Jump to content
NEurope
Razz

Give Blood.

Recommended Posts

Sorry, "safe" thing to do, when the sexual orientation that has seen the largest year on year increase in STIs and STDs is heterosexuals, yet still these people aren't equally blanketed with these gross 'sanctions'.

 

Fucking biggoted NHS/Blood Service.

 

It's much akin to saying that women aren't "ideal" to give blood owing to the fact that they are generally weaker-strength wise-than men, so therefore shouldn't give blood as it's not 'good enough'.

 

Really. Fucks. Me. Off.

 

Hey now, I'm on your side :) I think the more blood we can donate the better - I don't know any facts or figures, but I trust the blood service are doing what they deem appropriate given whatever the situation is currently.

 

The increase in STIs in heterosexuals is to do with africa primarily, right? Well africans aren't allowed to give blood either :/

 

I don't think it's comparable to what you say about women - they do have sanctions on the minimum you must weigh if you need to give blood though. And a temporary block on piercings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey now, I'm on your side :) I think the more blood we can donate the better - I don't know any facts or figures, but I trust the blood service are doing what they deem appropriate given whatever the situation is currently.

 

The increase in STIs in heterosexuals is to do with africa primarily, right? Well africans aren't allowed to give blood either :/

 

I don't think it's comparable to what you say about women - they do have sanctions on the minimum you must weigh if you need to give blood though. And a temporary block on piercings.

 

It's based on a study of people and their sexual in the UK, not Africa-which is where AIDs originated but lets not get started there.

 

I wasn't saying you don't agree with me, i said sorry to try and indicate it.

 

The minimum weight thing is so that they don't cause the donor any ill effects as they need a certain amount of blood from each individual i believe.

 

I don't believe the NHS/BS are doing the right thing, i think they just don't give a shit and are run by biggoted prigs. I also believe you are being naive about this issue. It's probably the most apparent and stupid kind of residual homophobia we have left over in this society from the times when being gay and having gay sex was illegal and deemed as a form of mental illness. These things haven't changed until recently aka in the last 20-30 years, and there is literally no reason why a guy who has received a blow job from another guy can't give blood. I mean women who give blow jobs are allowed to give blood. A number of my straight friends have been sucked off/sucked off a guy during there teenage years, yet if they were being totally honest they wouldn't be allowed to give blood either.

 

Now tell me, where in all of this is there any grounds for the NHS/BS to discount around 10% of the population from giving blood when they apparently need it so badly?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gay blood thing reminds me of the Alf Garnet sketch with the black guy at the blood donors.

Did you say you can't give blood if your parents were born abroad? Damn what a shame, guess it's no needles for me then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who experienced gay sex in any way aren't allowed to give blood?

Who the hell keeps that rule?

 

I'd like to see someone defend that in a court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People who experienced gay sex in any way aren't allowed to give blood?

Who the hell keeps that rule?

 

I'd like to see someone defend that in a court.

 

 

Exactly, it's ridiculous. I want to give blood when I hit 17 in a few months but according to them I can't. I'm still going to, they can go screw themselves.

 

Also, you can't give blood if your parents are born in another country? Lol, thats a pointless rule.

 

/rant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My parents were born in Greece so thats me not allowed...ever...Oh well, let it be on their conscience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought you could only legally give every 6 months to let your body cope with the loss of blood?

 

It's every 90 days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely keen on giving blood. Mainly based on what I eat, drink and the low amount of exercise I do. If I was healthy I'd definitely do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's based on a study of people and their sexual in the UK, not Africa-which is where AIDs originated but lets not get started there.

 

I wasn't saying you don't agree with me, i said sorry to try and indicate it.

 

The minimum weight thing is so that they don't cause the donor any ill effects as they need a certain amount of blood from each individual i believe.

 

I don't believe the NHS/BS are doing the right thing, i think they just don't give a shit and are run by biggoted prigs. I also believe you are being naive about this issue. It's probably the most apparent and stupid kind of residual homophobia we have left over in this society from the times when being gay and having gay sex was illegal and deemed as a form of mental illness. These things haven't changed until recently aka in the last 20-30 years, and there is literally no reason why a guy who has received a blow job from another guy can't give blood. I mean women who give blow jobs are allowed to give blood. A number of my straight friends have been sucked off/sucked off a guy during there teenage years, yet if they were being totally honest they wouldn't be allowed to give blood either.

 

Now tell me, where in all of this is there any grounds for the NHS/BS to discount around 10% of the population from giving blood when they apparently need it so badly?!

You're utterly right - I am indeed being naive. I'm overlooking a problem because I simply don't have to deal with it, and it doesn't affect me... And that's wrong of me.

 

I like to play devil's advocate and say that the blood service (.. ok so I don't know the correct label to call them by...) isn't being homophobic, just safe, because I genuinely don't think such an established part of society would act in such a way... But I do agree with you that it is unfair to blanket ban any sector of the populus in such a way. I just simply don't know how they could refine the rules to be more accurate in what they deem dangerous - because I am not an all-knowing agent in the goings-on. I don't know what tests they do perform on the blood or what tests they don't, so I can't honestly say what blood is fit or not.

 

I'm a little drunk so I won't be making much sense, nor will I be drawing fair comparisons - I just want to say that I agree that the system is unfair currently, but I don't know whether or not they are justified in any way, shape or form for what they are doing. I do not wish to lay my preferences one side of the fence or the other because I cannot weigh or judge their reasons thanks to a lack of knowledge or understanding on what actually counts as important. I have no idea what tests they do perform on the blood before it is used, nor what tests they wish to do but cannot due to time constraints. I would like to think (and I'm sure it is naive of me to do so) that they aren't bigoted and simply banning people from donating because they disagree with their creed (as surely if that was the case there would be tariffs on who could receive blood), and I would like to believe they have their reasons, whatever they may be.

 

So yeah... :|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My dad is from Iran, so that basically rules my ass out.

 

The whole gay thing... is a little weird. I mean, protected sex shouldn't be a bother.

 

What about if you're a hetrosexual who has unprotected anal sex. Thats technically the same thing, what happens then? Still not allowed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've only ever given blood once. I should do it more since i am O RH Negative meaning my blood is compatible with everyone, but i can only except O RH Neg. Much like a closet racist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm going in about 10 minutes, and I'm gonna badger the person taking it about the whole gay thing. I'll let you all know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My lass does it, she's just got a cool little bronze pinbadge in a presentation case for doing it ten times. I think you get a silver one for 25 and a gold one for 50 or something as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's based on a study of people and their sexual in the UK, not Africa-which is where AIDs originated but lets not get started there.

 

I wasn't saying you don't agree with me, i said sorry to try and indicate it.

 

The minimum weight thing is so that they don't cause the donor any ill effects as they need a certain amount of blood from each individual i believe.

 

I don't believe the NHS/BS are doing the right thing, i think they just don't give a shit and are run by biggoted prigs. I also believe you are being naive about this issue. It's probably the most apparent and stupid kind of residual homophobia we have left over in this society from the times when being gay and having gay sex was illegal and deemed as a form of mental illness. These things haven't changed until recently aka in the last 20-30 years, and there is literally no reason why a guy who has received a blow job from another guy can't give blood. I mean women who give blow jobs are allowed to give blood. A number of my straight friends have been sucked off/sucked off a guy during there teenage years, yet if they were being totally honest they wouldn't be allowed to give blood either.

 

Now tell me, where in all of this is there any grounds for the NHS/BS to discount around 10% of the population from giving blood when they apparently need it so badly?!

 

 

On their website there's a pdf where it talks about the reasons for not allowing homosexuals.

 

The evidence for barring MSM from donating blood is soundly based, though frequently (and vocally) contested by those who claim that our policy is unjustified – and even denies human rights – as more heterosexuals than MSM in the UK are now newly diagnosed with HIV each year. However, from HPA data and sociological surveys it can be estimated that approximate umbers of men newly diagnosed with HIV in the UK each year are very approximately 1 in 1000 for MSMs; 1 in 2,000 for men who are not homosexual or bisexual, but who may have other risk factors such as drug use or born overseas (especially in Africa); 1 in 40,000 for heterosexual men with no other

identified factor which might put them at higher risk.

 

So they're saying, that although more heterosexuals are diagnosed with HIV per year the proportion per person is still much lower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How do you give bone marrow? I'd like to hear more about that (both for interest and for possibly donating)

 

Try signing up via here.

 

Bone marrow harvesting consists of 6 needles, usually inserted into the pelvis. It requires an overnight hospital stay, but apparently it's not painful or anything.

 

Anaesthetic = no pain. However, if they have to do an emergency one - its one of the most painful procedures ever..

 

I'll never be able to give blood under the current criteria because, unlike my friends, i'm too opinionated (probs not the right word but i'm tired) to lie about my life to allow me to do something good.

 

It pisses me off when i get all these uni e-mails, and see all these ads asking people to give blood, literally screaming out for more donors, yet if you've had sex with a guy, even protected sex with a guy, then your not allowed to give blood. As if gay blood isn't the same as everyone else's. This is just simply fucking stupid and really riles me up.

 

GAH!!!

 

And all blood is screened anyway before they allow it to be given to other people.

 

So.

 

Fucking.

 

STUPID!

 

Its to do with risk - I can't be bothered looking at the statistics (hate them) or whatever, but its better to refuse blood than risk infecting others. I really doubt the NBS is the last bastion of homophobia in the country...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so I went, but having gashed my lip quite badly yesterday I wasn't able to donate right then and there. I was told to come back to a drive that's happening in two weeks, which I was slightly annoyed about, but fair enough. The people were really nice though, which was a plus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd never give blood. EVER. Unless it was me giving my blood to someone I knew, and believed deserved it.

 

Giving (public) blood is just another step towards idiocracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago there was a sudden shortage of blood at the hospital my mum worked at, and dad kept giving blood until they told him to stop, as he would have died or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd never give blood. EVER. Unless it was me giving my blood to someone I knew, and believed deserved it.

 

Giving (public) blood is just another step towards idiocracy.

 

Kurtle; How do you figure that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd never give blood. EVER. Unless it was me giving my blood to someone I knew, and believed deserved it.

 

Giving (public) blood is just another step towards idiocracy.

 

*checks public profile for age in disbelief*

are you kidding? it's not like organ donation, man - they have to have the stuff on TAP ready for emergencies... you get yourself into a car accident and need blood and you wont have time to route around your trusted friends for a match, most people who need blood need it immediately ...

 

and dude, idiocracy isn't a word... if you're going to shun a concept, use teh inglish! :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kurtle; How do you figure that?

Well; it's more likely someone unbeneficial to society will need my blood than someone beneficial to society, plus, my taxes already go to waste in the NHS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well; it's more likely someone unbeneficial to society will need my blood than someone beneficial to society, plus, my taxes already go to waste in the NHS.

 

my mother was made redundant because she couldnt carry on with her job after she was diagnosed with cancer - she's just had a major operation and needed a blood transfusion....

 

how's that? :blank:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
*checks public profile for age in disbelief*

are you kidding? it's not like organ donation, man - they have to have the stuff on TAP ready for emergencies... you get yourself into a car accident and need blood and you wont have time to route around your trusted friends for a match, most people who need blood need it immediately ...

I said UNLESS, meaning I wouldn't have to anyway. Still, my objection stands, I wouldn't want my blood going to anyone I don't see deserving, and since you can't do that, then no-one gets it.

 

and dude, idiocracy isn't a word... if you're going to shun a concept, use teh inglish! :grin:

Well maybe i'll ignore your arguments for the lack of use of capital letters and referring to me as "man".

Idiocracy is a film, sorry for the previous lack of Italic and a capital letter.

 

my mother was made redundant because she couldnt carry on with her job after she was diagnosed with cancer - she's just had a major operation and needed a blood transfusion....

 

how's that? :blank:

A murdering psychopath could also be saved, or someone crossing a level crossing as the lights are flashing, a drug addict, a car theif who's crashed a stolen car and is badly injured.

It's against my beliefs to save any of these people, and as I explained before, due to these people able to have my blood, I will never give it, especially as I, and your mother will then have to pay for many of them to live in jail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kurtle; Yeah pretty much what Bluey says. You can't determine if someone does or does not deserve blood that easily - and to be honest I don't think it is something we should be in charge of judging. The whole idea of a democratic society is the reciprocal aspect; that none of us are able to live the lives we live without aiding or benefitting someone else. With things like giving blood and taxes, we are instilling faith that others will return the favour someday, or that our taxes will return reapable benefits.

 

Of course it's your choice whether to donate or not (hence the charitable terminology), but to think only of the negative possibilities -- what about saving the pregnant victim of a hit-and-run?

 

I don't know of facts and figures, but I would guess that the figures the blood organisation produce as their estimated, predicted amount of blood needed daily/weekly/monthly/yearly would have something to do with blood disorders that people are born with.

 

I can understand you not wanting to donate to a drug dealer who's lost a lot of blood over a turf war or whatever, but you have to recognise that you're letting the minority of malignants prevent you from helping the majority of society-benefactors..

 

In short; You talk as if you assume all people who need blood are a waste to society. That's silly talk :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said UNLESS, meaning I wouldn't have to anyway. Still, my objection stands, I wouldn't want my blood going to anyone I don't see deserving, and since you can't do that, then no-one gets it.

so you're either a jehovah's witness or a nazi? like jayseven said, it's totally not for us to decide who does and does not deserve to live. so lying in a hospital bed after a steam-roller accident, would you accept blood, not knowing who exactly it had come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×