Diageo Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 So I noticed a while back that if a man is gay or has given/received head from another man then they are banned for life from giving blood. Now I thought it was a bit strange and wondered why exactly, and apparently it's because gay men are at a higher risk of contracting Aids. So recently my friend asked me if the ban was based on risk or on homophobic preconceptions? So I decided to see what people's opinions are on this. He said that if it wasn't because of risk, then surely gay activist would be all over this. Are they? He also said that people get STI's and that's a fact but I'll ignore that for the moment. So anyway, opinions on it?
MoogleViper Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 I think it's risk based. There's lots of things that prevent you from giving blood, the majority of them based on the risk of your blood being "infected"(for lack of a better word). It's the same if you've ever slept with anyone who's been a prostitute.
Dan_Dare Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 I think it's risk based. There's lots of things that prevent you from giving blood, the majority of them based on the risk of your blood being "infected"(for lack of a better word). It's the same if you've ever slept with anyone who's been a prostitute. This. I very much dislike the idea, but then I've not seen the numbers either. If there's still sound evidence to support it then...repugnant as it is, you can't argue with the facts. That said, I think that anyone who can provide a bill of clean health when they want to donate should be able to, regardless of their sexuality.
Eenuh Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Yeah, I know it's silly that gay people can't give blood (even if they can prove they're clean), but they want to lower the risks as much as possible I guess. I haven't been allowed to give blood the last two years or so because I received donor bone. Apparently that makes me a risk. My friend is not allowed to give blood for something like 6 years because she lived in Thailand for a year. Something to do with a risk of worms in her brain. =P Anyway, it's a weird thing to completely ban gay people as they need all the blood they can get, but they have their reasons I guess.
Mr-Paul Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 It also includes women who have had sex with a man who has ever had sex with a man. I haven't got any stats, but I think it's because AIDS is a lot more common among gay men than people of other sexual orientations, and they just cannot risk getting infected blood and putting it in someone else. I think they won't let you give blood ever if you've been to certain countries where infectious diseases are common as well, so I don't believe it to be discriminatory in any way.
Diageo Posted May 20, 2011 Author Posted May 20, 2011 It also includes women who have had sex with a man who has ever had sex with a man.I haven't got any stats, but I think it's because AIDS is a lot more common among gay men than people of other sexual orientations, and they just cannot risk getting infected blood and putting it in someone else. I think they won't let you give blood ever if you've been to certain countries where infectious diseases are common as well, so I don't believe it to be discriminatory in any way. Women only get banned for about 12 months I heard.
MoogleViper Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Women only get banned for about 12 months I heard. Yeah it's if they've had sex with the man in the last 12 months. Also as other people have said, if you've had a blood transfusion or similar. As well as visiting countries (Particularly malaria risk countries). It's all to do with statistics, not discriminatory. That said, I think that anyone who can provide a bill of clean health when they want to donate should be able to, regardless of their sexuality. But how would they do that? They would have to have a doctor run tests on each patient to check for all possible diseases. It would be far too costly.
The Mad Monkey Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Also as other people have said, if you've had a blood transfusion or similar. Also includes intravenous drug use, as a friend of mine found out. I can't donate anyway, due to having a terminal disease.
Diageo Posted May 20, 2011 Author Posted May 20, 2011 I can't either since I am foreign. So the stereotypes are true then? Aids is predominantly a gay disease and gay people get more STIs?
The Mad Monkey Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 So the stereotypes are true then? Aids is predominantly a gay disease and gay people get more STIs? Pretty sure it's more common amongst heterosexuals.
heroicjanitor Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Pretty sure it's more common amongst heterosexuals. There are more heterosexuals with the disease, since there are more of them, but either a higher percentage of gays have it, or it is just based on anal being a higher risk, but most likely both. Though excluding all gay people(even those who don't do anal) is stupid imo. Oral is statistically a much lower risk than vaginal. He also said that people get STI's and that's a fact but I'll ignore that for the moment. Not sure what is wrong with that statement :p
Diageo Posted May 20, 2011 Author Posted May 20, 2011 Not sure what is wrong with that statement :p LOL, dunno what I was thinking there. I meant to say he said, "All gay people get STI's and that's a fact."
Mr-Paul Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 This link(american) says the rate of AIDS is 50 times more prevalent in homosexual males than heterosexuals and lesbians. Reasons for this apparently are: Gay men are more promisicuous Higher risk through anal HIV carried more in semen than vaginal fluids Gay men take more drugs which effects the immune system
heroicjanitor Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 LOL, dunno what I was thinking there. I meant to say he said, "All gay people get STI's and that's a fact." All gay people? Heavy amount of prejudice there Possibly shouldn't have asked for clarification because this thread will now be derailed :p This link(american) says the rate of AIDS is 50 times more prevalent in homosexual males than heterosexuals and lesbians. Reasons for this apparently are: Gay men are more promisicuous Higher risk through anal HIV carried more in semen than vaginal fluids Gay men take more drugs which effects the immune system Case closed really.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Reasons for this apparently are: Gay men are more promisicuous Gay men take more drugs which effects the immune system I can't help but think: Are these two based on statistics or stereotype?
The Mad Monkey Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Meh, statistics are meaningless really, for every recorded homosexual there are at least two more in the closet, Also heterosexuals consider themselves less at risk, although I'm sure plenty practice anal sex, and so are tested less.
Wesley Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 I can't believe I'm not allowed to give blood just because I have AIDs. Those people make me sick.
MoogleViper Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Meh, statistics are meaningless really, for every recorded homosexual there are at least two more in the closet, Have you got any evidence for this or is it just your thoughts? And statistics are never meaningless. Statistics are data. The only problem is people who don't understand them (and people who deliberately misinterpret them).
The Peeps Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 It's scientific fact that gay blood will turn you gay. Same as if you're bitten by a gay. Shit that's zombies isn't it.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 It's scientific fact that gay blood will turn you gay. Same as if you're bitten by a gay. Shit that's zombies isn't it. You mean there's a difference?
The Mad Monkey Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Have you got any evidence for this or is it just your thoughts? And statistics are never meaningless. Statistics are data. The only problem is people who don't understand them (and people who deliberately misinterpret them). Just experience, I know, and know of, a good few men who consider themselves straight, but still have sex with other men. And statistics are only a measure of what they record, and whether the people polled are 100% honest.
heroicjanitor Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Just experience, I know, and know of, a good few men who consider themselves straight, but still have sex with other men. And statistics are only a measure of what they record, and whether the people polled are 100% honest. Difficult to throw a hiv test tbf. I also find your straight friends' actions to be very homosexual. Are you sure they claim to be straight? Maybe they are a statistical anomaly. Basically what you are saying is data doesn't mean anything and we should make it up based on the things we see locally, or on our preconceptions. That doesn't work, you can't extrapolate from local to global in most cases.
Mr-Paul Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Just experience, I know, and know of, a good few men who consider themselves straight, but still have sex with other men. And statistics are only a measure of what they record, and whether the people polled are 100% honest. Well if you click my link you'll see that it refers to men who have sex with men (MSM), not just gay people. Statistics, provided they have been collected in a genuine way, are a million times more worthy than your preconceptions.
MoogleViper Posted May 20, 2011 Posted May 20, 2011 Statistics, provided they have been collected in a genuine way, are a million times more worthy than your preconceptions. Is that a statistical fact or just your assumptions?
Recommended Posts