"Ban kept for gay men donating blood"


Not as one sided as you might think. Article clipping and some background
This one is wrong, but with provisos. More on that after the quote.

Gay men remain banned for life from donating blood, the government said Wednesday, leaving in place — for now — a 1983 prohibition meant to prevent the spread of HIV through transfusions.

The Food and Drug Administration reiterated its long-standing policy on its Web site Wednesday, more than a year after the Red Cross and two other blood groups criticized the policy as "medically and scientifically unwarranted."

"I am disappointed, I must confess," said Dr. Celso Bianco, executive vice president of America's Blood Centers, whose members provide nearly half the nation's blood supply.

Before giving blood, all men are asked if they have had sex, even once, with another man since 1977. Those who say they have are permanently banned from donating. The FDA said those men are at increased risk of infection by HIV that can be transmitted to others by blood transfusion.

For the provisos, I have to fill in some background.

One of the things that characterized part of the homosexual movement from the late 1960's well into the 1980's was sex without consequences, especially dangerous sex. There were those who prided themselves on having multiple anonymous encounters, many in a single day or evening.

Again, this wasn't every homosexual, but it was a very visible minority. In fact, the "right to sex" rapidly got wrapped up in the "rights" of homosexuals (don't get me started on group rights). So much so that free clinics were compelled to treat STDs, often multiple times for the same patients. In any other public health situation, such high risk patients would have been isolated so infection could be contained. But because this was a civil rights situation, doctors and other medical workers were eventually barred from asking even some of the most routine questions.

Risky sexual behavior among several partners without consequence. It sounds like a dream come true. Until people started dying of an unknown disease.

All of the sudden it became just another cause to champion. To hide the fact that the most likely victims were those who engaged in high risk behaviors, AIDS was "sold" to the American public as something that anyone could catch. The kinky sex angle was played down ("Bathhouses? What bathhouses?").

That is why the FDA stopped homosexual men from giving blood.

So I agree that discrimination against gay men as a class is wrong, but it's also political dynamite. If the FDA put in a screening process aimed at risky sexual behaviors, the "gay community" would have to acknowledge that not all homosexuals are the same and that government sponsored protection from the consequences resulting from risky behaviors is not a right.

I will also say that it is deeply ironic for me to be writing this. I'm straight myself, but there are some "risky" things I have done. Stupid would probably be closer to the mark for some of them.

— NeoWayland

Posted: Wed - May 30, 2007 at 06:32 AM  Tag


 ◊  ◊   ◊  ◊ 

Random selections from NeoWayland's library


Pagan Vigil "Because LIBERTY demands more than just black or white"
© 2005 - 2009 All Rights Reserved