FDA Keeps Ban On Gay Men As Blood Donors

(CBS News) WASHINGTON 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 longstanding 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.

In March 2006, the Red Cross, the international blood association AABB and America's Blood Centers proposed replacing the lifetime ban with a one-year deferral following male-to-male sexual contact. New and improved tests, which can detect HIV-positive donors within just 10 to 21 days of infection, make the lifetime ban unnecessary, the blood groups told the FDA.

In a document posted Wednesday, the FDA said it would change its policy if given data that show doing so wouldn't pose a "significant and preventable" risk to blood recipients.

"It is a way of saying, 'Whatever was presented to us was not sufficient to make us change our minds,'" Bianco said.

The FDA said HIV tests currently in use are highly accurate, but still cannot detect the virus 100 percent of the time. The estimated HIV risk from a unit of blood is currently about one per 2 million in the United States, according to the agency.

Critics of the exclusionary policy said it bars potential healthy donors, despite the increasing need for donated blood, and discriminates against gays. The FDA recognized the policy defers many healthy donors but rejected the suggestion it's discriminatory.

Anyone who's used intravenous drugs or been paid for sex also is permanently barred from donating blood.

http://wcbstv.com/topstories/topstories_story_143193011.html

 

I wonder how they determine anyone is gay?

 

They ask?

Either that or they just say "no" if you have impeccable dress sense.

 

So it appears this is a policy only effective as the word of the donor.

That doesn't give me a lot of reassurance. And It seems whores are exempt if they don't charge.

I hope I never need blood.

 

I take it you dislike homosexuals and sexually active females?

 

What give you that impression?

 

Well, the thing about "whores" was a giant red flag.

I inferred the rest from the language of your posts. If I was in error, please let me know and I will apologize.

 

None needed.

I was thinking along the lines of this policy seems like a poor screening process. Also, it's difficult to tell what a donor's sexual activities are.

Trying to figure out a new users attitude is interesting.

 

Actually the policy is kind of silly and does nothing for the safety of the blood. What does make the blood safe are the tests. Whether a much stricter questionnaire was in place or none at all, the blood's safety would remain much the same.

 

This ban perfect sense, because straight people never contract sexually transmittied diseases.

 

Except the 50% of adults who have HPV... GO WARTS!

 

I'm straight but can't give blood either. See I've lived in Europe for more than 6 months total from 1981 - 1998. Until they can come up with a non-lethal test for mad cow disease I'm ineligible. Of course I could just lie and they would never know. How would they know? Same for most any other group of people who are deemed ineligible.

 

OK, this is gonna show how gay I am, but I can't help thinking of the song "Masquerade" from Phantom of the Opera....

/Phantom

 

Believe me at times I am so surprised with the acts FDA does, there have been numerous instances in the past when they have banned the use of drugs or alternatively recommended the use of drugs which have backfired for respective reasons, now this ban on the gay people was not known to me, hope this has some logic in it and as someone asked here how on earth do they determine if a person is gay! So hoping this decision does not meet the same fate as has been with FDA in case of promoting pain reliever medicines that were of no use later.

 

I wonder if the people responsible for the ban realise that heterosexuals can also be inflicted with HIV/AIDS? Or Hepatitis. Or any other transmitable disease.

How on earth are they able to know whether a man is telling the truth or not? Why ask men? Women have also been infected with HIV/AIDS, they are hardly exempt.