Blood Donation Stupidness (by sarah)
As some of you know I can't give blood due to having had a blood transfusion myself in the past - this is a newish rule and I have given blood in the past but I understand that there are risks of human mad-cow disease and things and these where becoming concentrated by the fact that those most likely to give blood are those who have had a life saved by it.
I personally would have died aged 4 and half without blood so am very keen to encourage people to donate. I try regually to get Al to go but after an initial issue of him being underwieght (for his height) he has just been too whimpy.
Then a friend of mine pointed out he couldn't give blood though being perfectly healthy - the problem? His sexuality.
(Warning I do obviously now talk about sex and things in the post.)
Know anal sex runs a higher risk of bleeding and therefore fluids mixing compared with virginal sex. So I always assumed the rules would be like - if you have had unprotected anal sex not for six months or something like that but it's not.
The exclusion is on men who have anal or oral sex with other men as they are a higher risk group for viruses that live in the blood. But hang on a minute HIV is spreading rapidly through the hetrosexual population and erm... what about women having anal sex with men and for that matter oral sex with men?
I could find no reference to them only if you've had sex with a man who's had sex with another man - but erm... that is assuming they would actually have told you? And then the restriction is 12 months before giving blood.
Prostitutes fall under the catagory of never give blood too. But what of say someone just sleeping around that is not mentioned plus they say all the blood is tested and they are always short of blood. There is no distinction over weather condoms are used for 'gay' sex. Why I wonder - last I checked they were still number one for reliability and protection. A woman on the pill who sleeps around I would have thought would be a higher risk than say men who have had say three boyfriends ever?
I don't have the statistics so I can't say for sure - but they are also lumping everyone/man together here. Though they are saying it's only men who have been sexually active with other men but there are different life styles.
Ok so the viruses such as HIV and hep. aren't detectable in early infection so leave that buffer zone of 12 months since unprotected sex or exclude everyone who have ever had anal sex or oral sex with a man! And that would include a large proportion of women!
I understand that this may result in more blood being taken that subsequently can not be used but would that out weigh the amount of usable blood you would get?
I wonder what the EU and other countries rule on this one and weather getting their transmittion data would be helpful here?
I may have missed it but I didn't see any restrictions on women having unprotected sex :/ Of any kind!
Tue 10th Aug 2010 10:25 am 
Subscribe
By Iain Watson, Thu 12th Aug 2010 @ 12:26 pm
I've never understood this rule, it just seems so arbitary and archaic. It's not like people haven't been campaigning for years to get the government to change it. Shame on Labour for not pushing for it, it'll never get done under the Tories for fear off looking like they think gays should be treated as human beings.
By sarah, Thu 12th Aug 2010 @ 12:32 pm
I never noticed it until it was pointed out :/ I would have been indignant at 18 when I first gave blood had I known.
By Gavan, Thu 12th Aug 2010 @ 1:17 pm
This wouldn't be nearly so bad if the rule was that you couldn't give blood if you had had gay sex since 12 months before your last negative STD screen. I find the permanent exclusions of whole groups of people baffling.
By sarah, Fri 13th Aug 2010 @ 10:58 am
To be fair Gavan they are not completely excluding a group here - they say if you have never had sex but are a gay man you can give blood and lesbians can anyway.
They just seem to be being incredibly stupid about how sex works :/ Plus their restrictions mean that any woman married to say a bisexual man who is now just with them - can not give blood either. Nor if they are with a man who has been raped which is shocking really 🙁
By Stephen, Fri 13th Aug 2010 @ 12:19 pm
Thankfully the rule here in Australia is that you can't give blood for 12 months after male->male sex. However, we can't ever give blood because we used to live in the UK! If you've spent 6 months or more in the UK between 1980 and 1996 you can't ever give blood because they're worried you might have CJD.
By Rachel Cotterill, Fri 13th Aug 2010 @ 1:05 pm
Amazed that isn't illegal, these days. Personal opinion? If you're beyond the 12 month buffer point, just lie. It's not like they can check (unlike with transfusions where there should be medical records).
By Gavan, Fri 13th Aug 2010 @ 5:02 pm
They are excluding a group, though, the group of men who have had sex with men. Once you have joined that group, you can never leave it, even if all risk associated with the activity has been dealt with by waiting a time period and having tests.
Permanent exclusion makes sense if you are in a risk group for something which you can't prove you do not have, such as (currently, I believe) CJD. But for HIV, there are well-established tests available, and well-known time periods to wait before taking those tests.
By julies notebook, Wed 7th Oct 2015 @ 8:28 am
You know how I feel about this Sarah. It's wrong, I do not see how a promiscuous straight lad is safer than a gay guy with one or two sexual partners his whole life. The rules are antiquated.
By sarah, Tue 13th Oct 2015 @ 8:11 am
I am so sad that they are still sticking to these rules 🙁