Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cal04

(41,505 posts)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 02:42 PM Dec 2014

F.D.A. Lifting Ban on Gay Blood Donors

Source: NY Times

The Food and Drug Administration announced on Tuesday that it would scrap a decades-old lifetime prohibition on blood donation by gay and bisexual men, a change that experts said was long overdue and could lift the annual blood supply by as much as 4 percent.

The F.D.A. enacted the ban in 1983, early in the AIDS epidemic. At the time, little was known about the human immunodeficiency virus, which causes the disease, and there was no quick test to determine whether somebody had it. But science — and the understanding of H.I.V. in particular — has advanced in the intervening decades, and on Tuesday the F.D.A. acknowledged as much, lifting the lifetime ban but keeping in place a more modest block on donations by men who have had sex with other men in the last 12 months.

In a statement, the agency said it had “carefully examined and considered the scientific evidence” before changing the policy. It said it intended to issue a draft guidance detailing the change in 2015.

The shift puts the United States on par with European countries like Britain, which adjusted its lifetime ban in favor of a 12-month restriction in 2011. Men’s health advocates welcomed the move, saying that the ban was not based on the latest science and that it perpetuated stigma about gay men as a risk to the health of the nation. Legal experts said the change brings an important national health policy in line with other legal and political rights, such as permitting gay and people to marry and to serve openly in the military.




Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/24/health/fda-lifting-ban-on-gay-blood-donors.html?_r=0



Statement
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm427843.htm

(snip)
Over the past several years, in collaboration with other government agencies, the FDA has carefully examined and considered the available scientific evidence relevant to its blood donor deferral policy for men who have sex with men, including the results of several recently completed scientific studies and recent epidemiologic data. Following this review, and taking into account the recommendations of advisory committees to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the FDA, the agency will take the necessary steps to recommend a change to the blood donor deferral period for men who have sex with men from indefinite deferral to one year since the last sexual contact.

This recommended change is consistent with the recommendation of an independent expert advisory panel the HHS Advisory Committee on Blood and Tissue Safety and Availability, and will better align the deferral period with that of other men and women at increased risk for HIV infection. Additionally, in collaboration with the NIH’s National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI), the FDA has already taken steps to implement a national blood surveillance system that will help the agency monitor the effect of a policy change and further help to ensure the continued safety of the blood supply.

The FDA intends to issue a draft guidance recommending this proposed change in policy in 2015, which will also include an opportunity for public comment. We encourage all stakeholders to take this opportunity to provide any information the agency should consider, and look forward to receiving and reviewing these comments.


“FDA replaces irrational, homophobic gay blood ban with new irrational, homophobic gay blood ban”
http://americablog.com/2014/12/fda-replaces-irrational-homophobic-gay-blood-ban-new-irrational-homophobic-gay-blood-ban.html
(snip)
“This is a step in the right direction, but blood donation policy should be based on current scientific knowledge and experience, not unfounded fear, generalizations and stereotypes. Merely changing the parameters of this outdated policy does not alter its underlying discriminatory nature, eliminate its negative and stigmatizing effects, nor transform it into a policy based on current scientific and medical knowledge.
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
2. So you can be gay but you can't have sex for a whole year in order to donate?!?!
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 02:57 PM
Dec 2014

Not sure this is such a huge win to be honest.

stillwaiting

(3,795 posts)
6. Yes clearly. The only way that donations will increase 4% is if gay men lie about their sex lives.
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 03:09 PM
Dec 2014

I was very hopeful for a minute or two only to find out that I still can't donate. Unless I lie which I won't do.

TexasMommaWithAHat

(3,212 posts)
14. It's a matter of statistical probability
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:57 PM
Dec 2014

Since there is no way to guarantee the safety of the blood supply, the powers that be they do the best they can. And without judging behavior, we do know that certain behaviors are riskier than others.

cal04

(41,505 posts)
5. Agree. The public needs to comment on that
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 03:04 PM
Dec 2014
"Some may believe this is a step forward, but in reality, requiring celibacy for a year is a de facto lifetime ban," the organization Gay Men's Health Crisis, a New York-based nonprofit that supports AIDS prevention and care, said after the announcement.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/23/fda-blood-donation-ban_n_6373554.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg000


nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
3. As long as they apply the same rule to straight people
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 02:59 PM
Dec 2014

They have to be celibate for a year before they can donate. Straight people can get HIV too. They should be subject to the same criteria.

nichomachus

(12,754 posts)
10. What medical science is that?
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:08 PM
Dec 2014

That straight people don't contract HIV? That's not science. That's just stupid.

If a straight guy goes to a prostitute, he stands a chamce of contracting HIV. If he then has sex with his wife, she stands a chance of contracting HIV. They should make straight people wait a year too.

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
13. It is based on medical incidence statistics which are quite scientific.
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:44 PM
Dec 2014

Those statistics are real and constantly updated.

While any one straight guy might have a higher chance of HIV than any one man having sex with other men, and any one lesbian might have a higher risk than either, these things are based on group risks.

As a group, for multiple reasons, lesbians (women who have sex solely with other women) have a much lower risk than heterosexuals, and both have much lower risks than men who are having sex with other men.

There are multiple risk categories that exclude one from giving blood. Some are to avoid an unknown risk. Some are to avoid a very small risk with very high harm potential.

I understand WHY you perceive it as discriminatory, but it is not, because it is based on pretty solid data.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»F.D.A. Lifting Ban on Gay...