question about donating blood, bisexuality, etc.

I went to give blood and of course they asked four gazillion questions. One of them was, "Have you ever had sex with a man who's had sex with a man?"

To my knowledge, the answer was no, which is what I said.

However, there is an excellent chance that the answer to that question will soon be yes (the new guy in my life is bi).

Does this mean I can never, ever, ever give blood again? :wow:

This was at LifeSouth, BTW. Does Red Cross have similar rules?

And what is the reason for the rule anyway? I could understand if it was 1984, but now????

you will never be allowed to give blood again. It is because of aids virus (maybe not detectable at an early date) and hepatitis.
BE very careful...and for god's sake use condoms.

Jesus, I'm not an idiot.

He is a little younger than me and has had one LTR with a woman and one LTR with a man. Both were monogamous, and he's been tested twice a year for the last five.

I think I'll be okay. Or is there something I don't know about how HIV is transmitted?? :shrug:

:evilgrin:

More than homos carry diseases. :D

???????

and I can give blood. I tested negative for HIV and Hepatitis. This is why I can still give blood. So as long as you stay negative, you can donate.

:thumbsup: thanks!

All gay and bi people have AIDS.

Didn't you know that?

I was turned down to give blood because I'm gay. I am still fuming about it to this day.

donated blood are tested for HIV and Hepatitis antibodies, people in known higher risk groups such as injection drug users and men who have sex with men (MSM in the public health parlance, I didn't make these terms up), are more likely to have an infected sample that is negative on screening (false negative).

Here's why.

The key is, that people who donate blood are generally repeat donors, i.e. people who donate regularly. Since there is a window of about a month from becoming infected to where antibodies to virus are detectable (it may be even shorter now), it's more likely to "catch" a regular donor from a higher risk group in this "seroconversion window" period and have a false negative screen on their unit.

Now of course this sort of questionnaire screening does not take into account if you are monogamous, always perform safe sex etc. This sort of screening is designed to be a simple, no cost test to exclude higher risk groups from donating entirely and not get into such issues.

There are other people that are excluded as well. If you've traveled to certain countries that have a high rate of HIV, you can't donate for a couple of years!

It's just to keep the blood supply safe. Keep in mind that much of the donated blood is separated into its components - plasma, red cells, and platelets. A single contaminated donation could infect 3 people.

I'm not in a high risk group, but my blood has been rejected once just because of high liver enzymes. It didn't test positive for hepatitis, but the high liver enzymes could mean that I might have another blood born disease, so they didn't use it.

of blood to their relatives for surgery etc. because they "know" their blood to be safer than the general pool. However the REVERSE is actually true, probably because family members feel more pressure and incentive to lie about high risk behaviors in the context of donating blood to a relative than an anonymous donor.


Transfusion Medicine. 1994 Jun;4(2):135-8.

Infectious disease markers in autologous and directed donations.

Pink J, Thomson A, Wylie B.
New South Wales Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service, Sydney, Australia.

Autologous collections are strongly advocated by the New South Wales Red Cross Blood Transfusion Service (BTS) and have increased more than sevenfold since 1988. Directed donations, although not promoted, have also increased during this time. The prevalence of infectious disease markers (HIV, hepatitis C, hepatitis B and syphilis) in donations collected by the BTS from different donor groups including overall volunteer homologous, first-time volunteer homologous, autologous and directed were evaluated over a 42-month period. Donations from first-time volunteer homologous donors had the highest prevalence of hepatitis B and C. Autologous donations had a significantly higher prevalence of hepatitis B, hepatitis C and syphilis compared with overall volunteer homologous donations. The percentage of directed donations testing positive for either hepatitis B or C was higher than overall volunteer homologous donations, but not statistically significant. This study demonstrates that donations from first-time donors are the least safe, that the crossover of autologous blood into the volunteer homologous pool decreases the safety of that pool and suggests that directed donations may not be as safe as volunteer homologous donations and cannot be generally advocated at this time.

The UK is also included now because of the big Mad Cow outbreak in 97 or 98. Unfortunately. Or fortunately. Depends on your viewpoint, I guess.

FSC

The bottom line is that any increased risk of a blood born disease will mean that you can't donate blood. That's why they ask if you've gotten any tattoos in the last X number of years, if you've had sex in exchange for drugs or money, etc. etc.

I can understand why the regulation hurt your feelings, but it's honestly not an anti-gay thing, if that helps any...

In NY at the blood center. I think it's run by the red cross, but I'm not sure. I think it has to do with AIDS. I have never had sex with a guy. I cant imagine why this wouldn't disqualify all women. I guess the risks are higher.

someone considered high-risk, but men who've had sex with another man even once are deferred forever -- so, depending on the exact questions asked by the blood center, you may or may not be disqualified. (They each have slightly different guidelines -- I'm not sure how strict the government is.)

It's stupid, really...I, as a woman, could have unprotected sex with hundreds of men, and so long as I never asked them if they'd ever had sex with a man, I could remain in the blood pool. However, a man who's been in a monogamous relationship with another man since 1970 -- well before HIV/AIDS showed up in the blood supply -- and brings in proof of multiple consecutive negative HIV tests, can never donate ever.