"Let our rigorous testing and reviews be your guidelines to A/V equipment – not marketing slogans"
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

Gay Blood donating rights?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Buckeye_Nut
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mike c said:
yes, all blood is tested. (i hope so)

but imagine this ... let's say you and me were to test for potable water, free of all bacteria.

you test from different wells, lakes and rivers ...

then comes water samples from a well that we have had previous tests that had about 50% chance of the presence of bacteria. unless we had a shortage of water samples to test, why test from that well when we know 50% of our efforts will go to waste?
Click to expand...

Oh i agree,it is a waste of resources.
 
All blood is tested equally! In certain cases that involve MSM (male to male) certain pathogens within the blood type have unknown characteristic which cause scientist concern that the blood may be tainted. Therefore, it becomes a process of elimination.:)
 
billy p said:
However, a male who answers yes to the question of same sex relations is 263x's higher to be HIV infected, then a male who answers no.

Here's the article I've posted some of my answers from: http://www.hemophilia.ca/en/1.2.2.php
Click to expand...

Thanks, and yes but, always a but. They do test the blood, all donors. and, since this test can detect the HIV virus itself, where is the issue?

The current version, called the nucleic acid test, reveals the virus itself, and is considered extremely reliable.


Or, just the stigma effect? Then, that is discrimination, no? If the test reveals that in a hetero blood, that is discarded too; yes, perhaps not as often. :D
 
NAT is very reliable, but not foolproof. So can I ask, should it become a numbers game? IMO, not if it's me or my kids or anyone else, I know:).
 
Last edited:
billy p said:
NAT is very reliable, but not foolproof. So can I ask, should it become a numbers game? IMO, not if it's me or my kids or anyone else, I know:).
Click to expand...

Well, it's ALWAYS a numbers game. Really we should be restricting donations to virgins only if we don't want to be playing a numbers game. Even then it's never going to be a question of absolute safety.

For now, in the U.S., for the most recent numbers I can find , it seems like for the U.S. population it still makes sense to restrict "men who have sex with men" from giving blood. For other populations - and sometime in the future, probably the U.S. - it won't.
 
billy p said:
NAT is very reliable, but not foolproof. So can I ask, should it become a numbers game? IMO, not if it's me or my kids or anyone else, I know:).
Click to expand...

Yes, but then, how about the numbers game from the hetero blood that may have an undetected issue? If one doesn't play the numbers game in life, then there are very few options left: Don't drive the car, don't let the kids out of your sight, how may die from aspirins each year, etc. It is all about the numbers and risks we dare take in life. Life is full of risks and in the end, it is over.
 
Well, I can't counter some of those arguments;). Thats just life:)! However, you stated earlier it's a safety issue and nothing more, I couldn't agree more. So, I guess untill the courts and science tell us otherwise, I'd rather have them err on the side of caution.:)

Ps: you're much better then me, in counter agruments and I'll leave it at that!;)

Cheers, Billy p:)
 
Last edited:
mtrycrafts said:
Yes, but then, how about the numbers game from the hetero blood that may have an undetected issue? If one doesn't play the numbers game in life, then there are very few options left: Don't drive the car, don't let the kids out of your sight, how may die from aspirins each year, etc. It is all about the numbers and risks we dare take in life. Life is full of risks and in the end, it is over.
Click to expand...

Mtry, you're fighting a battle you can't win. This thread should be titled homophobes united. They don't want to accept them as people, and they don't want to accept your answers. It doesn't matter if the blood is clean, it came from a gay person, and it is tainted.

SheepStar
 
Sheep said:
Mtry, you're fighting a battle you can't win. This thread should be titled homophobes united. They don't want to accept them as people, and they don't want to accept your answers. It doesn't matter if the blood is clean, it came from a gay person, and it is tainted.

SheepStar
Click to expand...

I don't need to win:D
But, as you suggest, it may be the underlying idea that is the root cause of the fears. After all, we are easy to scare, some of us. And, for the past 4-5 years, there have been a great effort to keep that fear fresh at every turn, if you know what I am referring to:D

I am tempted to get that new book, 'God is not Great.' Another underlying reason for your suggestion:D
 
Sheep said:
Mtry, you're fighting a battle you can't win. This thread should be titled homophobes united. They don't want to accept them as people, and they don't want to accept your answers. It doesn't matter if the blood is clean, it came from a gay person, and it is tainted.

SheepStar
Click to expand...

Sheep, that's exactly what I thought, when I saw this thread! Especially, considering the source and his impeccable timing with what was happening already, that day:eek:. However, after some reading I only posted here because I thought there was reason enough, as too why the law hadn't changed. So please don't clump everyone with you know who;).
I will say that your above post, is exactly the response he was looking for? Thankfully, this thread didn't or hasn't yet, taken that route.
 
Last edited:
billy p said:
Sheep, that's exactly what I thought, when I saw this thread! Especially, considering the source and his impeccable timing with what was happening already, that day:eek:. However, after some reading I only posted here because I thought there was reason enough, as too why the law hadn't changed. So please don't clump everyone with you know who;).
I will say that your above post, is exactly the response he was looking for? Thankfully, this thread didn't or hasn't yet, taken that route.
Click to expand...

I know, and youe post didn't seem out of line, but this whole "special treatment" is just plain stupid. Test all the blood, reject all the bad stuff. Everyone is hinting at this but not saying it, so I will.

GAY BLOOD DOESN'T MAKE YOU GAY!

And judging by the responses from some members and admins, I'm right on the money. No wait, I know I'm on the money.

SheepStar
 
The statistics are kind of confusing on this one:
Around 47% of all people diagnosed with AIDS were probably infected with HIV through male-to-male sexual contact, while people exposed through heterosexual contact comprise around 17% of the total.
However:
In 2005, in 33 of the United States, 18,722 males were diagnosed with HIV from male-to-male sexual content.
However, 12,219 males and females were diagnosed with HIV from high-risk heterosexual contact.
Source:http://www.avert.org/usastatg.htm
I think these numbers are close enough to justify the abolishment of that ruling.
Also, since AIDS testing is becoming very reliable, it's even less of an issue.

Maybe we should ban high-risk heterosexuals also. That would be fair. Unfortunately, I'm sure a large number of "high-risk" heterosexuals are blood donors.

Also, do we really have such a surplus of blood to be screening people like this? No. In fact, there are often shortages. Maybe there would be a huge surplus of rainbow-colored blood saving hundreds of lives from all the new homosexuals itching to exercise their new found right!

On a somewhat related note, I ask you this:
If you were dying because you needed a transfusion, would you be willing to accept HIV contaminated blood?
 
You got your dirty Hemophagic blood on me...IT IS ON! :D
 
Seth=L said:
I didn't say it because I assume that most people know this already.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You'd be surprised at what some people believe. Two weeks ago I was talking to a couple who just had a baby two days before; I was giving them the standard new parents education talk before discharging them from the hospital, and when I told them if they take their infant son's temperature, it needs to be done rectally. The father didn't like that idea. I told him it was the best method to take an infant's temperature to which he replied, "depends on what you consider the best method..." um... the most accurate method for an infant... Long story short, he thinks that by putting a thermometer in his son's rectum it could make him gay... I've also heard the same idea from parents concerned about breast feeding their daughter, scared it could make her a lesbian. :rolleyes:
 
zildjian said:
You'd be surprised at what some people believe. Two weeks ago I was talking to a couple who just had a baby two days before; I was giving them the standard new parents education talk before discharging them from the hospital, and when I told them if they take their infant son's temperature, it needs to be done rectally. The father didn't like that idea. I told him it was the best method to take an infant's temperature to which he replied, "depends on what you consider the best method..." um... the most accurate method for an infant... Long story short, he thinks that by putting a thermometer in his son's rectum it could make him gay... I've also heard the same idea from parents concerned about breast feeding their daughter, scared it could make her a lesbian. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Good to have a doc here posting. We have discussions into your area, medicine:D

Yes, your encounters are most interesting but not unexpected. The amount of nonsense people believe and accept is just mind bending:mad:
And, not much will convince them otherwise, is the sad part.
They rather believe in voodoo, urban legends, etc than the facts.:(
Not much in consumer-land is immune, if anything.
 
i don't think there are people here who think that transfusion of gay blood will make a person gay.

I think people are thinking, there's too much risk of getting infected with something. (or my point is, it's a waste of resources UNLESS there's a shortage of donors)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top
Back