Man fights law banning blood donations by homosexuals

[sara1981]

Man fights law banning blood donations by homosexuals
Man fights law banning blood donations by homosexuals - WNEM TV 5

MIDLAND COUNTY, MI (WNEM) -
A local man protested a blood drive being held at an area church. But his gripe isn't with the church or the blood drive - he's challenging a federal policy that prohibits sexually active gay men from donating blood.

"I do not feel a part of everybody else in the community that's coming here to give blood," said Shane Hampton.

Hampton, who is gay, wants the chance to donate his blood. Being gay doesn't prevent him from taking part in the potentially lifesaving act, but since he is sexually active with other men, he is not allowed by law to give blood, according to federal law.

"Let gays give blood!" yelled Hampton from the side of the road in front of Messiah Lutheran Church in Midland County on Thursday afternoon.

Hampton says he's trying to change that federal law by drawing attention to his cause and conducting a one-man informational picket at a blood organized by Michigan Blood.

He's hoping to get the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to change their policy against allowing sexually active gay men to give blood.

"When they say I can't just because I choose to love differently than a straight person does, it makes no sense to me," said Hampton. "It's an out-dated law."

Hampton tells TV5 that he wants it made very clear that he is not protesting Messiah Lutheran Church or Michigan Blood.

"It wouldn't matter where the blood drive was," Hampton said. "It could be anywhere in Midland or the Tri-cities area and I would [protest]."

According to the FDA website, sexually active gay men are at a higher risk for HIV infections.

That website states that in 2010, sexually active gay men made up two percent of the entire U.S. population, but accounted for 61 percent of all new HIV infections.

Hampton admits the numbers don't look good, but he says those figures shouldn't be used to single people like him out.

"While the statistics are high, you know, higher in gay men having HIV, I don't [have HIV]," said Hampton. "And there are a lot of gay men that practice safe sex that are not infected that have good blood that would be going to save people's lives."

 

[jonnyghost]

"That website states that in 2010, sexually active gay men made up two percent of the entire U.S. population, but accounted for 61 percent of all new HIV infections."

The risk of getting aids from a blood transfusion are 1 per 2,000,000. They claim that the risk is so low because of "Because of careful screening and testing" So if you increase the amount of infected blood by 61% you would also increase the amount of infected blood that makes it past testing by 61%. You're only adding 2% to the population of blood donors assuming the same numbers of homosexuals would donate as non and so the risk of infection transfer would increase to 61 per 2,040,000 or 1 in 33,443.

That is assuming all other things are equal (I'm sure they are not) and that the numbers from the FDA website are accurate (I couldn't say).

I'm not sure what that means for homosexuals but statistically it's huge.

 

[Foxrac]

"That website states that in 2010, sexually active gay men made up two percent of the entire U.S. population, but accounted for 61 percent of all new HIV infections."

The risk of getting aids from a blood transfusion are 1 per 2,000,000. They claim that the risk is so low because of "Because of careful screening and testing" So if you increase the amount of infected blood by 61% you would also increase the amount of infected blood that makes it past testing by 61%. You're only adding 2% to the population of blood donors assuming the same numbers of homosexuals would donate as non and so the risk of infection transfer would increase to 61 per 2,040,000 or 1 in 33,443.

That is assuming all other things are equal (I'm sure they are not) and that the numbers from the FDA website are accurate (I couldn't say).

I'm not sure what that means for homosexuals but statistically it's huge.

I'm not sure if FDA website are accurate.

Back in 1980's, there were more HIV among gay people but got less today, compare to 1980's.

I have seen some gay couples don't use condom because they think same sex is safe than opposite sex - that's not true because all sex carry risk, including same and opposite sex. It means gay couples must use condom as safe sex to reduce the risk of STD.

Not have sex at all is obviously safe if you don't want STD or HIV.

 

[jonnyghost]

I'm not sure if FDA website are accurate.

Back in 1980's, there were more HIV among gay people but got less today, compare to 1980's.

I have seen some gay couples don't use condom because they think same sex is safe than opposite sex - that's not true because all sex carry risk, including same and opposite sex. It means gay couples must use condom as safe sex to reduce the risk of STD.

Not have sex at all is obviously safe if you don't want STD or HIV.

That could be. I know nothing of the reliability of the website or the numbers listed. It does pose the question if the numbers are true is it descrimination to exclude the high risk people? It would seem that the recipients would have some say as much as the donors. But if the choise is between not getting blood and getting blood at higher risk of std then i'm guessing most people would take the risk?

 

[jonnyghost]

Copy and past seems to be broken on my nook right now but if you go to the cdc webste they claim a 34% increase in hiv infection from 2006 to 2009 in gay and bi men with 63% of infected people being gay and bi men.

 

[fulminty]

Truth is, anal penetration by penis is a HIGH risk activity leading to STD (particularly HIV) transmission. I personally believe the policy is a solid one; the only reason it's discriminatory is because women who take their dudes in the back door are not similarly prohibited from blood donation. Change that, and bada-bing, bada-boom, you have a cogent, consistent policy in place.

 

[jonnyghost]

Truth is, anal penetration by penis is a HIGH risk activity leading to STD (particularly HIV) transmission. I personally believe the policy is a solid one; the only reason it's discriminatory is because women who take their dudes in the back door are not similarly prohibited from blood donation. Change that, and bada-bing, bada-boom, you have a cogent, consistent policy in place.

Then maybe they should have a ban on people that practice anal sex and remove the ban on homosexuallity. It may ban most of the same people (and more) but be more accurate?

 

[deafdyke]

Copy and past seems to be broken on my nook right now but if you go to the cdc webste they claim a 34% increase in hiv infection from 2006 to 2009 in gay and bi men with 63% of infected people being gay and bi men.

Maybe that's due to a particular subset of gay men............you know the type that is self hating and does crystal meth, and thinks that having sex with random people is so empowering.

 

[jonnyghost]

Maybe that's due to a particular subset of gay men............you know the type that is self hating and does crystal meth, and thinks that having sex with random people is so empowering.

That could be. I could not seem to find the study that they got thier numbers from so who know how accurate they are. I would think that having many partners and doing drugs would put you at higher risk no matter who you are.