Should the FDA Allow Gay Men to Donate Blood?

Reader Comments
Back to article

I just found this out yesterday that gay men cannot donate blood. That is the most ridiculous and outrageous thing I have ever heard. Me being a bi-sexual female take extreme offense to that. People don't choose to be gay, they are born that way. That's like saying people born a certain race cannot donate blood. Any straight person can also contract the AIDS virus but you are just discriminated against gays! We live in America don't we! I use to brag because I am proud to be an American but know my views have changed. I am still proud to be an american but I am also ashamed because of people and coorporations like you say gays cannot donate blood

sam of MO 3:52PM May 14, 2012

'Chances of the men who identify themselves as "heterosexual" being honest about the guy he sees on the "down low" are slim to none. Especially considering the fact that he would have to explain himself to his wife or friends as to why he was banned. How many times do you think an infected woman donates before symptoms from her unknown infection that her husband is spreading are so bad she finally has to see a doctor she can't afford or has no insurance for??
Do you people even realize that a woman who has had sex with someone she KNEW was positive is only deferred for 1 year?? Or that men who sleep with prostitutes are as well?? Yet I have been with the same person for over 10 years and if my mother needed a life saving transfusion and I was the only match I'd have to sit back and watch her die because no doctor would risk ignoring a government policy regardless of the situation.'
To answer your first paragraph, someone like Larry Craig is unable to donate blood, either, without lying (and lying here is a felony in, I think, 34 states, and a misdemeanor in 4 others. I have no idea how they could realistically enforce this in most cases, short of word of mouth or their own so-called "gaydars," although someone like Craig, Barney Frank, or Magic Johnson would probably be turned away on the spot, since they'd be recognized by the blood drive.)
That's the other thing: If you experimented with another man when you were 18 back in 1978 (or, say, were abused by a stepfather or priest,) got no diseases from it, and had no idea it would result in a lifetime ban, tough...AND your wife or girlfriend is, technically, subject to that same 12-month deferral you mentioned for knowingly sleeping with an HIV-positive man. It'd be awkward to tell your wife or girlfriend that technically, she's basically unable to donate blood, either, because of one experiment you had when you were 18, even if presently you're not "on the down low." I have no idea how instituting a less-than-lifetime deferral to accommodate for this is caving to a "politically correct pro-gay agenda" rather than on "actual science," to quote Gene Wade.
You can just not donate blood if you are disqualified, but the fact that there is a "peer pressure" element to blood drives at work will make people wonder, in addition to how it disqualifies your wife/girlfriend.

anonymous 4:30PM October 22, 2010

As a blood donor with a few gallons along the way, I know it can be frustrating to want to do "good" and yet be told no. Over the years, as more and more restrictions have come out- lived in Europe during the Mad Cow era? Been out of the country for longer than a certain length of time? Had your ears pierced or gotten a tattoo lately? These things can knock you out of giving blood also.
Perhaps there are other uses that donated blood can be utilized to benefit mankind.
I remember a dying mother in Atlanta who had been a victim of violence. She lost the child she was carrying and after pints and pints of blood, then she lost her life. They donated her organs to perhaps a dozen people. A victory in the face of loss. Then 3-4-6 months later, they found that 1 donor of all of those pints of blood became HIV positive. They had to go and tell all of those people, thouse sisters and brothers, or mother and fathers, that Yes, they got the organ, but they may have gotten something else. They now live under a cloud of fear as they periodically go to get tested to make sure that the organ they received did not come with an addition no one suspected.
This is not a matter of who one choses for a partner for males. It should also be for females. It is not just risky sexual behavior. It is any risky behavior- share a bed or share a needle.
I sometimes think that we are about to be down to two or three of us as donors. Everytime I read the literature before I donate, it seems someone else has to be excluded. But, if it were my mother or sister, my father or brother who was to get the transfusion or the organ- Hell Yes, I say exclude them. Do Not have people grateful for a gift that turns out to be something that will kill or debilitate them.
In the end - It is Not about the gay or bisexual male. It is NOT about you, it is about the person on the other end of the transfusion or the transplant. Do not try to make it about you. It is about the other person.
Again- science should be able to do good with donated blood even if it is not used in transfusions. These people should also find other ways to 'donate' with out trying to violate rules that have been developed for the good of the nation and the recipients of blood and organs.
No one in my family's life is worth that risk.
I give blood and encourage others to give blood so that it is there when we as a society need it. So that it is untainted and worth someone receiving it. I am an organ donor for the same reason. I would just donate the body to science if it was any chance that it would leave the recipient in a worse condition upon receipt.

MF Cleaveland of GA 3:12PM August 30, 2010

I do not understand the thinking of people who flat out say, "no" concerning gays being able to donate blood. What do you know about the sexual and drug habits of the straight donors? You don't know their possibly very promiscuous sexual lifestyles or drug habits. In addition, we are able to very quickly test blood from donors. So, all this boils down to is stereotyping and discrimination. It is time for a change to our thinking and our practices and allow all people to donate blood and test it, as we do anyway.

Jan W. of WI 9:21PM August 18, 2010

HIV positive patients have the same needs for transfusion of whole blood as well as the various factors. All blood is tested for HIV hepatitis and other disorders. A casual contact several years ago probably if negative is very low risk. Like most of these yes/no questions biology is without absolutes.

walt of AL 9:54AM July 28, 2010

"People in America have a choice, correct?
The last time I looked anyway! People can choose the medical center where they wish to be treated, the physician, surgeon, etc. People can even change the nurse assigned to them in that facility.
So, why can we choose not to receive blood donated by a gay or lesbian person if we are unconfortable? If blood is labeled as such, why should this be a prejudicial issue?
I donate approximately Q3M for my own personal stores so I won't have to deal with such issues.
Have a good day."---- im with this person on the matter. It is true that we have a choice that why we are here in the USA.

abe of MN 8:43AM July 28, 2010

How do you think hiv spread through the USA and millions died from aids ? It's because of this evil sinful lifestyle, get out of it before it's too late .

notpc of TX 8:33AM July 28, 2010

The last time I looked anyway! People can choose the medical center where they wish to be treated, the physician, surgeon, etc. People can even change the nurse assigned to them in that facility.
So, why can we choose not to receive blood donated by a gay or lesbian person if we are unconfortable? If blood is labeled as such, why should this be a prejudicial issue?
I donate approximately Q3M for my own personal stores so I won't have to deal with such issues.
Have a good day.

noproblemhere of CA 6:03AM July 27, 2010

The safety of the nation’s blood supply is a top priority for many, including gay men. As noted by the authors, current FDA blood donor policies do not yield an entirely risk-free blood supply. This is largely due to inconsistencies in donor deferral guidelines, which impose significantly less stringent deferrals on high-risk heterosexual men and women, yet ban all gay men—even those who are HIV-negative, consistently practice safe-sex, or are in monogamous relationships— for life. These inconsistencies were acknowledged in June by the Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability whom concluded that current blood donor deferral policies are “suboptimal.”
Alternative policies exist in Italy and Spain which do not prohibit gay and bisexual men from donating blood. Rather, these countries require that all donors are objectively screened for high-risk sexual behavior, regardless of sexual orientation. Italy reports significant declines in transfusion-related HIV transmission since the policy was implemented in 2001. For example, between 1999 and 2000, prior to implementing an objective screening policy, Italy reported 22 transfusion-related HIV transmissions—by 2008, only four transfusion-related HIV infections were reported. Other countries, such as Australia, are currently reviewing their MSM deferral policies. The success of the objective screening policy abroad warrants greater investigation of implementing a similar policy domestically.

Robert, Gay Men's Health Crisis of NY 5:43PM July 26, 2010

Honestly, I find and firmly believe that homosexuality is morally wrong and simply unnatural. However, if a gay man or a lesbian wants to contribute to the community and feel helpful by giving blood, then by all means let them! Unless doctors are just stupid, you have to take tests to see if you are HIV positive or carrying an STD. While STDs and AIDS are major problems within the homosexual community, they also appear among heterosexuals. If a murderer donated blood and I received it, would the blood make me a murderer? Heck no! If it did, then many of us ought to behaving like mosquitoes because they bit us!
Point being, if their blood is not containing any STDs or other hazards, then let them give.

Patrick of KY 5:02PM July 26, 2010