Why are gay men barred from donating blood?

Is it just because they’re classified as a high-risk group? Or is there some other reason at play?

As a gay man, I donate blood regularly every three months. I sign that medical disclosure without any hesitation or shame, because I truly believe I'm doing something good for others.
I’ve tested negative for HIV, and I’m not promiscuous... So, is there an actual, specific reason why I shouldn't be able to donate?

If you're actually asking me, then no 🙂

but, I mean, nobody really asks me 😢

honestly, I don't know, I'm definitely no expert here

Wait, how can they say no when you're literally handing it over every three months? 😕

So they aren't allowed to give it?

🤣 😵
If that’s actually the case, then we really are just a bunch of idiots 😵

In my view, anyone who is healthy should be able to donate blood. It’s really that simple.

I honestly can't believe they actually ban that🤔...
...I mean, they’re already running every essential screening possible on all donated blood anyway. 🙄

Yeah, it's a no-go.

http://www.redcross.org/index.asp?id=41#1, under the section "Who cannot donate blood" (which is their mistake, not mine), it clearly lays out who's disqualified from donating.

It’s basically just a list... most people whose behavior falls under "high risk" are included there.

I gotta admit—even though I don't love the idea—I actually agree with them, and I totally get where they're coming from.

Like, when that case happened recently where a guy contracted HIV from a transfusion, everyone was freaking out about how that could even happen. It was explained pretty clearly that you can't detect HIV in the blood within that 3-4 month window after exposure... so if a donor gives blood right during that "window" period while they're newly infected, they'll test negative, but they're still infectious. It's scary stuff.

They're basically just trying to shave down that tiny—but real—chance of something like that happening.

Dana Allen3, you're a smart kid, so you should probably realize that figuring out "who is actually healthy" isn't exactly a simple task...

Daniel Diaz6 said:I honestly find it hard to believe they even prohibit that🤔...
...but regardless, they run all those essential screenings on every single unit of donated blood anyway. 🙄

When you see the doctor for your pre-donation exam, you have to sign a statement confirming you haven't had sexual contact with someone of the same sex...
If you aren't willing to sign that, I assume they won't let you donate.

I donate because I just shrug my shoulders at that statement and sign it dutifully every time. 😁

Jose Miller3 said:Yeah, it's prohibited.

http://www.redcross.org/index.asp?id=41#1, under the section "Who Cannot Donate Blood" (this is their error, not mine), it clearly lists everyone who is ineligible to donate.

It’s all laid out there; basically, most people whose behavior falls under "high risk" are included.

I have to admit, as much as I dislike it, I agree with them and fully understand their reasoning.

When it recently happened that a man contracted HIV from a donor, everyone was outraged, wondering how that was even possible. It was explained quite clearly that HIV cannot be detected in the blood within 3-4 months of infection. If a donor gives blood during that specific "window"—right when they become infectious—it is impossible to detect such a thing.

They are simply trying to further reduce the relatively small probability of such an occurrence happening.

Dana Allen3, you're a smart guy, so you should realize that determining "who is healthy" isn't exactly a trivial task.

I heard from my aunt at Mayo Clinic that they have tests at the Petrov facility that can detect HIV within 21 days of infection... whereas the tests at Mayo Clinic detect infection within 3 months of exposure...

In my opinion, the more logical question would be whether you had high-risk sexual contact within that timeframe (whatever that might have been), rather than asking if you had sex with someone of the same gender... people would likely be a bit more honest that way since they wouldn't have to explicitly confirm they are gay.

I believe they even prohibit blood donations from people who spent more than three months in the United Kingdom during a certain period (I think it was back in the eighties)... 🙂

rapidwalker7 said:I think people who spent more than three months in the United Kingdom at some point—I'm thinking back to the eighties, I guess—aren't even allowed to donate blood... 🙂

That was mostly because of Mad Cow Disease, but if I recall correctly, they've actually scrapped that rule now...

Jose Miller3 said:that was due to Mad Cow Disease, though I believe they lifted it...

I wasn't sure what the reasoning was, but I think that rule was still in effect about three months ago...

I always assumed Mad Cow Disease wasn't bloodborne... didn't it require specific nervous system cells or something like that?

Honestly, that’s kind of a joke. It’s hardly a guarantee. I mean, think about it—how many straight people have been infected with HIV, yet their blood would be accepted without a second thought?
Their whole approach is a bit naive.🙄

Jose Miller3 said:Yeah, it's prohibited.

http://www.redcross.org/donate-blood/eligibility/index.html, under the section "Who cannot donate blood"...

I can't believe this! 🙂
Are gay men considered a higher risk group than lesbian women?🤔

rapidwalker7 said:In my opinion, the more logical question would be whether you had risky sexual encounters during that timeframe... rather than asking if you had sex with someone of the same gender... people might actually be honest if they didn't have to out themselves as gay just to answer...

I completely agree.

@Jose Miller3, we were just talking about that nonsense regarding the UK and those crazy cow outbreaks a second ago.

And yeah, I think this whole situation is totally retarded. What’s even worse? Someone actually wrote on a questionnaire that they hit up sex workers, and nobody did a damn thing about it. 🙂
From then on, he stopped posting. But he still goes out there playing the "noble" guy, donating blood. 🙂

Also, this rule about gay men not being allowed to donate blood is just straight-up moronic. If you haven't had a risky encounter in 21 days—or 6 weeks, or whatever the hell the timeframe is—I don't see any logical reason for it.

What an absolute load of nonsense. As if having risky encounters is some exclusive club reserved only for gay men...🙄

Statistically speaking, it’s justifiable. The risk of contracting HIV is significantly higher among gay men. We could go down a philosophical rabbit hole debating whether that’s due to a higher likelihood of minor injuries causing blood exchange, or if those arguments are just moot when you consider people in stable, monogamous relationships. But at the end of the day, you can't argue with the data.

This is honestly just plain stupid and discriminatory—I really feel like someone needs to challenge the legality of this whole regulation.

Nowadays, being gay or an IV drug user isn't automatically seen as the only way to be at risk for AIDS; instead, we look at anyone engaging in high-risk sexual behavior across the entire population 😈

Justin Fox, honey, maybe do a little more digging on this: being gay doesn't mean you face an absolute risk of catching AIDS any higher than any heterosexual person engaging in risky sexual behavior 🙂

Come on, sweetie 😍, do you even actually know what counts as risky sexual behavior in the first place???? 😈

It’s honestly such an incredibly stupid regulation. You’d think medical professionals would actually be informed about what constitutes risky behavior, but apparently not. Discriminating against someone who genuinely wants to help just because of their sexual orientation is frankly shameful. 👎

I just went down the rabbit hole and clicked on this link, and honestly, it’s just plain absurd. It claims that permanently disqualifies a donor—specifically a man—if he has ever in his life had sexual contact with another man...
😲
Are you kidding me? So even if a guy is perfectly healthy and had that kind of encounter just once five years ago, he’s essentially blacklisted from donating forever!?
If an HIV test can accurately detect the virus within a three-to-four-month window, what on earth is the logic behind this rule!?

Come on, everyone, please—try to actually think about the reasoning behind instructions like these.