Posted on 06/14/2016 7:37:23 PM PDT by Faith Presses On
PRE-donate your OWN blood for yourself...bank it...rather than risking a transfusion of gay AIDS blood!
You can’t pick family, you are basically stuck, so no.
10 years ago I was very anemic and received a blood transfusion. If these leftists had their way I would have gotten AIDS..perhaps these leftists who want gay blood so badly can have it transfused into their bodies and if they get AIDS oh well
Liberals are a death cult....they hate themselves & they hate life. The rest of us are just in the way.
What could possibly go wrong?
I had no idea the blood supply could be considered safe, I thought AIDS, hepatitis and the whole toxic petri dish of homosexual diseases had long ago been green-lighted into the general blood/plasma supply cuz "homophobia" and "unfairness" and stuff.
I have zero doubts the homosexuals will prevail in their efforts to taint/poison blood/plasma products because everyone should be exposed to the consequences of homosexual behavior, especially the 'privileged'.
The ban likely also isn’t just about AIDS, but other concerns like hepatitis.
And from CNN:
“Every unit of blood donated in the United States must undergo 13 tests, including 10 for infectious diseases (such as HIV, hepatitis and syphilis).
“The use of donor education material, specific deferral questions and advances in donor testing have reduced the risk of HIV transmission from a blood transfusion to about 1 in 1.5 million to 2 million blood units, according to the National Institutes of Health.
“While it is possible to detect HIV in a unit of blood nine to 11 days after infection, the NIH says that once a person is infected with HIV, it generally takes about three months for the body to produce enough antibodies to be detected by an HIV antibody test. For some people, it can take up to six months.”
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/13/health/orlando-shooting-gay-men-donate-blood/
Yes. I thought of that. The blood all over some had to be tainted with Hep B and C. HIV only lives 30 seconds outside the body.
This should be a medical decision, not a political one.
Here's some stuff from a San Fran AIDS site
There's a period of time after a person is infected during which they won't test positive. This is called the “hiv window period.”
The window period can be from 9 days to 3 months, depending on the person's body and on the HIV test that's used. During that time, you can test HIV negative even though you're HIV positive. You can still catch HIV from someone who is in the window period. In fact, there is evidence that a person in the window period is more likely to pass the virus on.
That means the blood they donate will not test positive but it will still infect people who get that blood.
If more people get aids it will no longer be an overwhelmingly gay disease.
That's a great point.
The Left is screaming that science and statistics of risk based on decades of data are "homophobic!", therefore in the interests of non-bigotry, the controls and protocols surrounding blood and plasma supply should roughly conform to immigration/rapefugee policies throughout the West, i.e., no meaningful control/accountability based on the facts, or else "isms" n stuff.
I grew up in a small town where a classmate lost their mother due to an HIV tainted blood infusion in the mid 80s.
Per the CDC, one in five homosexual adult males is HIV positive. Nearly half of that group are unaware of their condition. Homosexual males comprise approximately one percent of the U.S. population. Fifty thousand new cases of HIV are diagnosed each year, and the numbers are increasing. Homosexual males account for 80% of the new cases.
320M x 0.01 x 0.2 x 0.5 = 320,000 homosexual adult males in the U.S. who are unaware they are HIV positive.
If only one percent of that total donate blood, that’s 3,200 pints of infected product in the system.
Who the h*** would wish that risk...except of course the homosexuals and Leftists who want more hetero cases of HIV.
“If we have aids, you should have aids!”
Yes. From CNN:
“While it is possible to detect HIV in a unit of blood nine to 11 days after infection, the NIH says that once a person is infected with HIV, it generally takes about three months for the body to produce enough antibodies to be detected by an HIV antibody test. For some people, it can take up to six months.”
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/13/health/orlando-shooting-gay-men-donate-blood/
I’ve read quite a few of these articles now, and they all say different things and make different claims about just this point, the effectiveness of the testing done on donated blood, even though they are all sure that the FDA ban is needless.
And none of them cover issues like the fact that the blood donation process doesn’t need a very high risk pool of donors coming in, and tying up their resources as well as undoubtedly increasing the number of infections of HIV (and hepatitis) occurring through blood donations.
One news report, for instance, points to Italy as a proposed model, but a journal article on Italy’s process that I came across says that while they changed their screening from an outright ban of “MSM” “per se,” they are still effectively barred due to the behavior requirements.
[[Democrats and the media push for lifting the blood donation ban on gay men ]]
They should all be forced to get a blood transfusion with blood collected from homosexuals prior to voting
Absolutely.
I remember way back to the mid 80s that the media was hyping the 'all you straights are gonna get AIDS too' because they desperately wanted it to be true, at least throughout the West.
Their prediction largely proved true for impoverished areas of the globe, however.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.