Posted on 09/27/2014 8:34:55 PM PDT by Phillyred
What’ll happen is those private groups will get the same treatment as everyone else - include homosexuals or face devistating legal troubles.
Then people really will die due to a lack of available blood or HIV infected blood in circulation. Clearly an Agenda 21 move here (depopulation).
How is blood from less than 3% of the population going to really save over a million lives?
Math is hard.
In the U.S., there are 2.5 million deaths per year. Are we really to believe that 40% of U.S. deaths are attributable to blood shortages?
They just can’t kill us off fast enough, can they.
appropriate
Excellent point.
Utter bullshit. Hysterically false.
Who is writing this fiction?
They are probably not talking about whole blood, but how many lives based on the amount blood products, like plasma or platelets.
I think the number is still inflated beyond reason.
AND the push is on to repeal all “disclosure” laws that require HIV/AIDS victims to inform their sexual partners.
AIDS Pride and all that.
so a 2% increase in the blood supply will save a million lives? I had no idea that 50 million Americans bled to death.
Eligibility Criteria by Topic/Lifetstyle and Life Events
Donor Deferral for Men Who Have Had Sex With Men (MSM)
The top priorities of the American Red Cross are the safety of our volunteer blood donors and the ultimate recipients of blood. On June 11, 2010, the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary's Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability voted against recommending a change to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) policy of a lifetime deferral for men who have sex with other men. The FDA is responsible for determining donor eligibility requirements and the Red Cross is required to follow their decisions. However, the Red Cross does support the use of rational, scientifically-based deferral periods that are applied fairly and consistently among donors who engage in similar risk activities. We will continue to work through the AABB (American Association of Blood Banks) to press for donor deferral policies that are fair and consistent and based on scientific evidence, while still protecting patients from potential harm.
“As long as nothing bad happens, everything will be good”
Some real deep thoughts by the study designers. And you know they were paid good money to make up some numbers.
“Study: Allowing blood donations from gay men could help save over a million lives in U.S.”
This title is deceptive. A careful reading of the text will show that it was a CALIFORNIA study.
They are banned because of likely transmission of deadly disease....just like the ban for decades now if you have travelled to Africa in the past five years
As far as HIV goes, it is an established fact that the incidence of AIDS is much higher in the gay community than in the general population so those that engage in this risky behavior should be excluded. Although blood is tested for the presence of the virus, there is a "window" after infection during which the blood test will be negative even though the person is capable of transmitting the infection through blood or blood products.
IV drug use is another high-risk category of donors that are excluded, not just because of HIV, but also Hepatitis B and C. It is typical of the gay and lesbian lobby to complain because they cannot do whatever they want to do just because of "discrimination".
I have a brother (who is not gay) who can not give blood because he lost a finger. So, if you figure things like that and the fact of multiple same sex partners and the possibility of passing on not only AIDS but any other assortment of sexually transmitted diseases. Then the number of eligibles goes down considerably.
Here are the current FDA and /or AABB guidelines for volunteer blood donation (allogeneic and autologous) screening:
ABO, Rh Typing
Unexpected antibody screen (immunohematologic antibodies)
Hepatitis B surface antigen
Hepatitis B core antibodies
Hepatitis C antibodies
Serologic test for Syphilis
HIV-I/II antibodies
Human T-cell lymphotrophic virus antibodies
HIV-I Nucleic Acid Test (PCR)
HCV Nucleic Acid Test (PCR)
West Nile Virus Nucleic Acid Test (PCR)
Bacterial Screening of Platelet components
Additional tests may be preformed at the discretion of the collection facility, such as Cytomegalovirus (CMV) Antibody screening, Hepatitis B Nucleic Acid Testing (PCR) and T. Cruzi antibodies (Chagas' Disease).
So, multiple same sex partners mean the chance of getting clean blood is extremely low.
All that extra blood isn’t going to help anyone if it isn’t safe to use.
This isn’t about bigotry or homophobia or anything else besides hard statistical data. Gay and Bisexual men in the United States have an exponentially higher rate of current HIV infections and represent a staggering percentage of new HIV infections.
From the CDC’s own website:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/index.html
http://www.cdc.gov/std/Syphilis/STDFact-MSM-Syphilis.htm
-50% of all existing HIV/AIDS cases are gay or bisexual men.
-Gay and bisexual men account for nearly 2/3’s of all new cases of HIV each year.
-Young gay and bisexual boys and men aged 13 to 25, (which the CDC generously estimates to be 2% of the general population) account for no less than 3/4’s of the new HIV cases each year. That represents an increase of almost 60% since 2008.
-Gay and bisexual men also account for a disproportionately high percentage (75%) of new syphilis cases each year. Syphilis is still very much a killer, folks.
It’s madness to even consider using such a high risk group for blood donation. No testing method is infallible, and this would represent an undue risk to the blood supply. It doesn’t matter if it’s gay men or needle-sharing drug addicts, the risk is too damned high.
Oh, and if the ban is so discriminatory, why aren’t lesbians (who have very low HIV infection rates) banned from donating blood? Again, this is not about anything but sound and sane medicine.
Damn. These people are determined that if one thing doesn’t get us, another will. Blood from sodomites, epidemics from illegals, ebola...
All that extra blood isn’t going to help anyone if it isn’t safe to use.
This isn’t about bigotry or homophobia or anything else besides hard statistical data. Gay and Bisexual men in the United States have an exponentially higher rate of current HIV infections and represent a staggering percentage of new HIV infections.
From the CDC’s own website:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/risk/gender/msm/facts/index.html
http://www.cdc.gov/std/Syphilis/STDFact-MSM-Syphilis.htm
-50% of all existing HIV/AIDS cases are gay or bisexual men.
-Gay and bisexual men account for nearly 2/3’s of all new cases of HIV each year.
-Young gay and bisexual boys and men aged 13 to 25, (which the CDC generously estimates to be 2% of the general population) account for no less than 3/4’s of the new HIV cases each year. That represents an increase of almost 60% since 2008.
-Gay and bisexual men also account for a disproportionately high percentage (75%) of new syphilis cases each year. Syphilis is still very much a killer, folks.
It’s madness to even consider using such a high risk group for blood donation. No testing method is infallible, and this would represent an undue risk to the blood supply. It doesn’t matter if it’s gay men or needle-sharing drug addicts, the risk is too damned high.
Oh, and if the ban is so discriminatory, why aren’t lesbians (who have very low HIV infection rates) banned from donating blood? Again, this is not about anything but sound and sane medicine.
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.