Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fwdude

Why can’t they donate and then LATER screen the blood and discard it if anything is found wrong?

Of course, a blood donation is often the way they find OUT they tested positive....


15 posted on 02/19/2018 7:38:54 AM PST by OrangeHoof (Donald Trump: Doing the work American politicians just won't do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: OrangeHoof

The test is not 100%. What percentage of failure is acceptable?


18 posted on 02/19/2018 7:44:20 AM PST by MortMan (We are living in interesting times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: OrangeHoof

Why can’t they donate and then LATER screen the blood and discard it if anything is found wrong?
************************************************

Although, they test all the blood, the virus can take months to show up.
Also, it is not very cost effective to continue to collect and test blood that they can’t use. It really becomes like a free Aids test.


25 posted on 02/19/2018 7:50:02 AM PST by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: OrangeHoof
Why can’t they donate and then LATER screen the blood and discard it if anything is found wrong?

Read the article and the science behind the deferral. There is at LEAST a 10-day window of occult infection where the virus is not detectable and would slip past screeners into the blood supply, putting many at risk of infection.

And what party-animal sodomite counts days between encounters anyway?

27 posted on 02/19/2018 7:50:30 AM PST by fwdude (History has no 'sides;' you're thinking of geometry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: OrangeHoof

Tests are never 100% accurate.

Screening is essential.

Are you willing to play Russian Roulette with people in need of blood products all for the benefit of someone else’s self gratification?

I have given over 2 gallons of blood. About six years ago I developed an Idiopathic disorder of the blood. It just came out of nowhere. Nothing I did caused the disorder.

I am no longer able to donate. I don’t feel discriminated against.


36 posted on 02/19/2018 8:09:03 AM PST by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: OrangeHoof

Because once infected a person’s blood might not test positive for up to 6 or 9 months. They blood would pass the initial screening and only show positive later. To get an more accurate screening a person would have to be abstinent for that length of time and then get tested. Even more reason not to allow certain people to donate blood.

Another thing not made public or taught in schools is that if one is infected by a person that they almost certainly know has HIV or has been raped ect... that a person can get a massive dose of Aids medicine within like 48 to 78 hours that will almost certainly stop the infection. This isn’t made public because the drugs are too expensive.


42 posted on 02/19/2018 8:22:40 AM PST by Sheapdog (Chew the meat, spit out the bones - FUBO - Come and get me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: OrangeHoof

Why can’t they donate and then LATER screen the blood and discard it if anything is found wrong?

Of course, a blood donation is often the way they find OUT they tested positive....

_______________

I’m thinking they can’t be sure through screening which is why they have bans or restrictions. Scary!


53 posted on 02/19/2018 9:54:03 AM PST by TiGuy22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson