Replies

The mainstream and left-wing media are all publishing stories like this one in the last few days that push for the ban to be lifted.

This is despite the fact that the FDA ALREADY PUBLISHED A REPORT last year that showed they EXHAUSTIVELY STUDIED the issue. They went through all the reasons why a one-year ban is needed.

I posted key excerpts of the FDA report in another thread.

It is a worthwhile read AND an excellent reference on this issue, as it simply and clearly addresses and refutes each and every reckless claim being made.

If you have any questions on this issue, see this report, and your question will likely be answered in one of the excerpts I pulled out:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3440453/posts

In my own words, some highlights from the report:

* The total lifetime ban was getting less effective because a small, but growing and significant number of sexually active gay men were donating blood anyway. Many were doing so because they considered the ban discriminatory, so it seemed some change needed to be made.

* After carefully studying the matter, which is documented in the report, the FDA recommended the one-year waiting time after last sexual contact for MSM rather than completely lifting the ban for the following reasons:

- The extremely high levels of HIV infection among MSM.

- They determined that men who have a history of having sex with men still have a far greater incidence of HIV infection than do men who have many multiple partners.

- They also write that in both heterosexual and homosexual relationships considered to be monogamous, about 25% of them actually aren’t, and it is the homosexual relationships that are falsely believed to be monogamous that are a much greater threat in terms of HIV infection.

They also note that a potential blood donor who is in a male homosexual relationship might truthfully report that his relationship is monogamous, even while his partner is having sexual contact with other men.

- For a variety of reasons, other options besides the one-year ban, such as simply relying on testing the blood or testing donors beforehand, aren’t effective and/or practical.

* The report says that while the FDA knows that keeping this ban isn’t a perfect solution, it is the best option among all the possibilities.

* The report also mentions the concern that a new infection might quickly spread among sexually active gay men and infect the blood supply before it could be detected.