Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Just read in the times that gay men have "won" the right to donate blood...

149 replies

AliGrylls · 10/09/2011 20:37

It was yesterday's newspaper and I have tried to find a link to the article online but for some reason can't find it. Anyway, apparently gay men have never been able to donate blood because of the risk of HIV and hepatitis - until now. This is going to be replaced by a new rule which is that they have to have been celibate for a year. Does this seem archaic to anyone?

What if, for example, there is a gay man who has been in a monogamous relationship for 12 years. Also, taking into account the fact that the sort of person that chooses to give blood is most likely going to be the sort of person who is honest. Should the rule be that it was subject to an up to date blood test for everyone?

DH and I were just discussing and he did point out to me that people do lie and there is a risk that someone could pass it on. Am I being unreasonable or naive?

Let's liven up mumsnet with a good discussion about this.

OP posts:
PicsInRed · 16/12/2020 20:02

People who lived more than 6 mos in the UK, France or ROI during BSE, or received a transfusion in those countries at any time 1980 onward, aren't welcome to donate blood in NZ.

It's all risk assessment.

www.nzblood.co.nz/give-blood/donating/am-i-eligible/variant-creutzfeldt-jakob-disease-vcjd/

nosswith · 16/12/2020 20:06

I am a blood donor. I am a heterosexual man. The requirement now changed had existed ever since I first gave blood, when HIV was a death sentence, to be blunt.

From a non-medical perspective and given the greater risk of transmission of HIV through anal sex, it seemed a reasonable safeguard, though it must be said that at the time I expect far fewer heterosexual men probably have/had anal sex than nowadays.

The change seems reasonable to me.

Arnoldthecat · 16/12/2020 20:09

From my own reading Stonewall and the tachellites started this campaign some years ago and the National Blood services were forced to fold and meet their demands. This latest thing is another campaign that they have "won". The most sensitive test for HIV can only detect antibodies 10 days from the point of infection.

Barkspawn · 16/12/2020 20:54

Forced to? What, did Peter Tatchell hold them at gunpoint or something?

klaerntrapetor · 17/12/2020 15:31

@Arnoldthecat

From my own reading Stonewall and the tachellites started this campaign some years ago and the National Blood services were forced to fold and meet their demands. This latest thing is another campaign that they have "won". The most sensitive test for HIV can only detect antibodies 10 days from the point of infection.
Do you do your reading from breitbart?
Arnoldthecat · 18/12/2020 11:42

Effectively we are reliant upon the honesty of donors. The most sensitive test has a minimum 10 day window. When this campaign was first launched several years ago by Stonewall the national blood service opposed it on grounds of safety but eventually had to fold due to threat of legal action .

The original honesty period was 12 months, now its three but stonewall wont be happy until its zero.

They dont really care about the safety of the NBS nor do they care how many homosexuals donate. Its all about establishing a principle. Once they've beaten the NBS into submission, they'll move onto some other campaign thus leaving every blood product recipient in this country exposed to a potentially greater risk of contracting HIV via a donation.

This risk will not be removed until an antibody test with a much narrower window is available for testing of blood donations.

For all we know, some people could be using blood donation as an easy route to screening.

BashfulClam · 18/12/2020 16:53

I find it quite mad that a monogamous gay man in a long relationship can’t give blood even if they gave had sexual health screening. Whereas a straight person with several partners isn’t seen as a risk.

Mind you MIL thought HIV and AIDS is ‘something only gay men get!’ She could understand how it found possibly affect heterosexuals...

Barkspawn · 18/12/2020 17:24

@Arnoldthecat

Effectively we are reliant upon the honesty of donors. The most sensitive test has a minimum 10 day window. When this campaign was first launched several years ago by Stonewall the national blood service opposed it on grounds of safety but eventually had to fold due to threat of legal action .

The original honesty period was 12 months, now its three but stonewall wont be happy until its zero.

They dont really care about the safety of the NBS nor do they care how many homosexuals donate. Its all about establishing a principle. Once they've beaten the NBS into submission, they'll move onto some other campaign thus leaving every blood product recipient in this country exposed to a potentially greater risk of contracting HIV via a donation.

This risk will not be removed until an antibody test with a much narrower window is available for testing of blood donations.

For all we know, some people could be using blood donation as an easy route to screening.

You really think they're going to start using potentially infected blood just to seem politically correct? Although I can see why you'd like to think so.
Thelnebriati · 18/12/2020 17:31

I've had a donation so can never donate blood, but I can't donate for my own use either, and I'm a fairly rare blood type.

I'm due surgery in a year or two. It would make sense for me to donate a couple of pints for my own use, instead of being a drain on the blood bank.

klaerntrapetor · 19/12/2020 13:03

@Arnoldthecat

Effectively we are reliant upon the honesty of donors. The most sensitive test has a minimum 10 day window. When this campaign was first launched several years ago by Stonewall the national blood service opposed it on grounds of safety but eventually had to fold due to threat of legal action .

The original honesty period was 12 months, now its three but stonewall wont be happy until its zero.

They dont really care about the safety of the NBS nor do they care how many homosexuals donate. Its all about establishing a principle. Once they've beaten the NBS into submission, they'll move onto some other campaign thus leaving every blood product recipient in this country exposed to a potentially greater risk of contracting HIV via a donation.

This risk will not be removed until an antibody test with a much narrower window is available for testing of blood donations.

For all we know, some people could be using blood donation as an easy route to screening.

I don't see what stonewall have to do with anything.
HIVpos · 19/12/2020 13:26

I can’t donate blood - obviously - as a woman who’s HIV+ and one of a third of all those living with HIV in the U.K.

As for using blood donation as an easy route to screening, there are a lot easier ways like a free postal test or a trip to a GUM clinic or a test bought from a chemist.

For reference the P24 antigen gets picked up first in an HIV test with antibodies a short while later. Blood donations are also screened for the virus itself.

Echo08 · 19/12/2020 14:18

@theinet

they don't think gay men in a "monogomous" relationship , can keep it monogamous - simple as that.

mind you there are plenty of heterosexuals that jump in and out of bed with loads of people and they don't have to be celibate . HIV is rising fast amongst straight people.

Excuse me ! My Dc is gay and he has been happily I may add with his partner for 4 years .Speak for yourself.
Kokeshi123 · 19/12/2020 14:50

The ban has never been on gay men per se, but on MSMs (men who have [anal] sex with other men). A large minority of gay men do not have anal intercourse, and about 1/3 of straight men in prison will have anal intercourse with someone at some point.

I think making the donation condition on "celibacy for XX period of time prior to the donation" is probably essential, unfortunately.

They only test blood units for ANTIBODIES TO the virus, not the virus itself--testing all units for the virus itself would be prohibitively expensive. New infections will therefore not show up, because you have to have the virus in your system for a while before your immune system starts churning out the antibodies.

And unfortunately, prevalence rates among MSMs are very high, much much higher than in the population as a whole---meaning that even someone who is (as far as they know) in a monogamous male-male relationship is still at statistically significant risk, because it only takes their partner cheating on them. If Dave's husband Andy cheats, there is a non-negligible chance of Andy's contracting HIV from the other guy, and if he does, then the risk that he will pass it on to Dave is high. Even if Dave is as pure as the driven snow, his lifetime risk of contracting HIV is unfortunately not tiny.

"Prevalence is highest in gay/bisexual men in London with an estimated 83 (credible interval 73 to 96) per 1000 gay and bisexual men aged 15 to 74 years." This is a really high rate, people. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=In%202017%2C%20the%20prevalence%20of,aged%2015%20to%2074%20years.

By contrast, the rate among prostitutes/sex workers in the UK is a fraction of this rate--this study found it to be about 0.3%. Most probably got the virus from sharing needles or long-term relationships with dodgy pimps/boyfriends who shoot up drugs. And there are pretty much no cases on record of prostitutes/sex workers in the UK passing it on to punters. It just doesn't really happen. Risks for vaginal intercourse in the general population (not prostitution) are even lower. www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/western-central-europe-north-america/uk

Technically, my husband could cheat on me, contract the virus from a woman, and pass it on to me, but the chances of his doing so are almost comically low in countries like the UK, because so few women are infected in the first place, and because women very rarely pass it on to men through vaginal intercourse even if they are infected.

It's different if you are living in a place like Uganda or South Africa where women do quite often pass the virus on to men as well as vice versa, resulting in chains of heterosexual transmission between men and women, or if you are injecting drugs. However, both those situations are also prohibited if you want to donate blood--you cannot shoot up drugs, you cannot have lived in places like Uganda recently.

In practice, if your blood titres show that you have ever had hepatitis (and a whole bunch of other things), your blood will be thrown out anyway, and again, this will automatically rule out over half of gay men who have been sexually active for a while.

CharlotteRose90 · 19/12/2020 14:59

Christ as someone that’s had countless blood transfusions I couldn’t give a shit who donated it. All blood is screened and tested before it’s given to someone else. It’s not just taken and injected straight away.

HIVpos · 19/12/2020 15:59

@Kokeshi123 not sure if you read my post above, in particular the bit about ⅓ of plHIV being women? Couple of points:

The vast majority of people who’ve contracted HIV have been diagnosed and are on treatment and wouldn’t be donating blood anyway. Of those as yet undiagnosed, an estimated 4,200 are MSM and 3,200 are heterosexual men and women. So numbers are not really that different. Your comment about risk for women being comically low is incorrect and actually not at all comical, though it is true that overall HIV is much harder to pass on than other STIs. (Source of stats: your avert link)

Regarding blood donating and testing, here’s the link to info I gave above: www.blood.co.uk/the-donation-process/further-information/tests-we-carry-out/
To quote: “We perform two tests for the virus; one is a combination test that looks for both a protein in the virus coat and antibody to the virus; and a second that looks for the virus itself, targeting the virus nucleic acid.”

Basically, as @CharlotteRose90 says 👍🏻

weggsdgdf · 19/12/2020 19:41

The stereotype of gay men being sleazy and promiscuous is unfortunately still deeply ingrained.

Arnoldthecat · 20/12/2020 22:39

*It's ridiculous.

The most common way that HIV is transmitted is through vaginal intercourse.*

I disagree. Im looking at the HPA report entitled HIV in the UK:Toward Zero and it lists Gay and bisexual men as the group with the highest number of diagnosis of HIV.

In 2018 for example, and with reference to heterosexuals ,724 men and 826 females tested positive. Reporting as having acquired HIV heterosexually. Of these number 22% reported that they had prevbiously been diagnosed HIV positive outside of the UK. One assumes they acquired the virus outside of the UK then moved here for unspecified reasons.
In 2018 around 47% of men and women who were tested positive in the UK and who had acquired the virus heterosexually were born in a country of high hiv prevalence (ie not the uk) 81% of them were black African.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/858559/HIV_in_the_UK_2019_towards_zero_HIV_transmissions_by_2030.pdf

VestaTilley · 20/12/2020 23:34

Please Google the infected blood inquiry. It’s ongoing now.

The reason the threshold for giving blood in the UK is rightly high, is because of how so many people in the UK have previously died after being transfused with infected blood products. It was awful. I had two transfusions after DS was born: I approve of very rigorous screening of blood.

And gay men weren’t banned- I talked to someone about this who worked at the Terence Higgins Trust about this one. Men who have sex with men were banned. Eg, not because they were homosexual, but because the risk of HIV was far higher.

I hope if the ban has been lifted it’s because it is genuinely safer now, not just because of woke lobbying.

Barkspawn · 21/12/2020 19:38

Ffs, they're not going to put lives at risk because of "woke lobbying".

Arnoldthecat · 21/12/2020 19:52

You dont think so? Government doesnt have a good track record on this. What about the haemophiliac scandal, CJD, Thalidomide and others..

Ponoka7 · 21/12/2020 19:58

I live not far from an area were the men will go on stag dos in Magaluf etc and go with African prostitutes. At home they go with drug using street workers. They certainly aren't going to tell the truth when they donate blood and they do via work.

We don't ask heterosexual people if they have sex with people from African etc. So the ban was unfair.

Arnoldthecat · 21/12/2020 20:08

If a man has unprotected sex with an African hooker or a druggie street prostitute then he is clearly incredibly stupid. The tragedy is that he might have a partner at home who is blissfully unaware of it.

Barkspawn · 21/12/2020 20:36

@Arnoldthecat

You dont think so? Government doesnt have a good track record on this. What about the haemophiliac scandal, CJD, Thalidomide and others..
I don't see what that has to do with the 'woke lobby', whoever they are.
klaerntrapetor · 24/12/2020 21:12

[quote Arnoldthecat]*It's ridiculous.

The most common way that HIV is transmitted is through vaginal intercourse.*

I disagree. Im looking at the HPA report entitled HIV in the UK:Toward Zero and it lists Gay and bisexual men as the group with the highest number of diagnosis of HIV.

In 2018 for example, and with reference to heterosexuals ,724 men and 826 females tested positive. Reporting as having acquired HIV heterosexually. Of these number 22% reported that they had prevbiously been diagnosed HIV positive outside of the UK. One assumes they acquired the virus outside of the UK then moved here for unspecified reasons.
In 2018 around 47% of men and women who were tested positive in the UK and who had acquired the virus heterosexually were born in a country of high hiv prevalence (ie not the uk) 81% of them were black African.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/858559/HIV_in_the_UK_2019_towards_zero_HIV_transmissions_by_2030.pdf[/quote]
Whatever furthers your blatant agenda...

New posts on this thread. Refresh page