AIBU to think this is homophobic?

[MotherPanda]

Was just looking at the guidelines for giving blood and it reads that you must not give blood if you have had sex with:

A man (if you?re a male). Men who have had anal or oral sex with another man (with or without a condom) are deferred from blood donation for 12 months.

Can someone explain to me why this is different from heterosexual anal sex or any sexuality oral sex?

I don't see why the risk is greater.

they probably would lower the guidelines if the banks were short.

Yes, this happens. I know of two long-time donors who are now over the age limit for giving blood receiving letters asking them to donate again because the bank was short of their blood type. In their case, the risk to them was deemed to be acceptable.

I know I keep banging on about cost/benefit risk analysis but that is what it's all about. It is objective and impersonal. I do understand the frustrating at groupings: I can't drive at the moment due to a seizure, which to me is complete nonsense because it was in a very specific set of circumstances that would not happen while I was driving or, in fact, ever again, but the DVLA doesn't care about my personal feelings or inconvenience, it cares about the risk I pose as a member of a set group to the overall population if I drive. You could say that that's disability discrimination trying to justify itself on the basis of cost cutting. But most people wouldn't.

Actually, for Psammead's scenario, women in particular who have had unprotected sex with multiple partners should not be allowed to donate (women are at a much higher risk of getting HIV through unprotected sex than heterosexual males are).

Though, IIRC when my friend and I went to donate blood, neither of us could, her because she'd had non-NHS accupuncture within the last year and had had unprotected sex with someone who'd been to South America (me because my blood pressure's too low)

I dont get this one, maybe someone could explain the reason behind it

^You should never give blood if:

You've ever worked as a prostitute.

You've ever injected yourself with drugs - even once.^

What if you have made changes to your life, are now living 'cleanly' and have had blood tests showing no infections ? What is the reason to still exclude someone ?

Are people who have been to the dentist recently banned from giving blood as well? I'm sure I heard that somewhere, but it sounds silly now...

I think you are not ment to donate if you have had complicated dental work within the last 7 days, after seven days it is fine

I think it's reasonable to restrict who have give blood if there is a higher chance that a type of person's blood will be unusable. I think bone marrow is the same, which as it's often life or death, is unreasonable to be picky about.

I donated blood in the UK for years and received a Gold award for the number of units I had given. Once I began to take simple medication eg aspirin, I was not allowed to give any more because of the risk of 'watered down' blood for the recipient. I was a bit hurt but still thought that any precaution for the recipient was worth the restriction on donors.

I visit South Africa quite frequently to visit family and offered to give blood there. I was not asked at all if I were taking medication so was able to donate. At least I knew I had no STDs. That is what the bugbear is here. You must all have heard about the British haemophilia recipients who had been gven blood from homosexuals and they finished up with HIV and eventually died early? That's what restrictions are for - to protect the recipients and I agree with it.

Its totally homophobic!

I can give blood even if I've had straight sex, which might have been unprotected and with someone who has had unprotected sex with god know who... (given that my exH went off with the OW who knows what I might have picked up, certainly enough stories on here about men cheating on wives) my gay friend, who is a doctor, cannot give blood even if he uses condoms or is in a monogamous relationship....

I'm glad to hear the guidelines have changed - but they need to change to be about practicing safe sex if you in an at risk group, not how long since you had sex or with who.

Picnic - I think you have to let them know about anything other than a straightforward check-up at the dentist.

The rules might seem unfair but I think it's wrong to label them as racist or homophobic. There are many more criteria to being allowed to give blood or not.

They rely on people being honest with them about anything, right down to a donor developing a cold in the week following donation and ringing the service to let them know about it.

Because the slightest chance of infection to the patient receiving the blood could cost them their lives.

The rules are there to protect everyone, donors, staff and recipients alike have to be kept safe and if there is an increased chance of infection they have to know about it and make a decision accordingly.

Partly that decision will save them time and money as well as save lives and in some cases that means ruling blood out before they even take it.

It's not fair if someone wants to give and is not allowed but they don't have limitless cash or resources and there are no second chances if someone is given blood that will harm them in some way.

If the rules relating to race or sexuality are being relaxed or changed thanks to advances being made in testing the donated blood and ensuring it is safe then that is great news but those rules were first put there for a reason that has nothing to do with racism or homophobia and everything to do with saving lives.