Males at risk from female blood transfusion

[AssignedPerfectAtBirth]

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/blood-tranfusions-pregnant-women-kill-men-study-trali-journal-american-medical-association-a8006946.html

Turns out that biology matters after all. So what will happen if a male has their medical record changed to F or X. Theresa May, take note

“It’s none of your business what sex chromosomes I’ve got!”

D’oh.

It'll make no difference under current procedures in UK as donor details are not provided to the hospitals who use the blood.

The Dutch study concludes that it's an interesting finding, but more research is needed before clinical significance can be assessed properly (they need it replicated in more than one population).

There are no plans to exclude women who have ever been pregnant from donating.

Thats one of many reasons why medical staff are exempt from claims of 'transphobia' when they ask for a patients biological sex. If they can be, so can the rest of us.
Biological sex means something. Its why its a protected characteristic.

It makes a difference with stem cell donors, something to do with anti bodies.

Hey this will mean that women's homocide stats will increase. Who knew we were such killers

TRALI is very rare.

That the incidence increases with products from multiparious donors has been known for some time.

Can anyone link the actual study? Were there differences in rate noted in female recipients, by parity?

And as this is an observational study, did they also include paediatric case?

Excluding risky donors is the usual response to a group of donors posing additional risk to patients. This research is not being reported in terms that show the conclusions are firm enough for that.

So what will happen if a male has their medical record changed to F or X.

I know the answer to this one. Someone did a FOI request to NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT):

If a donor states that they are a woman we accept that and do not enquire about their birth gender.

If a donor states that they are a man we accept that and do not enquire about their birth gender.

Same goes for their sexual partners in terms of the deferral policy:

Male sexual partners of transgender women would not fall under the men who have sex with men deferral policy in their assessment.

Male sexual partners of transgender men can not donate for 12 months as per the men who have sex with men deferral guidance.

As if that were not insane enough, in the same press release where the govt. announce the upcoming reform of the GRA, we get:

The Government has also accepted the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs (SaBTO) to change the deferral periods for blood donation for men who have sex with men. The usual deferral blood donation period will be reduced from 12 months to three months for men who have sex with men. These reductions are based on the most up to date scientific evidence and medical advances, which will offer more people the opportunity to donate blood without affecting the safety of the blood supply

The. Same. Fucking. Press. Release!

pencil that is insane

So, hang on, a man who has sex with trans women (biological males) ISN'T prohibited from giving blood? Fuck a doodle doo.

And yet transwomen are 49 times more likely to have HIV than a reference group.

The odds ratio for being infected with HIV in transgender women compared with all adults of reproductive age across the 15 countries was 48·8,” the researchers state in their findings.

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3000094

And

But with multiple medications necessary already (such as estrogen, which must be taken weekly), HIV-positive trans women are less likely to regularly use antiretroviral medication than are their nontransgender peers.

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.hivplusmag.com/case-studies/2013/04/08/invisible-women-why-transgender-women-are-hit-so-hard-hiv%3Famp

Does them not being asked their birth sex mean they are disregarded as a high risk group?

I understand your point but they won't need to ask male or female, they will just ask if you have ever been pregnant.

Hang on, are they calling FtMs Transgender Women and MtFs Transgender MEN? Because that would be the only way it makes sense.

Yes they are. Wait till the transactivists get a hold of that. They will terf them relentlessly.

No they're not, they have embraced self-ID.

* I understand your point but they won't need to ask male or female, they will just ask if you have ever been pregnant.*

That isn’t failsafe. I have never been pregnant but I’m female.

The risk is from the blood of women who have been pregnant, not all women, so asking about previous pregnancy should be an effective measure.

So they will ask a 6 foot four man in a dress and a beard if he’s ever been pregnant?

The AGP individuals will be lining up to be asked that.

Steph-on-knee who honestly thought they might get pregnant (through anal sex), would deliberately engage them for hours.

"That isn’t failsafe. I have never been pregnant but I’m female." then according to the article in the OP your blood carries no additional risk, it is only blood of those who have ever been pregnant.

Yes in terms of risks from blood donations from women who have been pregnant this is neither here nor there.

In terms of the deferral policy for 'men who have sex with men' it is absolute insanity.

If I started IDing as a man, DH could no longer give blood.

OTOH, gay men who don't want to wait 12 months from sex (or 3 months if the guidelines are updated) before giving blood simply need to ID as female, or have their partner do so, and they are good to go.

I have no idea whether the deferral period is effective at all for reducing the risk of contaminated blood but either we need it (and it should be based on actual biological risk) or we don't and it should be got rid of altogether.

Also, in terms of haemoglobin levels, it could harm the health of a male donor who IDs as a woman and who gives blood when his Hb levels match those of a woman but not of a man - i.e. if he didn't ID as a woman he would not be allowed to give blood as his Hb levels would be too low. Or maybe that guideline is pointless too and should be got rid of - I don't know.

They may well accept self id but surely they wouldnt be so dangerously reckless as to let men who have sex with men forego the deferral because they say they are women?

From the FOI - A man who has had his gender reassigned as a woman who, as a man, had not had high risk sexual activity, can be accepted if, as a woman, they have a sexual relationship with a man

That sentence is incredibly hard to read! And it makes no sense.