So biology is real - BBC story about woman who needs donated blood from biological males

[bellinisurge]

'My ability to see depends on men giving blood' www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51047046

I have MS. I do not take this woman's medical condition lightly and I am sorry to use it to make a point. But it would appear that she can only have blood from biological men to make the serum she needs to address her condition.
In other words, biology would appear to be real in matters of blood donation.
I have my own medical reasons (unrelated to MS) for not being able to be a blood donor. I'm sad about that but I accept biological fact.
P.S. Give Blood if you can.

I came to post about this BBC story too, I saw a different related video about male blood being used in neonatal situations as it has higher iron

www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-kent-51042236/more-men-needed-to-donate-blood-high-in-iron

I think I've seen on here before that the blood donation service don't ask your sex when you donate only your gender

The report uses the word gender, but it's quiet clear that they want more donations from male sexed people not more from male gender identifying people. The use of gender rather than sex in NHS information is totally messed up and if TRA gain more ground it's only going to get more confusing going forward.

Sorry. I started a thread but have just asked for it to be deleted.

Who would have thought it. Sex matters.

The report uses the word gender, but it's quiet clear that they want more donations from male sexed people not more from male gender identifying people But how will they know? If 50% of current female donors self ID as men - how would their donated blood be used? It'd be labelled male, surely? Because that's what the form would say, because all it asks for is your self ID gender. Not your biological sex.

This is such a clear cut area where sex matters.

'aiming for a 26% increase in new male donors this year in a bid to help fix the widening gender imbalance.'

Except it's the sex imbalance, isn't it, NHS? You'd probably better use the correct term, hadn't you?

I came to see if there was a thread on this (am FWR regular but under different name as don't want to be IDed). I have skin in this game as I also have Sjogren's (thankfully atm without the same complications as the article, but other issues and there is no cure).

I have already taken up the sex/gender issue with my local trust by writing, and making my views very clear on that stupid fucking questionnaire, stickers, leaflets etc. Obviously I have been ignored or dismissed (interestingly not by some HCPs including consultants, who I have spoken to face to face who are GC)

But on this particular issue I absolutely will demand clear written answers and explanations as it seems so clear cut and indefensible, I can't see how they can justify themselves, or ignore someone who is so directly affected by this (she said naively)

Clearly I want to arm myself with the best advice from you lot so if anyone has any suggestions re wording/specific questions to ask I would be really grateful (happy to start different thread if people think best?)

(Also, I plan to copy in the HCPs directly involved with the care of my Sjogrens - opthamology/neuro/rheumatology, under three different hospitals!)

This is a horrible disease and I feel for Jo Daniels in the article. Hopefully this will raise awareness not just of the disease but of the risks to women's health by denying biological reality.

I have seen a few people saying that NHS blood donations are done on self Id gender. Does anyone know where this idea comes from? The other mumsnet threads I could find were a bit inconclusive. It sounds like the word gender is used on the form.

I have seen a few people saying that NHS blood donations are done on self Id gender. Does anyone know where this idea comes from?

2015 FOI here:

www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/male_partners_of_transgender_wom#incoming-676502

ITV covered the same story. Apparently blood from males can be used to treat more conditions because 1) iron content is generally higher 2) women’s blood can be higher in antibodies which make it unsuitable for some types of treatments. Every article I’ve read on this though, conflates sex and gender and appeals for more people of male gender to come forward to donate.

There can also be issues with blood being given to men if it was from a woman who's ever been pregnant.

So sex matters that way, too.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3747649-Blood-donation-record-states-my-gender-is-female

Pretty sure Wales still records sex of blood donors, not gender, for exactly this reason.

My form, issued 6th January, still listed gender: F, and not sex.

The comments on FB on the blood donation service page to this story are not about whether they actually record sex of donors, but more about the fact that gay men are still excluded as donors, and people feel that that is the reason for a shortage of male donors. No-one has yet mentioned the aspect of whether they even know if someone is male or female biologically.

perhaps it doesn't actually make a practical difference in this specific case, as what they will be using is blood with the required level of iron. Whilst that mainly comes from male donors, they probably use the actual iron level as the determining factor as to what blood they use.

And perhaps it's true in other cases; perhaps they screen and choose blood for 'absence of certain antibodies' that might have resulted from pregnancy, rather than choosing male blood, etc.

But it would make it easier if they could have accurate sex data as part of the filtering system!

Screening all the blood to work out the sex of the donor because they don't want to ask feels like an unnecessary expense.

Also if they have a gap in donors, between genders, that's not the same as a gap between sexes.

What about non binary people there are lots of them about. Don't they want them to donate. They are unable to capture their gender.

I don't think they need to screen the blood to work out the sex, but to work out if it has the necessary characteristic they are looking for - like high enough iron. Presumably not all male blood would have that anyway, so they'll actually be screening for that. It just makes it easier to say they are looking for more male blood, because it tends to have it. etc.

I agree, though, that just having accurate records would go a long way to making the process more efficient.

They do need to know. There’s an enzyme in the blood of women who have ever been pregnant that cannot be given to people with certain liver conditions.

They make those products out of male blood only to minimise the risks. That’s biological male, not pretend male.

Isnt that what the finger prick test does - indicate iron levels?

Isnt that what the finger prick test does - indicate iron levels?

Yes, and if you're borderline, they'll take a blood sample and put it in a little electronic machine to get a proper reading, and if you're too low to give, but not badly so, they send you off with a leaflet about haemoglobin and iron-rich foods, and if you're below another threshold, they tell you to see your GP, who will probably just prescribe iron tablets and talky about leafy green vegetables.

They screen donated blood for a whole host of diseases and other stuff, too. They take two or three testtube samples for testing before your blood is allowed through the cable to fill the donation bag.

Also, women need to go longer between giving blood than men - 16 weeks compared to 12 weeks I think. If the blood service is recording gender not sex and then using that to send out invites to give they might be putting some donors at risk.