They told me I couldn't donate blood

[hermanding]

perhaps this has a connection to the refusal to allow blood to be donated.

The same day that Lalo died, I received a call from a very nice lady representing someone in the medical field involved in harvesting whatever organs could be saved from one who has just died. in the conversation, i told her we had been together for between 13 and 14 years. She asked if I would object to answering if it had been more than 5 years since our last sex encounter. I said it had been much less than 5 years.
She then said that - although not her own belief- that no organs could be used from his body for transplant or anything else - due to his having had sex with another guy within 5 years, and she was sorry to have troubled me.
I told her Lalo had very few - if any organs - that had not been ravaged already - including his eyes.
ding

 

[Red Storm]

I went through this 2 yrs ago was told to leave immediately when said I was gay. 2 of my fellow coworkers who DID donate blood have bare sex with countless women. is that safe?

bullshit.

 

[Passion4Muzik]

The first and only time I tried to donate blood, I was told my veins were too small and the needle would ravage them.

I had long hair at the time and I'm a "pretty boy" so who knows if their reasoning was legitimate.

 

[Georgiadude]

I used to work for a "blood bank" in the twin cities. Maybe I can help clear up some of the rumors and misconceptions going on in this thread and back up some of the facts as well.

First, don't take a lot of this as defending the practices. I'm simply explaining some of the rational. Don't kill the messenger alright.

Blood and it's various components (platelets, plasma, red blood cells) are considered a drug. Therefore the industry is regulated EXTREMELY heavily by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). ALL of the blood banks, plasma centers, organ procurement organizations etc. fall under the FDA watch. This includes the Red Cross blood centers as well. So yes they are a private organization however they all have to follow the very strict regulations, rules and protocols that the FDA sets. Any deviation from those guidelines will get you shut down, fined or possibly jailed. It doesn't matter what political party is in control. None of the past administrations were willing to get involved or change policies or procedures.

The questions that you are asked come straight from the FDA and must be read word for word. You are not allowed to decide the wording or make any changes. The order may be arranged somewhat but all of the questions MUST have the "appropriate" answer given. ANY answer that does not pass the guidelines is an immediate "denial". So if they ask "have you had sex with another male, even one time since 1980" and you say "yes" according to the FDA that is an immediate DQ and there is no need to go any further.

The sexual history questions are just a part of the interview process. There are questions about travel, past medical history, family history etc. For instance if you have traveled to an area of the world where malaria is present you are DQ'd for 1 year. After that time has lapsed you will have cleared that question but are still subject to all the others. Another is having lived in England or that area due to the human form of "mad cow disease". It's called crutschfeld/yachev disease (a close spelling but not totally correct)

Another area of questioning is the health history. Pretty much any history of cancer, other than skin, is a DQ. Obviously communicable diseases etc. If you are taking some medications you may be DQ'd as well. Most medications are allowed. There is a long list of those to check as well.

So, if you've made it through the inquisition as I used to call it. They will check your blood pressure, pulse, temperature and respiratory rate. Next is the finger stick. That is to make sure your iron level (red blood cell) count is high enough or not too high. Most men don't have a problem getting past this hurdle. For a lot of women it tends to follow their cycle. Diet plays a part here as well.

If you have made it past all of these road blocks then you will be allowed to donate. I know it is maddening, frustrating and at times mind numbingly stupid but it is not the organizations fault. They absolutely must follow the FDA guidelines. Periodic changes are made to the protocols and what used to be an exclusion may no longer apply and at times people that have been donating for years are suddenly told they are no longer allowed to do so.

Yes, you can lie and many do. A lot of the times the people working there know when someone isn't telling the truth. they hesitate, stammer or contradict themselves later on. They ask that you be honest but there is no lie detector test ....... yet.

Like I said in the beginning. I'm not defending these practices. They are trying to keep the supply "safe" however by doing so alienate a lot of people and a great number of well meaning, perfectly healthy people are turned away. Myself included btw. If you have questions let me know. I will do my best to answer them. I hope that helps.

Best regards

Steven.

 

[treanir]

Thanks for that, Steven. Quite informative. But I still don't get why all homosexuals are still automatically disqualified in this day and age. A temporary DQ would make *some* sense, but an automatic blanket ban seems pointless. From what I gather (from And The Band Played On, the blood banks didn't want to exclude gays at first because we represented quite a large part of their donations. There has to be a way to include us again. I, for one, would donate blood if I could.

 

[Georgiadude]

Your welcome Treanir.

Not all homosexuals are banned. Just those that are sexually active or were at one time. I know thats splitting hairs but I guarantee that is the answer you would get if you called them on it.

Basically the FDA is still stuck in the early years of the hiv/aids scare. Some of it from the over cautious medical community and some of it from the public misunderstanding, misconceptions and stereotyping and of course government beaurocracy as well. There are questions on the form geared towards heterosexual activity as well but it is mainly focused on homosexual sex. to be more specific male/male contact. They refer to it as "high risk behavior". In the early days of the hiv/aids crisis the testing wasn't as specific or caught it. I personally know of 3 people that were infected with hiv from a transfusion in the early 80's. Some, not many but some were "donating" as a way of getting tested for hiv. They couldn't afford to have it done or were too embarrassed to go to the clinic so they used the blood bank as their test. So as it typically does, the public hysteria took over and the government over reaction happened and this is the result.

There are some people that will "bank" their own blood prior to having major surgery but it is very expensive and not covered by most insurances. It's call "autologous donation". If the blood isn't used it is released into the general supply.

As far as "suing for discrimination". Good luck with that. The public out cry and hysteria would be so loud that it wouldn't get anywhere. Even if the medical community backed us. Which they don't. It wouldn't even be considered.

I know it's not fair, and there are many perfectly healthy people that are willing, able and more than wanting to help their community and those that are sick and injured. I had given over 3 gallons before I had to honestly DQ myself.

Again. I'm not defending this. I'm just trying to explain how/why they do it. Having been on the inside for 2 years. I'm not allowed to donate either. Please don't PM me bitching me out. I'm not the FDA. If you have a complaint bitch at them not me. Thank you.

Steven.