Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:39am Tue 15 Apr 08
[quote]But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.[/quote]
Fact or Homophobia?
But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.
Fact or Homophobia?
Posted by: kiwiget, NZ on 12:28pm Tue 15 Apr 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote]But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.[/quote]
Fact or Homophobia?
[/quote] Who cares which?
The fact is, any organisation has the right to decide whom it will and won't accept donations from.
Another example of the tail trying to wag the dog here.
The Missing City wrote:
But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.
Fact or Homophobia?
Who cares which?
The fact is, any organisation has the right to decide whom it will and won't accept donations from.
Another example of the tail trying to wag the dog here.
Posted by: jkr, Lochwinnoch Greater Glasgow on 2:06pm Tue 15 Apr 08
I am more concerned that perfectly healthy blood donors are no longer allowed to give blood when they reach 70.
I can understand not starting after 70 but healthy donors should be allowed to continue.
I am more concerned that perfectly healthy blood donors are no longer allowed to give blood when they reach 70.
I can understand not starting after 70 but healthy donors should be allowed to continue.
Posted by: Templeton_otg, Bridgeton on 3:13pm Tue 15 Apr 08
When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them
When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them
Posted by: Atomic_xD, Pontefract on 4:22pm Tue 15 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Templeton_otg[/bold] wrote:
When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them[/quote] [bold]Absoloutly agree![/bold]
If the Government are so desperate for blood doners, they should release their inhibitions- especially concerning homosexual people. It is a discriminative, stereotypical statement to say that HIV would be rife if gay men were to donate. I believe an effective solution to the problem would be to screen [bold]everybody[/bold] for HIV.
Templeton_otg wrote:
When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them
Absoloutly agree!
If the Government are so desperate for blood doners, they should release their inhibitions- especially concerning homosexual people. It is a discriminative, stereotypical statement to say that HIV would be rife if gay men were to donate. I believe an effective solution to the problem would be to screen
everybody for HIV.
Posted by: weegielady, glasgow on 6:11pm Tue 15 Apr 08
[quote]quote[/quote] ANGRY gays are set for crunch talks with Scottish Government chiefs today to demand they are allowed to donate blood.
[italic]angry gay men ! they will rumple up your cushions![/italic]
ps who are all these folk scared of their own house? homophobic or something i think it is..
quote
ANGRY gays are set for crunch talks with Scottish Government chiefs today to demand they are allowed to donate blood.
angry gay men ! they will rumple up your cushions!
ps who are all these folk scared of their own house? homophobic or something i think it is..
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 7:53pm Tue 15 Apr 08
this should be allowed in fact they should be allowed to give eight pints at a time.
this should be allowed in fact they should be allowed to give eight pints at a time.
Posted by: Templeton_otg, Bridgeton on 9:18pm Tue 15 Apr 08
[quote][bold]Atomic_xD[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Templeton_otg[/bold] wrote: When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them[/quote] [bold]Absoloutly agree![/bold] If the Government are so desperate for blood doners, they should release their inhibitions- especially concerning homosexual people. It is a discriminative, stereotypical statement to say that HIV would be rife if gay men were to donate. I believe an effective solution to the problem would be to screen [bold]everybody[/bold] for HIV. [/quote] Hats off to to Atomic_xD comon sense prevails based on the American model a programme of national screening is being introduced by the CDC Centre for Disease Control this is proveing effective as part of the national curriculum in sex education and prevention of further transmition of all BBV's blood borne viruses .The video on the BBC Scotland website on this subject clearly states there is no concievable [bold]clincal case[/bold] to enforce the ban
Atomic_xD wrote:
Templeton_otg wrote: When the ratios for HIV transmission between Gays & Hetrosexuals are neck in neck with each other,is it right to exclude one group ? when the term of High risk catagory patient applies should the ban be even relivant When the standard tests regardless of sexual orreintation are carried out We want blood and need adaquate supplies of it the scottish goverment talk about stigma in all regards every day and of tolerance but this I fear will be one of those ONLY when it suits them
Absoloutly agree! If the Government are so desperate for blood doners, they should release their inhibitions- especially concerning homosexual people. It is a discriminative, stereotypical statement to say that HIV would be rife if gay men were to donate. I believe an effective solution to the problem would be to screen everybody for HIV.
Hats off to to Atomic_xD comon sense prevails based on the American model a programme of national screening is being introduced by the CDC Centre for Disease Control this is proveing effective as part of the national curriculum in sex education and prevention of further transmition of all BBV's blood borne viruses .The video on the BBC Scotland website on this subject clearly states there is no concievable
clincal case to enforce the ban
Posted by: slam, Glasgow on 9:21pm Tue 15 Apr 08
Sure, gay men have rights. We all do. I demand the right to know, if I ever require blood, that I am NOT receiving blood from a gay man.
Sure, gay men have rights. We all do. I demand the right to know, if I ever require blood, that I am NOT receiving blood from a gay man.
Posted by: weegielady, glasgow on 9:41pm Tue 15 Apr 08
being a blood donor is a good thing, however, these militant gay guys are always away on some march, with banners asking for equal rights and so on, and they gave those donor rights up by having sex with men. it is too risky and so i think the law should stay as is it due to potential HIV contamination. as they figures show it is 5 times more likely in men who have sex with men .1300 signatures is hardly a humungous petition. I am straight and I dont march to places with banners or want to snog my heterosexual partner in public or demand this that and other or flaunt my sexuality as a cause for medical procedures being done to me. at end of the day you cant demand these basic human rights as the recipients ,as stated well by slam have the right [italic]not[/italic] to be given aids through a blood risky transfusion .
being a blood donor is a good thing, however, these militant gay guys are always away on some march, with banners asking for equal rights and so on, and they gave those donor rights up by having sex with men. it is too risky and so i think the law should stay as is it due to potential HIV contamination. as they figures show it is 5 times more likely in men who have sex with men .1300 signatures is hardly a humungous petition. I am straight and I dont march to places with banners or want to snog my heterosexual partner in public or demand this that and other or flaunt my sexuality as a cause for medical procedures being done to me. at end of the day you cant demand these basic human rights as the recipients ,as stated well by slam have the right
not to be given aids through a blood risky transfusion .
Posted by: brianscottie43, Toronto, Canada on 1:03am Wed 16 Apr 08
I am a transplant (liver/kidney) recipient. About one week away from becoming comatose the doctors told me they had organs for me, but they were coming from a man who, the previous day, had been released from prison. They pointed out that the problems were possible HIV or Hepatitis infection because homosexual and drug needle use are both common prison activities. The organs seemed okay at that time but either of these infections would not reveal themselves for about 3 weeks, but if infection did occur they could be treated with drugs and were no longer a death sentence. There was no infection and it is now almost two years since my operation and I feel wonderful. If gays wish to donate blood surely it could be tested at the appropriate time after donation then utilized if no virus is detected. If it can save lives then surely there is an obligation to find ways to get around the problem.
I am a transplant (liver/kidney) recipient. About one week away from becoming comatose the doctors told me they had organs for me, but they were coming from a man who, the previous day, had been released from prison. They pointed out that the problems were possible HIV or Hepatitis infection because homosexual and drug needle use are both common prison activities. The organs seemed okay at that time but either of these infections would not reveal themselves for about 3 weeks, but if infection did occur they could be treated with drugs and were no longer a death sentence. There was no infection and it is now almost two years since my operation and I feel wonderful. If gays wish to donate blood surely it could be tested at the appropriate time after donation then utilized if no virus is detected. If it can save lives then surely there is an obligation to find ways to get around the problem.
Posted by: weegielady, glasgow on 1:23pm Wed 16 Apr 08
well done brianscottie in canada you are alive thansk for amazing skills of drs
to be an organ donor is a good thing, however , your dr informed you who it was coming from and that it would be risky, the risk outweighed the advantages, and your life has been saved.
issue here regards gay male blood donors who would maybe be contaminted with aids /hiv/hepatitis and maybe others? and anonymous recipients could end up infected and dying as a result.
there is no fixed test to utilizie blood cordon off hiv from samples, and so some may have healthy cells and some may have hiv but I dont see any comments from those 13 hundred guys who seemingly demand this right, must be at colin and justins wedding reception
:-)
well done brianscottie in canada you are alive thansk for amazing skills of drs
to be an organ donor is a good thing, however , your dr informed you who it was coming from and that it would be risky, the risk outweighed the advantages, and your life has been saved.
issue here regards gay male blood donors who would maybe be contaminted with aids /hiv/hepatitis and maybe others? and anonymous recipients could end up infected and dying as a result.
there is no fixed test to utilizie blood cordon off hiv from samples, and so some may have healthy cells and some may have hiv but I dont see any comments from those 13 hundred guys who seemingly demand this right, must be at colin and justins wedding reception
:-)
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 2:29pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
[quote]But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.[/quote] Fact or Homophobia? [/quote] Well, I know you think I'm overly PC so I guess you know how i'd answer this question...
Review the guidlines on the most recent, most informed medical evidence. Science and reason.
Some of the knuckle draggers on this thread make ye sick - especially the '8 pints' thing. That'll be 'all the blood in a body', as in 'dead' will it? Wee pink triangles for all the gays is it? Well done.
The Missing City wrote:
But any move to review the ban is likely to anger blood transfusion chiefs, who claim allowing gay men to donate blood would increase the risk of HIV contamination to supplies by five times.
Fact or Homophobia?
Well, I know you think I'm overly PC so I guess you know how i'd answer this question...
Review the guidlines on the most recent, most informed medical evidence. Science and reason.
Some of the knuckle draggers on this thread make ye sick - especially the '8 pints' thing. That'll be 'all the blood in a body', as in 'dead' will it? Wee pink triangles for all the gays is it? Well done.
Posted by: GAW, Glasgow UK on 3:52pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Homosexual men are, and always have beenm more likely to have HIV than a member of the general public.
I dont believe that infection rates are the same for homosexuals and heterosexuals. Remember, the heterosexual infection rate is hugely boosted by the number of asylum seekers who have swamped Glasgows STD clinics.
NO to homosexuals giving bloood - I dont want to gamble with my health on account of their irresponsible sexual habits.
Homosexual men are, and always have beenm more likely to have HIV than a member of the general public.
I dont believe that infection rates are the same for homosexuals and heterosexuals. Remember, the heterosexual infection rate is hugely boosted by the number of asylum seekers who have swamped Glasgows STD clinics.
NO to homosexuals giving bloood - I dont want to gamble with my health on account of their irresponsible sexual habits.
Posted by: OnTheGreen, City Centre on 4:56pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Well judging from some of the comments above it seems a notable proportion of those out there are not as far evolved out of the cave as you might think!!!
I mean who needs clinical evidence about infection rates that show you are as likely to get infected with HIV if you are straight than if you are gay?
Also who cares that your average straight person is equally (if not more so) likely to get drunk and have unsafe sex with any number of random people than a gay person?
No no those narrow minded people above would choose to believe outdated stereotypes about gay people sleeping their way around everyone they can find! Therefore they are a huge risk to the public obviously!
For example GAW would chose to believe the only reason any straight person could possibly get HIV would be because of an asylum seeker, I am sorry but HIV has been around longer than they have.
If people are going to comment on this issue they should at least be honest. You don't want gay people to donate blood because you don't want to take a chance that you might end up receiving it. Come on now!! A blood transfusion will do no more than help save your life, it wont turn you gay!
All blood is screened prior to it being accepted and so any argument to exclude gay people is pointless. Alas predjudice tends to win out, especially in Scotland, so I have no doubt the ban will remain! Weggielady the rest will no doubt sleep better at this thought....
Lets just hope if they ever need a transfusion the hospital has enough....then again maybe not!
Well judging from some of the comments above it seems a notable proportion of those out there are not as far evolved out of the cave as you might think!!!
I mean who needs clinical evidence about infection rates that show you are as likely to get infected with HIV if you are straight than if you are gay?
Also who cares that your average straight person is equally (if not more so) likely to get drunk and have unsafe sex with any number of random people than a gay person?
No no those narrow minded people above would choose to believe outdated stereotypes about gay people sleeping their way around everyone they can find! Therefore they are a huge risk to the public obviously!
For example GAW would chose to believe the only reason any straight person could possibly get HIV would be because of an asylum seeker, I am sorry but HIV has been around longer than they have.
If people are going to comment on this issue they should at least be honest. You don't want gay people to donate blood because you don't want to take a chance that you might end up receiving it. Come on now!! A blood transfusion will do no more than help save your life, it wont turn you gay!
All blood is screened prior to it being accepted and so any argument to exclude gay people is pointless. Alas predjudice tends to win out, especially in Scotland, so I have no doubt the ban will remain! Weggielady the rest will no doubt sleep better at this thought....
Lets just hope if they ever need a transfusion the hospital has enough....then again maybe not!
Posted by: Templeton_otg, Bridgeton on 5:27pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[quote][bold]OnTheGreen[/bold] wrote:
Well judging from some of the comments above it seems a notable proportion of those out there are not as far evolved out of the cave as you might think!!! I mean who needs clinical evidence about infection rates that show you are as likely to get infected with HIV if you are straight than if you are gay? Also who cares that your average straight person is equally (if not more so) likely to get drunk and have unsafe sex with any number of random people than a gay person? No no those narrow minded people above would choose to believe outdated stereotypes about gay people sleeping their way around everyone they can find! Therefore they are a huge risk to the public obviously! For example GAW would chose to believe the only reason any straight person could possibly get HIV would be because of an asylum seeker, I am sorry but HIV has been around longer than they have. If people are going to comment on this issue they should at least be honest. You don't want gay people to donate blood because you don't want to take a chance that you might end up receiving it. Come on now!! A blood transfusion will do no more than help save your life, it wont turn you gay! All blood is screened prior to it being accepted and so any argument to exclude gay people is pointless. Alas predjudice tends to win out, especially in Scotland, so I have no doubt the ban will remain! Weggielady the rest will no doubt sleep better at this thought.... Lets just hope if they ever need a transfusion the hospital has enough....then again maybe not! [/quote] In the not so distant futre eveolution will take a further step in terms of organ donation there is the proposed compulsery retention of organs for transplant services due to the shortage so you will only have to carry an [bold]Opt Out Card[/bold] . And due to organ donation and transplant rules as they currently stand you are not entitled to ask if the organ or even the blood source was either black, in jail Gay str8 or a dare I say it a note from the Sandyford Initive saying Uncleen minority handle with care So what will GAW and weegielady do then or if indeed implied by my quoted lernered colleuge the majority of that little fringe element of Scottish people do . The answer is more research into testing procedures rigid as they currently are useing the Anti bodies test . you'd think the transfusion service would have learn better testing procedures after there complacencey and subsiquent failure on there previouse record for importing blood donations without checking them .Everyone is checked regardless so it dosent matter if your that sweet little one to one couple if you give blood regardless of your orientation your still tested if your pregnant in all scottish hospitals in maternity your offered the test . Is not of what you do in bed behind closed doors . How that got into the phychi of this debate shows the depth of that persons perception and education requiremnts .All statistics are avalable on the HPS website thats Health Protection Scotland least there is acurate based on your health boards annual statistics and area
OnTheGreen wrote:
Well judging from some of the comments above it seems a notable proportion of those out there are not as far evolved out of the cave as you might think!!! I mean who needs clinical evidence about infection rates that show you are as likely to get infected with HIV if you are straight than if you are gay? Also who cares that your average straight person is equally (if not more so) likely to get drunk and have unsafe sex with any number of random people than a gay person? No no those narrow minded people above would choose to believe outdated stereotypes about gay people sleeping their way around everyone they can find! Therefore they are a huge risk to the public obviously! For example GAW would chose to believe the only reason any straight person could possibly get HIV would be because of an asylum seeker, I am sorry but HIV has been around longer than they have. If people are going to comment on this issue they should at least be honest. You don't want gay people to donate blood because you don't want to take a chance that you might end up receiving it. Come on now!! A blood transfusion will do no more than help save your life, it wont turn you gay! All blood is screened prior to it being accepted and so any argument to exclude gay people is pointless. Alas predjudice tends to win out, especially in Scotland, so I have no doubt the ban will remain! Weggielady the rest will no doubt sleep better at this thought.... Lets just hope if they ever need a transfusion the hospital has enough....then again maybe not!
In the not so distant futre eveolution will take a further step in terms of organ donation there is the proposed compulsery retention of organs for transplant services due to the shortage so you will only have to carry an
Opt Out Card . And due to organ donation and transplant rules as they currently stand you are not entitled to ask if the organ or even the blood source was either black, in jail Gay str8 or a dare I say it a note from the Sandyford Initive saying Uncleen minority handle with care So what will GAW and weegielady do then or if indeed implied by my quoted lernered colleuge the majority of that little fringe element of Scottish people do . The answer is more research into testing procedures rigid as they currently are useing the Anti bodies test . you'd think the transfusion service would have learn better testing procedures after there complacencey and subsiquent failure on there previouse record for importing blood donations without checking them .Everyone is checked regardless so it dosent matter if your that sweet little one to one couple if you give blood regardless of your orientation your still tested if your pregnant in all scottish hospitals in maternity your offered the test . Is not of what you do in bed behind closed doors . How that got into the phychi of this debate shows the depth of that persons perception and education requiremnts .All statistics are avalable on the HPS website thats Health Protection Scotland least there is acurate based on your health boards annual statistics and area
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 6:48pm Wed 16 Apr 08
Pete, Glasgow on 2:29pm today
sorry to see you are so far up your own pc a-s-s that my humour offends you.
i dont have a prob with gays just to set the record straight.
humourless idiots do ofend me.
Pete, Glasgow on 2:29pm today
sorry to see you are so far up your own pc a-s-s that my humour offends you.
i dont have a prob with gays just to set the record straight.
humourless idiots do ofend me.
Posted by: weegielady, glasgow on 9:34pm Wed 16 Apr 08
[italic]wonder if dracula ever had this worry[/italic]
wonder if dracula ever had this worry Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 10:48am Thu 17 Apr 08
[quote][bold]tam-m[/bold] wrote:
Pete, Glasgow on 2:29pm today sorry to see you are so far up your own pc a-s-s that my humour offends you. i dont have a prob with gays just to set the record straight. humourless idiots do ofend me.[/quote] I don't think it's particularly PC not to wish someone dead because of their sexuality. More normal and human.
Pity you didn't think to 'set the record straight' until someone actually challenged you.
Snivelling cowards offend me.
tam-m wrote:
Pete, Glasgow on 2:29pm today sorry to see you are so far up your own pc a-s-s that my humour offends you. i dont have a prob with gays just to set the record straight. humourless idiots do ofend me.
I don't think it's particularly PC not to wish someone dead because of their sexuality. More normal and human.
Pity you didn't think to 'set the record straight' until someone actually challenged you.
Snivelling cowards offend me.
Comment | Read Comments (19)
