quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

Well the fact is recieving anal sex is a riskier sexual activity for HIV transmission. That part is accurate, the rest is assumptions, and conjecture with policies set and not updated since the lte 80's early 90's.

I am very aware of high risk behaviors that allow for a greater chance of transimission.  And believe me I'm all for protecting the innocent, I've lost siblings and friends to the disease I'm in no way saying there shouldn't be any selective practices, just seems the one mentioned is lacking.  

If you have lived in the UK during the Mad Cow scare years you cannot give blood either, Elegant is disqualified under that policy.
It is a matter of them over protecting to avoid the potential for lawsuits based on fact or not they are expensive to defend against.

This reasoning I can understand for their stance.  Blood banks provide a much needed service, the last thing they need is to have to spend valuable dollars and time on lawsuits when in fact the agency took every precaution possible to insure the safety that the blood products were clean of the virus. It could even be possible the person bringing suit may or may not have been infected by the agency's donated blood and that really would be such a disservice to us all in the long run.  I can see, in the end, that it would be better to ward off such occurrences when possible  Meaning best not to leave themself open to lawsuits if they can avoid it. 
 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

I think it's more of a common sense thing.  I mean yes, there's some discrimination there, but oh well.  It's not like someone's passing you over for a job or making you go to some separate bathroom.  Not being able to give blood is, quite frankly, small fry.  As for the strict regulations and such, yes they probably do need some updating in light of recent statistics.  But evidently the need for blood is not so dire that they've had to do this yet. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: LW3

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

I think it's more of a common sense thing.  I mean yes, there's some discrimination there, but oh well.  It's not like someone's passing you over for a job or making you go to some separate bathroom.  Not being able to give blood is, quite frankly, small fry.  As for the strict regulations and such, yes they probably do need some updating in light of recent statistics.  But evidently the need for blood is not so dire that they've had to do this yet. 

then you can also discriminate nurses, doctors and any other workers at hospitals or similar.
there's a lot of people that you need to discriminate because "common sense".
and another thing... you are wrong. about the need for blood.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

quote:

ORIGINAL: LW3

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

I think it's more of a common sense thing.  I mean yes, there's some discrimination there, but oh well.  It's not like someone's passing you over for a job or making you go to some separate bathroom.  Not being able to give blood is, quite frankly, small fry.  As for the strict regulations and such, yes they probably do need some updating in light of recent statistics.  But evidently the need for blood is not so dire that they've had to do this yet. 

then you can also discriminate nurses, doctors and any other workers at hospitals or similar.
there's a lot of people that you need to discriminate because "common sense".
and another thing... you are wrong. about the need for blood.

Uhh...not really, since the doctors' and nurses' blood isn't going to be going into the patient.  Gloves, scrubs, masks, etc. protect against this happening.  I personally wouldn't care if my doctor had had anal sex in the past (though it would kinda freak me out if he was HIV positive...eek).  The restrictions on blood are probably in place for a very good reason.  Even though they test all of the batches of blood, if they happen to come across some that has a disease, they probably have to cleanse the whole lab and go through lots of other rigamarole, so it's best to avoid it in the first place.

Also, the very fact that they have not yet updated their restrictions shows that the need must not be that dire, or they would have done it already.  Besides, you are in Spain and therefore your country's situation as far as blood supply goes is probably quite different than it is in London (where O.P. is from) and here in the U.S.  Speaking of which, I'm not even sure what the restrictions are here.  I gave blood a while back, but I forgot what questions they asked. 

I keep up with the local news around here pretty well and I have never heard of anyone dying in a Louisiana hospital because the hospital ran out of blood. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: RiotGirl

you lie and give blood anyways.  They test the blood for all sorts of diseases so you have no worry about giving anyone else anything (if you have something).  Plus on the flip side - you'll find out at a very low cost if you have something.  Like Hep C.  Doctors dont really test for it.. but an old friend of mine found out that they do test for it when you donate blood.  Little known to her that she had Hep C. 

yeaaaaaaaaaah - whatta way to work the system!  On top of that - you can help other people in the process. 

(p.s. i've been too lazy to do it so far... but you can try it)

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes
If your child needed a transfusion, and you were told that the donor of that blood was bisexual, or had had sex in a country with a high incidence of AIDS, would you want your child to receive the blood?

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes
If your child needed a transfusion, and you were told that the donor of that blood was bisexual, or had had sex in a country with a high incidence of AIDS, would you want your child to receive the blood?

If I knew the blood had been tested properly, I wouldn't give a rat's ass where it came from. I don't have kids, but that goes for myself and any of my family members. The blood came from a reputable blood bank giving it to the hospital, therefore I trust it and wouldn't worry about it going into me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple

I lie to the blood bank people for these very reasons. I know they test the blood afterwards, I'm pretty sure I haven't gotten anything from my tattoos or piercings, and it shouldn't matter that I slept with a bi guy who's had anal sex.

If I were a more common blood type, I wouldn't make sure to donate every time I'm eligible (seven weeks or whatever it is). But I'm O- and there is never enough of that. So it's dishonesty for a good reason.

quote:

ORIGINAL: amaidiamond

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

quote:

ORIGINAL: LW3

quote:

ORIGINAL: Renorei

I think it's more of a common sense thing.  I mean yes, there's some discrimination there, but oh well.  It's not like someone's passing you over for a job or making you go to some separate bathroom.  Not being able to give blood is, quite frankly, small fry.  As for the strict regulations and such, yes they probably do need some updating in light of recent statistics.  But evidently the need for blood is not so dire that they've had to do this yet. 

then you can also discriminate nurses, doctors and any other workers at hospitals or similar.
there's a lot of people that you need to discriminate because "common sense".
and another thing... you are wrong. about the need for blood.

Uhh...not really, since the doctors' and nurses' blood isn't going to be going into the patient.  Gloves, scrubs, masks, etc. protect against this happening.  I personally wouldn't care if my doctor had had anal sex in the past (though it would kinda freak me out if he was HIV positive...eek).  The restrictions on blood are probably in place for a very good reason.  Even though they test all of the batches of blood, if they happen to come across some that has a disease, they probably have to cleanse the whole lab and go through lots of other rigamarole, so it's best to avoid it in the first place.

Also, the very fact that they have not yet updated their restrictions shows that the need must not be that dire, or they would have done it already.  Besides, you are in Spain and therefore your country's situation as far as blood supply goes is probably quite different than it is in London (where O.P. is from) and here in the U.S.  Speaking of which, I'm not even sure what the restrictions are here.  I gave blood a while back, but I forgot what questions they asked. 

I keep up with the local news around here pretty well and I have never heard of anyone dying in a Louisiana hospital because the hospital ran out of blood. 

To be honest I think you have picked up on the wrong end of the point here, as far as I can gather it was a point about that they could discriminate about doctors and nurses giving blood, because they are more at risk of  infections and the like, not about  the sex lives of the medical staff.
I also notice that your line about being squicked about the possibility of a doctor treating you if he was HIV positive was in very very small print, to be honest its not a squickedness I can understand, HIV is spread by very specific ways, and I very much doubt you would have any of that sort of contact with your doctor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple

quote:

ORIGINAL: windchymes
If your child needed a transfusion, and you were told that the donor of that blood was bisexual, or had had sex in a country with a high incidence of AIDS, would you want your child to receive the blood?

If I knew the blood had been tested properly, I wouldn't give a rat's ass where it came from. I don't have kids, but that goes for myself and any of my family members. The blood came from a reputable blood bank giving it to the hospital, therefore I trust it and wouldn't worry about it going into me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple

First of all, windchymes, you interpreted my earlier remark about reputable. I donate through either the Red Cross or whatever local one will also have the Bloodmobile going around.

If I ever feel like I may be unsafe, like having unprotected sex with someone who is also having unprotected sex on the side, I will not donate until I get tested for HIV. I saw the excellent safety practices used by the studios where my tattoos and piercings came from and it's not as if I'm doing one within days of the other.

I obviously have more faith in the world - and in science's ability to screen for these things - than you do. I will not post any more on this topic if you continue to react with hypotheticals. Give me statistics on disease transmission through blood donation since the mid-90's or something and I may be convinced to stop. Until then, people need O- blood, so stick a needle in my arm, splatter a little blood on my shirt in the process, and use part of me to save lives.