RE: Common Sense or Discrimination?

RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

swtnsparkling -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 3:00:33 AM)
quote: 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. And Reputable Blood Banks NEVER make a mistake? Mistakes can happen any where at any time by anyone

thompsonx -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 5:03:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amaidiamond I'm glad I'm not the only one with the oppinion that it is wrong, It just seems like they are saying, girls, go out and sleep with a different man every night if you want to, take as many risks as you like, we don't care, but heaven forbid a man should have the audacity to be gay or bisexual. It made my blood boil! amaidiamond: I wonder if boiling blood has the same effect as boiling water in killing pathogens? thompson

JerseyKrissi72 -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 5:28:31 AM)
I think it is discrimination plain and simple and I'm sorry you had to go through that.

Sinergy -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 5:41:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: amaidiamond I'm glad I'm not the only one with the oppinion that it is wrong, It just seems like they are saying, girls, go out and sleep with a different man every night if you want to, take as many risks as you like, we don't care, but heaven forbid a man should have the audacity to be gay or bisexual. It made my blood boil! The part of this thread that I find tragic or amusing, depending on the level of bile in my blood on that particular day, is the historical reasons for these restrictions. Back in the 1970s, it was common practice for the American Red Cross and other blood banks to combine blood products from multiple donors for ease of transfer or shipping of the blood. Nobody knew what HIV was caused by, or whatever, and nobody had any idea it would be a problem. This resulted in HIV being spread to thousands of people because one batch of tainted blood put into the general soup would then go on to infect everybody who was given a transfusion from that particular batch of blood product. When the virus which causes HIV was discovered, and tests to determine the antibodies were developed, the Red Cross' guidelines for blood products veered hard to the other side with the Red Cross making all sorts of reasons to refuse to accept blood products. I am not sure I would call it discrimination per se. The Red Cross did a big "oops" 30 years ago, and now are gun-shy about the possibility that they could be held accountable for doing another one. It is simply easier to deny a person the ability to donate blood than it is for them to relax their restrictions and risk tainted blood products getting into their general supply. On a related note, depending on my mood I donate blood or blood platelets every so often. There ya go... Sinergy

lateralist1 -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 6:21:56 AM)
'They' whoever they are, are stopping the likes of us giving blood. But what do they do then. Well I assume that 'they' buy it in with our money. Probably from far less reliable sources. I'm talking about England I know even less about the States. I was told never to come back as I passed out. I could have told them there was a good chance that I would pass out if they had bothered to ask. So what. I pass out. I come round. They get their, I presume, much needed blood. Have they never dealt with anyone who passes out before. They treated me as if I was a criminal or something. Of course I could be wrong. It's like a lot of stuff. We don't know what really goes on. Cause 'they' are too fucking scared to tell us. Now can anyone tell me how to change that vanilla sign. I am not bloody vanilla. If I was I wouldn't be here would I ?

meatcleaver -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 6:44:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lateralist1 Now can anyone tell me how to change that vanilla sign. I am not bloody vanilla. If I was I wouldn't be here would I ? Just keep posting. Once you have posted so many posts (can't remember the number) your icon changes.

RosaB -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 7:15:31 AM)
Something to think about, I saw this on the news this morning. The Red Cross is being fined for violations in instances of blood safety screening practices. Makes it more understanding why they have such stirngent practices even though some agencies seem in violation. http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/red-cross-fined-for-blood-safety/n20061128060009990002?cid=2194

LordODiscipline -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 7:50:12 AM)
I gave blood regularly until about ten years ago - then I was informed that "because you served in the armed forces and were station (even temporarily) in Britain and ate the food there, you cannot donate because of the possibility of Mad-Cow Disease" *I was stationed there over twenty years ago. There is no "end cap" - so, assumably I shall never be able to give again.* *The rules are there to prevent anything from contaminating the supply due to things which might not be capable of being sited in the blood given.* *Mad Cow disease is impossible to identify in blood.. and, might not be spread by it - but, it is prevalent in the blood of people who ghave the full blown disease.* AIDS might be in someone's blood for month previous to it being evident... they still do not have great tracking on that, as it is different individual to individual - but, they know that after X amount of months, it is evident or not there. *So, therefore you have your waiting period.* *It is what they have to do to prevent others from getting it - and - from getting sued.* ~J quote: ORIGINAL: amaidiamond Good Evening Everyone, Not sure this is the right place for this thread but if it is out of place mods please move it :) Basically I was a little irate during the second half of my day at work, the reason for this is that I went at lunchtime for some information about giving blood, I never have done this before, always been to afraid but I thought I'd try and face my fear and help others. Now upon reading the literature I found out that I am not able to give blood, now as I don't inject drugs, never have, never will, am clean of disease, don't have casual sex etc so I would have thought that I was a good strong doner material, apparently not. The reason I am not able to give blood is believe it or not because my Dom is bisexual and has played with men in the past, the ruling states that if you are female you must wait 12 months before giving blood if your male partner has ever in his life been with other men, now this 12 months is since you had sex so if you have a long term male partner who is bisexual or even experimented in his younger years to find out you are well and trully out of the question. Now the bit that irks me is this, I understand that there is a higher risk of HIV between males that have anal sex, but oral? Why should there be a higher risk of HIV from oral sex be it male male or male female? Also why is it only that males that have had anal sex should be avoided? It mentions nothing at all about females that have and do have it. Basically it strikes me as strange that if you take two say, 20 year old people, one male one female, both bisexual, the male has anal sex, he is then counted out for blood donation for the rest of his life, the female however sleeps with this male and has anal sex (therefore being equally at risk) and then goes on to have anal sex with other partners who happen to be straight, in 10 years time the male is still out for the count but the female, though she could have had sex in a multitude of ways with a hundered different men is classed as "safe" So I ask, is this common sense? or is it discrimination? I'm interested in others oppinions. Thanks

AquaticSub -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 8:49:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CalliopePurple If I ever may have been exposed to HIV, I will stop for that six months at least. But I'm still an optimist and the Red Cross seems unlikely to change its policies anytime soon. So I still do what I do. Or I may not. I'll make that decison the next time I become eligible, which is December 29. Hello! The point is that you don't know you've been exposed. You are putting people's lives at risk with your selfish desires to help when you shouldn't be. The rules suck yes, but get off your lazy butt and campaign if you don't like it. Edited to add: And now I start to understand their harsh screening process. It seems people are lying to them anyway. Perhaps they can catch you up somewhere. Sadly, this thread is starting to change my mind about their rules, at least some of them. If you can't be trusted to be honest when giving blood, I don't want yours being given out.

safesaneplay2 -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/28/2006 8:56:41 AM)
Has anyone here tried the home testing kits? I know there are free tests at the health depts and at your doctor's office..but, the LIST factor is there.

MistressTexas -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/29/2006 12:31:52 AM)
fast reply I will fully admit I've lied at one point (and one point only) to give blood. I'd gotten a piercing done roughly 8 months earlier (in canada you must wait 12 months). It was fully healed, and I had a full blood panel done less than a month earlier, with no "high risk" activities whatsoever in that time frame. Then my sister was in a car accident, and I happen to be RH O-. At the time, it seemed worth it. I'm lucky as hell to have known I was clean, because I never would have put her at risk if there was a question. I also discussed it with our dad, and he agreed that the minute chance the bloodwork had missed something was worth taking, due to how dire the situation was. My point is, I can understand lying about it in certain circumstances, like to save a family member. But just for the sake of donating blood? thats silly. Or at least it seems that way to me. Some of the measures and restrictions are outdated, but obviously people who study this stuff untill they're blue in the face have decided there are still reasons for everything. For instance, I do believe some people can/have gone 10-15 years before having HIV markers become present. If not more. Since HIV is a relatively new bug to hit the world, it stands to reason that they take somewhat paranoid measures with it. Doctors and researchers are still figuring out the long range implications of it, and who knows if there are still people who havent been tested since 1980 or whatever.

CandleInTheWind -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/29/2006 1:55:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AquaticSub This annoys me as well. It's my understanding that they test all the blood anyway. I realize that isn't foolproof but still... Why can't a gay man give blood? If they are really doing it to avoid HIV infected blood then they are turning away the wrong group. the waiting period is becasue even though tey are supposedly testing all of the blood products...the test is actually for the antibodies not the virus...theya re unable to find the virus inthe blood...sooo you can be viral positive for a while before your immune system figures out to attack it and thereby releasing antibodes to the virus.....so.. that is the thing! when in doubt the thinking is that it is better to decline the donation that to accept the potentially hazardous blood products!.. as far as the otehr issues such as a promiscuous person trying to donate blood...if one is actualy being conscientous..then they would be honorable and not donate! that is my own opinion.. I am one of those peopel that is unable/unwilling to donate...I have an unual type of anemia and also have a chronic fatigue issue and well the anemia isnt contagious well i know that the chronic fatigue is a virus that to ordinary people is nto a problem it is the same virus that caused mononucleosis. (i had that at 16) but for the individual that has a depressed immune system they could potentially come down with this god awful condition that i have been dealing with for more than 20 years that at times leaves me debilitated and sleeping 16-20 hours of the day...I would feel horrible if someone were to coem down with such a condition becasue of me.... I have doen my research and technically it is not a syndrom that would preclude me from donating...but for me it is my feelings that prevents me... Blood donation is somethign that people do to help others...if there is a otential problem with yours...would you still feel strongly about being able to donate or would you still feel that they shoudl take your blood? Think about it....your boyfriend is bi....the potential is there that he hasnt necessarily been honest about his sexual activities(which is what the medical thinnking fo rthat rule is by the way) mybe he is a a catcher as well as a pitcher and just doesnt tell you about it....you having sex with him can use condoms...and i recommend that by the way...but the persont aht would be recieving the blood cant wrap up each blood cell! have a great day and ask any questions if you have them.. little red

CandleInTheWind -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/29/2006 2:02:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail well you are out for being in the UK. Mad Cow and all that. Forget any other anomalies. Interesting if you look up KC692 on one of the threads here it is het females of hispanic and white types I think, that is the fastest growing HIV+ around.... So, the gay thing is so 90's now, it seems...........the Rot Kreuz should catch up to the CDC and others in another ten years and only still be 20 years behind. Ron that is based upon the new changes in population...the old thing was like say 3% of female caucasian women have +hiv and the black women were say 12%+...and then there were the break down of aged ones...believe it or not the fastedst increases is occuring this last few years has beent he aged population and the thinking int hat is that these are the patients and partners of those undergoing heart surgery and therfore blood transfusions in a greater amount than a younger person would...the likelyhood of recieving a blood transfusion is greater in the elderly for a bunch of different reason such as the heart dieases, cancers, renal issues, liver issues, strokes, and various anemias due to the host of diseases that frequent the elderly population not to mention those who are sexual partners of these people.. a two for one thing for the exposure

wandersalone -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/29/2006 4:26:50 AM)
I also am not allowed to donate blood as I lived in the UK in the late 80's (which makes me think that they must not have many people who can donate blood over there). My own feeling is that I would rather the Red Cross etc be overly cautious and reduce the available pool of blood donors rather than read about 1 person infected by a blood transfusion which possibly may have been prevented. Yes it would be frustrating to not be able to donate but maybe you can help in other ways such as donating your time or money instead of giving blood. That is what I do so that I still feel that I am able to help in some way.

Renorei -> RE: Common Sense or Discrimination? (11/29/2006 7:53:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lateralist1 'They' whoever they are, are stopping the likes of us giving blood. But what do they do then. Well I assume that 'they' buy it in with our money. Probably from far less reliable sources. I'm talking about England I know even less about the States. I was told never to come back as I passed out. I could have told them there was a good chance that I would pass out if they had bothered to ask. So what. I pass out. I come round. They get their, I presume, much needed blood. Have they never dealt with anyone who passes out before. They treated me as if I was a criminal or something. Of course I could be wrong. It's like a lot of stuff. We don't know what really goes on. Cause 'they' are too fucking scared to tell us. Now can anyone tell me how to change that vanilla sign. I am not bloody vanilla. If I was I wouldn't be here would I ? More than likely, they didn't tell you to never come back because of what might be wrong with your blood. It's probably more of a liability issue for the agency collecting the blood. If you get up after giving blood and pass out and fall (perhaps onto something dangerous) and hurt yourself, you could perhaps sue the agency doing the collecting. They probably don't want to take any chances with things like this. While YOU might not be the kind of person who would be so rude to sue or cause bad publicity for the blood place, *THEY* don't know that...so they have to do everything they can to cover their asses.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.015625