Science The FDA would rather let people die from coronavirus than take blood from gay men


By Graham Gremore

The FDA just cleared the way for hospitals to begin using blood plasma to treat patients with coronavirus. Patients who have recovered from COVID-19 and who now carry the antibody for the virus are being encouraged to donate blood to help others.

There’s just one caveat.

Sexually active gay and bisexual men need not bother donating.

The FDA says it’s upholding its 12-month restriction on blood donations from gay and bisexual men, despite a nationwide blood shortage and a letter signed by 17 Democratic senators urging the agency to revisit its discriminatory deferral policy.

“As such, it is imperative that we move away from discriminatory donor deferral policies that prohibit many healthy individuals from contributing much-needed blood and blood products,” the letter states.

GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis called for the “antiquated ban” to be “immediately lifted.”

“The FDA cannot let an outdated and discriminatory ban on blood donations from gay and bi men get in the way of potentially life-saving treatment for the country’s painful current health crisis,” she says.

“Gay and bi men who have recovered from COVID-19 and want to donate plasma, or who want to help contribute to a nationwide shortage of blood, are banned from doing so as a result of the FDA. Continuing to enforce this antiquated policy is dangerous, irresponsible, and flies in the face of recommendations from medical experts.”

A spokesperson for the FDA says the agency “is aware there has been a significant reduction in blood and plasma donations around the country” and that its “working with the blood banking and source plasma industries” to find a solution.

It’s still not lifting the restriction though. Meanwhile, the U.S. coronavirus death toll just surpassed 4,000 today.
 
Even if it's a good idea to change the policy and let them donate...now is just so very obviously not the moment.
What do you mean it's not the moment? Politicians on both sides always use tragedies as an excuse to push their agendas. It's arguably the only moment to push policies like this — if people see your policy as the lesser of two evils they're more willing to allow it.
 
Is WuFlu even known for necessitating blood transfusions or is this just more whining from the increasingly tone deaf left? Why waste a tragedy, I guess.

A bit late, but the only reason blood donation is even a current topic is:

a. Many blood drives got cancelled over social distancing concerns.
b. They're looking at using plasma from people who have recovered as a potential treatment due to the antibodies.
 
What do you mean it's not the moment? Politicians on both sides always use tragedies as an excuse to push their agendas. It's arguably the only moment to push policies like this — if people see your policy as the lesser of two evils they're more willing to allow it.

Because we need the attention of our medical workers on difficult and risky work so it's a bad time to implement not immediately needed policy changes. Also, the public is at their maximally paranoid and fearful about disease right now so their reaction in this crisis will be to reject this as a risk.

What you can sell in a crisis is the idea that big Daddy government is going to make everything safe and non-threatening again. You don't do that with shit that might scare people.
 
Do they not realize the greatest vaccine ever created spawned from a gay man?! Lunacy!

flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.u1.jpg
 
Is WuFlu even known for necessitating blood transfusions or is this just more whining from the increasingly tone deaf left? Why waste a tragedy, I guess.
I’m not sure about the Yellow Fever, but I know that less people are donating because less people are going out in general. And the people who need blood still need blood, and even though accidents are down overall they still happen.
 
Is it actually against gay and bi men specifically? What's different about gay and bi women that leave them exempt from it?
There is literally only one known case of a woman getting aids from having sex with another woman. It's not unheard of for lesbians / bi girls to have aids - lesbians / bi girls that have aids get it from having sex with men with aids, sharing needles, and sharing sex toys.
 
Last edited:
Is it actually against gay and bi men specifically? What's different about gay and bi women that leave them exempt from it?
I donate blood somewhat regularly, so I have to fill out the screening questionnaire often.

From what I gather, the act of unprotected butt sex is the single most dangerous thing a person can do in regard to STDs. People who receive anal sex have the highest risk for contracting STDs like HIV/AIDS because the epithelium of the rectum is very thin with high permeability and low traumatic resistance. Every time they take it up the ass they get micro-tears in their rectal lining, which exposes the circulatory system to foreign material - including disease causing organisms.

Men who have sex with men (homos) are banned outright because butt sex is gay sex.

Heterosexual men and women can also be eliminated due to answering yes to questions that ask " in the last X months, have you had/offered sex in exchange for money, drugs, or other services?" or "in the last X months, have you engaged in unprotected sex with multiple partners?", etc.
You can also be eliminated if you were in Britain/Europe during the mad cow disease epidemic for a certain period of time.
The main reason for these questions is to prevent contaminated blood from getting into the system.
 
This is stupid, it's not discrimination against homosexuals, Heterosexuals who engage in sexual behaviors that increase the risk of contracting HIV/AIDS are also forbidden from donating blood for a period of time.
yeah, but gays are super special and should be treated as such. you fucking bigot
 
Back