FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Finally, they are going to lift the ban

Jump to newest
 

By *razydriver8 OP   Couple
over a year ago

plymouth

As reported on Yahoo....

..Gay men will soon be able to donate blood after the Government moved to lift donor restrictions across the UK.

A lifetime ban was put in place in the UK in the 1980s as a response to the spread of Aids and HIV.

about time , I say..

But the Department of Health has said men who have not had homosexual sex within a year will now be able to donate as of November 7.

The move comes after recommendations were made to change the restrictions following a review by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs (Sabto) earlier this year.

The committee had considered the risk of infection being transmitted in blood, attitudes of potential donors in complying with selection criteria and scientific improvements in the testing of donated blood.

Their advice was accepted by the health ministers in England, Scotland and Wales.

The National Aids Trust (NAT) has welcomed the changes.

The organisation tweeted: "NAT welcomes the lifting of the lifetime blood ban for gay men and the new evidence-based approach."

Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said the new policy was a "big improvement on the existing discriminatory rules".

But he added it fell short of lifting the ban on gay men who always used condoms.

"Most gay and bisexual men do not have HIV and will never have HIV. If they always have safe sex with a condom, have only one partner and test HIV negative, their blood is safe to donate," he said.

"They can and should be allowed to help save lives by becoming donors."

Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service national director Keith Thompson said: "We are pleased that this new donor selection criteria has been made possible by the most up to date scientific advances in screening and testing."

Public Health Minister Anne Milton said: "Blood donations are a lifeline, and many of us would not have loved ones with us today if it was not for the selfless act of others.

"Appropriate checks based on robust science must be in place to maintain this safety record and the committee's recommendation reflects this.

"It is important that people comply with all donor selection criteria, which are in place to protect the health of both donors and transfusion recipients."

Stringent blood donor testing has meant there has been no documented transmission of a blood-born virus in the UK since 2005, with no HIV transmission since 2002.

..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Stringent blood donor testing has meant there has been no documented transmission of a blood-born virus in the UK since 2005, with no HIV transmission since 2002.

.."

Yep stringent rules put in place have worked and so now when there is no crisis of blood donors they relax the criteria which was put in place for very good reason. If its working why re-introduce a risk group? Make a sensible precautionary rule made because of the implicaitons and stick to it seems to be beyond a lot of these so called professionals looking after us.

There have been no cases of small pox and they wont destroy the virus that they keep in labs. One day it will get out....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unky monkeyMan
over a year ago

in the night garden

I saw it on the news at lunch, great news!

Now if only the ghey dudes were allowed to play Euro Millions it would be a perfect society.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

A few years back, I was working in West Africa when an incident happened on the rig involving a Dutch contractor who was very badly injured….

The nearest major treatment facility with a regulated blood supply was over 4 hours away,

Many local African guy’s hired in as casual daily workers, donated their blood to be used helping keep the injured man alive until transferred to hospital….

I've often wondered about this, as the area we were working had a very high HIV infection rate... So much so, our company had refused permission for its own employes to donate blood other than in the controlled environment of a hospital, whilst working in that region...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How did they stop gay men donating blood? Unless it was written on their foreheads . Any man could say he was straight and give blood. I am sure somebody good enough to give blood would take care about their HIV status.Unless somebody was using the blood donation for a HIV test (no good under three months).

But blood as been heat treated for HIV and the like for years now.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How did they stop gay men donating blood? Unless it was written on their foreheads . Any man could say he was straight and give blood. I am sure somebody good enough to give blood would take care about their HIV status.Unless somebody was using the blood donation for a HIV test (no good under three months).

But blood as been heat treated for HIV and the like for years now."

They identified the risk groups from studies and decided to withdraw donations from those in those risk groups. So nobody had to have it written on their heads it was a blanket ban after they traced the sources from people infected from blood transfusions. It wasnt bigotry it was scientific study and an undeniable fact where the infection was multiplying. So preventative - and it seems to have worked as todays report says.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How did they stop gay men donating blood? Unless it was written on their foreheads . Any man could say he was straight and give blood. I am sure somebody good enough to give blood would take care about their HIV status.Unless somebody was using the blood donation for a HIV test (no good under three months).

But blood as been heat treated for HIV and the like for years now.

They identified the risk groups from studies and decided to withdraw donations from those in those risk groups. So nobody had to have it written on their heads it was a blanket ban after they traced the sources from people infected from blood transfusions. It wasnt bigotry it was scientific study and an undeniable fact where the infection was multiplying. So preventative - and it seems to have worked as todays report says.

"

I feel you miss my point. The ban was only ever effective if the person was honest about their sexual history or preference.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"How did they stop gay men donating blood? Unless it was written on their foreheads . Any man could say he was straight and give blood. I am sure somebody good enough to give blood would take care about their HIV status.Unless somebody was using the blood donation for a HIV test (no good under three months).

But blood as been heat treated for HIV and the like for years now.

They identified the risk groups from studies and decided to withdraw donations from those in those risk groups. So nobody had to have it written on their heads it was a blanket ban after they traced the sources from people infected from blood transfusions. It wasnt bigotry it was scientific study and an undeniable fact where the infection was multiplying. So preventative - and it seems to have worked as todays report says.

"

but the people that were in the at risk catagory was just beyond believe, i can't give blood as i shag a guy that has sucked a cock ffs he has never done anal but yet purely as he has sucked cock i can't give blood i'm sorry but try to justify that, i have sucked a few hundred more cocks than he has but yet had he been straight i would be perfectly fine to give blood

go figure

i applaud the ban being lifted about bloody time too in my book

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eaboMan
over a year ago

marden

if it works why change it. I am all up for taking risks with your own life/safety. But i do not agree with taking a risk with someone else's. You can shout and scream about your right to give blood but surely you wouldn't want to risk someone else's life just so you could make yourself feel good?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I wouldn't disclose my sexuality to the Blood Service as it's none of their goddam business and they should be screening all blood anyway.

Not that I give blood in the first place. Nothing against it, I just never felt the need to donate.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think the question(s) at the blood doning sessions ,should have/be:- "Have you recently had any sexual activity that might have put your health at risk?

Not have you had sex with another man. I use to say no, even though I had, because of GUM tests I was 100% sure I was ok to give blood. Why would I endanger somebodies health?

If a man had unprotected anal sex with a man that was HIV+ and that HIV+ man then had unprotected anal sex with a woman, whats the difference?

When the man and woman went to give blood, they would say no to the man and yes to the woman for giving blood.

The ban was most probally lifted because it was not really appliable.

At the end of the day its down to donors being responsible.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"if it works why change it. I am all up for taking risks with your own life/safety. But i do not agree with taking a risk with someone else's. You can shout and scream about your right to give blood but surely you wouldn't want to risk someone else's life just so you could make yourself feel good? "

That's exactly how I feel.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I don't see it as my right to give blood. If I go to donate blood and they refuse it then I'm no worse off than I was before - it's their loss not mine so fuck 'em.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead

there is one thing that may have gone unnoticed in all of this regarding the lifting of the ban.. which is going to raise eyebrows

it is not as simple as everyone now being able to give blood...

gay and bisexual men will still not be asked to give blood if they have had sex with a male partner 12 months prior ....

so you are asking them the abstain for a year... hmmmmmm

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have to abstain from being tattooed for at least a year before I can give blood again- have only done it once in my life so far...........

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unterslickCouple
over a year ago

tullamore


"there is one thing that may have gone unnoticed in all of this regarding the lifting of the ban.. which is going to raise eyebrows

it is not as simple as everyone now being able to give blood...

gay and bisexual men will still not be asked to give blood if they have had sex with a male partner 12 months prior ....

so you are asking them the abstain for a year... hmmmmmm"

jeez what a downer man,,was all happy reading the orig post,,thats just wrong,,wtf do the lads/ladies have to feckin do next

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh

Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men. "

Bugger!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men.

Bugger!"

Well yeah... there's been a bit of that!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men.

Bugger!

Well yeah... there's been a bit of that! "

OOOOppppsss

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *abioMan
over a year ago

Newcastle and Gateshead


"Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men. "

yes, but only if you have not had sex with a bisexual man within the last 12 months...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ickingFantasticMan
over a year ago

Fareham

I would be pretty certain that the rules put in place had little or no effect other than to annoy some potential donors enough so they chose not to help.The rules were plainly un-enforceable and as pointed out by a few people, poorly thought out, even with this ban being lifted, it is still poorly thought out, how are you going to verify someone hasn't had gay sex in x amount of time?

The most likely reason for the reduction in transmission via this route is as mentioned at the end, much better and more regular screening of donated blood.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"Does that mean they'll accept my blood again then?! I've not given blood for the last five years because they object to my sexual history with bisexual men.

yes, but only if you have not had sex with a bisexual man within the last 12 months...

"

Well yet again they won't be having any of my blood... it offends me that the put adverts on the radio begging for people to go... I have perfectly good blood, I have regular tests at the GUM clinic, I have safe sex and presumably they test the blood before they use it for anything!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ensualfire88Man
over a year ago

Edinburgh

What if you only have sex with married men?

After all, they're straight.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"What if you only have sex with married men?

After all, they're straight."

I guess that's okay if you have a vagina!

Do you?!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ensualfire88Man
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"What if you only have sex with married men?

After all, they're straight.

I guess that's okay if you have a vagina!

Do you?!"

No. But more than a few of people have categorically assured me that i am a fanny and/or a cunt.

So that should count for something, surely?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irtyGirlWoman
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"What if you only have sex with married men?

After all, they're straight.

I guess that's okay if you have a vagina!

Do you?!

No. But more than a few of people have categorically assured me that i am a fanny and/or a cunt.

So that should count for something, surely?"

Perhaps you should go give blood and ask them... they'll have you fill in a special form for speshal boys like you!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *ensualfire88Man
over a year ago

Edinburgh


"What if you only have sex with married men?

After all, they're straight.

I guess that's okay if you have a vagina!

Do you?!

No. But more than a few of people have categorically assured me that i am a fanny and/or a cunt.

So that should count for something, surely?

Perhaps you should go give blood and ask them... they'll have you fill in a special form for speshal boys like you! "

don't joke - i went to donate with a couple of girls in an office i worked in once at lunchtime, thought i should 'give something back' to society.

Not easy trying to explain why they didnt want my cells...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top