Try this logic on for size:

“It’s a practical law because the gay community has much higher rates of sexually transmitted diseases. We must take our precautions wisely,” she said. “Even if they lie on the form and say they are straight, everyone’s blood will go through a final screening test for diseases.”

What is happening now is that Chinese lesbians are acting up a little.

Lesbians in China have organized an online petition calling for gay people to be allowed to donate blood, state media reported Tuesday.

The petition, asking the government to remove a law enacted in 1998 banning the gay community from donating blood, has drawn 540 signatures from lesbians and aims to reach 1,000, the official China Daily reported.

Do you think they can find a thousand lesbians in China?

source

Comments

  1. #1 D. C. Sessions
    July 28, 2009

    Bear in mind that this is the same country where they pool collected blood and use the same needles for collecting from entire villages.

  2. #2 Jason Thibeault
    July 28, 2009

    I’m sure there are tons more than a thousand that one could find if one is trusted, but it’s sad to say those that sign might be a wee bit harder to find afterward.

    DC: sounds like they need to rethink their collection strategy overall. Gays can’t donate because of potential diseases, yet we’ll mix up all the blood from an entire village and potentially have to throw out a whole village worth of donations because one of them had something. So wrong on so many levels.

  3. #3 kongstad
    July 28, 2009

    Actually in Denmark you may not donate blood if you are male and have had sex with another male – ever!

    Although I am a proud blood donor, it always hurts me when I have to sign a statement promising that I have never had sex with another man whenever I give blood.

  4. #4 steve s
    July 28, 2009

    Lesbians should absolutely be allowed, even encouraged, to donate blood. Gay males, on the other hand, have ridiculously high rates of infection of HIV and other STDs, according to the CDC.

  5. #5 Fargo
    July 28, 2009

    A friend of mine was turned away from blood donation for having had homosexual relations, and that was here in Oregon, so don’t think this is somehow not present in the states.

  6. #6 Katherine
    July 28, 2009

    In New Zealand, you can’t give if you are a man that has had sex with a man, you can’t give if you are a woman and your male partner has had sex with a man within the last [not sure] years, if you have worked as a prostitute in the last [not sure] years, if you or your partner were in Britain within the last 30 years, if you or your partner are from a country with a high rate of HIV/AIDS.

    Every time I donate blood I have to disclose that my current partner is from South Africa, and explain at great length that he is also a registered blood donor with the NZ blood service and that they have been accepting his blood for years etc. etc. It sucks, but it’s what they need to do while HIV has such a long period during which it cannot be detected. It might seem discriminatory against gay and bisexual men, but clearly the answer (and this would be good for everyone) would be to reduce the rate of HIV/AIDS in the gay community to the point where it is the same as the rest of the population. Then you can complain to blood services to get them to let you give blood. Until then give money to charity, not blood.

  7. #7 Joel
    July 28, 2009

    This is the policy of the American Red Cross. I was turned away from the blood drive where I work, told by the nurse I cannot ever give blood (she was kind and understanding) and subsequently received a letter from the American Red Cross stating that I am barred from giving blood. Ever.

  8. #8 Greg Laden
    July 28, 2009

    In America, Republican Senators are not allowed to give blood.

  9. #9 Stephanie Z
    July 29, 2009

    Republican senators don’t have any blood to give! Or anything else, really.

  10. #10 Azkyroth
    July 29, 2009

    Amusingly, they don’t ask a single damn question about promiscuity, just the buttsex one.

    Katherine: While I don’t have the source to hand, I’ve seen some calculations that indicate that with current screening procedures, accepting blood from Men Who Have Sex With Men would potentially result in one additional HIV infection due to transfusions, per decade. Comparing that to the number of lives saved by expanding the blood supply…

  11. #11 José
    July 29, 2009

    In New Zealand, you can’t give if …. you or your partner were in Britain within the last 30 years

    WTF? Because all British men are gay?

  12. #12 José
    July 29, 2009

    Nevermind. It’s because of those mad British cows.

  13. #13 Joerg
    July 29, 2009

    It’s the same in Germany. As homosexuals count as a risk group concerning AIDS, they may not donate blood.

  14. #14 MadScientist
    July 29, 2009

    Well, if the lesbians really want to help out they just have to lie. It’s not as if it’s the first time in history that people have to lie to idiots in order to do good. Let the authorities do all the tests – that’s a good thing – it won’t catch out any significant fraction of lesbians but it’ll catch a lot of those disease-ridden heterosexuals.

  15. #15 Ray Ingles
    July 29, 2009

    It’s especially silly because it’s much harder for lesbians to transmit STDs anyway. For example, in the U.S. there are only a handful – literally single digits, when I checked a couple years back – of documented cases of woman-to-woman HIV transmission with no other risk factors. Even if the actual rate of transmission is higher than that (and it seems quite likely) it’s still way lower than that for heterosexuals or homosexual males.

  16. #16 itzac
    July 29, 2009

    Canada also has an indefinite deferral for any man who’s had sex with another man. I’ve heard quoted a statistical analysis that showed that after 5 years the risk of transmitting HIV is the same as for the general population.

    It seems a little ridiculous. There are plenty of other questions to screen out high risk donors that do not result in indefinite deferrals. And in cases where you are deferred, they ask that you provide documentation from a doctor before you’re allowed to donate again. I can’t think of any reason being gay requires any extra measures beyond these, unless you have a problem with receiving icky gay blood.

  17. #17 Katherine
    July 29, 2009

    Azkyroth: wow, I didn’t know the figures obviously. Certainly sounds silly when you put it like that.

  18. #18 Richard Eis
    July 31, 2009

    -Gay males, on the other hand, have ridiculously high rates of infection of HIV and other STDs, according to the CDC.-

    The CDC needs to grow up then.

    Oh how terrible for ME. I can’t give blood to people that need it. I don’t have any STD’s, I just happen to belong to a group with a slightly higher risk factor. and how up-to-date is that info anyway?

    ok, i won’t give blood….not my loss.

    Thing is…would you rather die of aids (scary) in 20 years or so, or die now from lack of blood?