Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Published on February 6, 2006 By Dr Guy In Current Events

The University of Vermont will not ban the American Red Cross from the College campus for their blood drives.  Why would they even consider doing it you ask?  Because some snot nosed, whiny, petulant child decided that the Red Cross was discriminatory against Gays.  How?  For following the FDA mandated donation collection guidelines!

Yes, a former student of Vermont decided that since they do not TAKE blood from openly homosexual people, they should not be allowed to ACCEPT donations from anyone!  Never mind that there are not enough people willing or capable of donating and that the nation's blood supply is always in short supply (we are a blood importer).  Never mind that no one asks the sexual preference, race, creed or color of the recipient of the donations.  Never mind that millions would die yearly without the life giving gift of blood, perhaps even this whiny brat's friend, lover or family member might be among the donees. 

No, screw all that!  Condemn them to death!  Because they followed the law!  A law that was not made arbitrarily or capriciously, but to safeguard the recipient of the blood from contracting an incurable disease.  They did not create the rule to be spiteful!  But who wants to go have an appendectomy only to lose a the rest of their life because they got HIV.

How selfish and petty can you get?  Apparently for this student, the answer is a whole lot!


Comments
on Feb 06, 2006
Maybe it's time for the law to change?
on Feb 06, 2006

Maybe it's time for the law to change?

As long as they can detect the HIV virus when it is acquired, I see no problem.  They are making strides, but I dont think they are there yet.

on Feb 06, 2006
Never mind that no one asks the sexual preference, race, creed or color of the recipient of the donations.


Um, only sort of. They do ask if you have had sex with a man since 1977 or if you have had sex with a man who has sex with a man since 1977.

Not saying that they necessarily should change the rules, but the Red Cross does a lot of cutting off its nose to spite its face. Having lived in the UK for more than 6 months, I'm no longer eligible to donate to the Red Cross; however, I can donate to the Rhode Island blood center because they were smart enough to ask when I was there and realized that I was there after they put in all the precautions for Mad Cow.

Rules for rules sake are just plain silly--but I would never try to close down the Red Cross because of it.
on Feb 06, 2006

Um, only sort of. They do ask if you have had sex with a man since 1977 or if you have had sex with a man who has sex with a man since 1977.

Receipients. Not donors.  And yes they ask you that because of AIDS when you donate.

I wondered about the UK think when they first started asking me about it, and was told it was because of bovine encephalitis.  I am not familiar with that.  If it is hard to detect, then I can see them being paranoid (since they can be sued to death if they miss it).  But if it is detectable with tests, then I dont see the reason for banning them as well.  The problem (and understand that I am not up on the latest on AIDS and HIV) is that it was often not detectable until the patient had been infected for 6 months.  So during that first 6 months, donations could be and were contaminated.

on Feb 06, 2006
Receipients.


Sorry. Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension today. I do understand why they ask, though.
on Feb 06, 2006
I wondered about the UK think when they first started asking me about it, and was told it was because of bovine encephalitis. I am not familiar with that. If it is hard to detect, then I can see them being paranoid (since they can be sued to death if they miss it). But if it is detectable with tests, then I dont see the reason for banning them as well. The problem (and understand that I am not up on the latest on AIDS and HIV) is that it was often not detectable until the patient had been infected for 6 months. So during that first 6 months, donations could be and were contaminated.


If it it only undetectable for six months, then they shouldn't have a lifetime ban. I am PERMENANTLY BARED from ever donating blood to the American Red Cross again in my life. Which is funny because they still call me every 8 weeks to see when I am going to donate. "Um, never, you won't let me."
on Feb 06, 2006

Sorry. Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension today

No, just get rid of that bug!  I know they make me fuzzy headed.

on Feb 06, 2006

If it it only undetectable for six months, then they shouldn't have a lifetime ban. I am PERMENANTLY BARED from ever donating blood to the American Red Cross again in my life. Which is funny because they still call me every 8 weeks to see when I am going to donate. "Um, never, you won't let me."

I was talking about AIDS.  I have no idea about Mad Cow.  But the theory (again just a theory) of the AIDS one is that if you have had homosexual encounters, you probably still are.  And until they nab that nasty bug earlier, I can see the ban.

I have no idea on mad cow.  We dont have the Red Cross here.  We have the VBS, but they ask the same questions.  Since I answer in the negative, I dont know if it is a life time ban for them.  Although I did hear from one person (when I was a drive coordinator) that he screwed up on the answers one time (he said yes when he meant no), and they would not allow him to donate again.  I think that kind of black and white mentality is self defeating as well, as he wants to give, but cannot, and does not fit any of the high risk profiles (but it has made me read the questions a lot closer since then).

on Feb 06, 2006
We have the VBS, but they ask the same questions


VBS works on the same guidelines as the Red Cross--I'm bared from life from them as well.
on Feb 06, 2006

VBS works on the same guidelines as the Red Cross--I'm bared from life from them as well.

Sorry about that.  Like I said, some of the rules, if they were temporary, are wise.  But not as absolutes.  if one had a homosexual encounter in 1977, but none since, it is obvious, they are either dead from AIDS or dont have it.