March 4, 2010 5:01 PM

Senators: Lift Ban on Gays Donating Blood

By
CBSNews
(AP)  The time has come to change a policy that imposes a lifetime ban on donating blood for any man who has had gay sex since 1977, 18 senators said Thursday.

"Not a single piece of scientific evidence supports the ban," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., who joined 16 other Democrats and independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont in writing Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Margaret Hamburg.

The lawmakers stressed that the science has changed dramatically since the ban was established in 1983 at the advent of the HIV-AIDS crisis. Today donated blood must undergo two different, highly accurate tests that make the risk of tainted blood entering the blood supply virtually zero, they said.

The senators said that while hospitals and emergency rooms are in urgent need of blood products, "healthy blood donors are turned away every day due to an antiquated policy and our blood supply is not necessarily any safer for it."

Brian Moulton, chief legislative counsel for the Human Rights Campaign,the nation's largest gay rights group, said they are hopeful that the policy, last reviewed in 2006, will change under President Barack Obama, "who is interested in looking at all the policies that have a discriminatory effect." The goal, he said, is "to have policies in place that are based on the science" rather than "any discriminatory idea about our community."

The senators' letter noted that in March 2006, the American Red Cross, America's Blood Centers and the American Association of Blood Banks reported to an FDA-sponsored workshop that the ban "is medically and scientifically unwarranted."

The FDA, in a statement, said that "while FDA appreciates concerns about perceived discrimination, our decision to maintain the deferral policy is based on current science and data and does not give weight to a donor's sexual orientation."

It said that while some groups favor relaxing restrictions, others, "such as those representing the hemophilia community, support continuation of the current policy."

People with hemophilia, a bleeding disorder, require periodic transfusions and in the past, before screening techniques were improved to ensure blood was HIV-free, were among those most at risk of contracting the virus.

Kerry compared the effort to lift the blood donation ban to legislation he backed in 2008 to end the law banning people with HIV from traveling and immigrating to the United States. That ban was lifted last year.

Also signing the letter were Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Dick Durbin and Roland Burris of Illinois, Daniel Akaka of Hawaii, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Mark Udall and Michael Bennet of Colorado, Al Franken of Minnesota, Maria Cantwell of Washington, Carl Levin of Michigan, Tom Harkin of Iowa, and Mark Begich of Alaska.


AP
Add a Comment See all 49 Comments
by antoniof123 March 9, 2010 4:36 PM EST
Can we beat all the senators now and I mean with a stick none of them are any good.
Reply to this comment
by jjfrost500 March 8, 2010 3:15 AM EST
mredmodm why dont you flip back a couple pages and get some fresh prospective on some of your more moronic opinions
Reply to this comment
by otter4771 March 7, 2010 10:26 PM EST
The percentage of gay people who have AIDS is very small. The people who die from AIDS is miniscule. So banning millions and millions of people based on bad tests is just plain discrimination. People don't die from having sex. HIV tests are highly suspect because they are not specific in determining an actual specific virus. Even the inserts from the companies state this. I know people who tested positive for antibodies and are in better health than those who are negative and live unhealthy lives. The overwhelming majority of gay people don't have any virus or disease. The reason why gays might be the biggest percentage is because they are always told to test test test. Other people don't. Of course that means the percentage will be higher. Stupid.
Reply to this comment
by jjfrost500 March 7, 2010 11:53 PM EST
sir-with all your ranting you still have not explained as to why this is labled discrimination-what are gay people being prevented from doing?giving something to someone? well that someone has said we dont care to recieve it- if a gay person wanted to give another person a sausage injection and they refused it-is that person also discriminating against the gay individual?
by jjfrost500 March 8, 2010 12:04 AM EST
also you really shouldnt be spreading misinformation-("people dont die from having sex")they most certainly do die from having sex-that is one way that aids is transmitted a deadly disease-what do you live under a rock?
See all 5 Replies
by jjfrost500 March 7, 2010 12:39 AM EST
im not able to donate blood anymore because one time about 5 years or so ago they said cause i was overseas in europe back in 1982 i may have eaten mad cow meat-but i donated blood all my life up until then-whhaaa!!!- what about me im being discrimanated against too- why dont we worry about real issues, such as how are we going to keep from losing our homes because there are no more jobs that pay a living wage anymore? instead of non-issues such as this one
Reply to this comment
by jjfrost500 March 7, 2010 1:25 AM EST
the blood banks are saying-we wont be needing ur blood-how is that discrimination? is costing gays something? is taking money out of thier pockets?-food from thier mouths?-im not makin the connection here-if i tell a car dealer i wont be needing a four weel drive truck -am i discriminating against four wheel drive trucks? what is the issue here? i dont get it
by cws5949 January 26, 2011 11:21 PM EST
One I hate to be a jerk but guess what your a bigot and thats the worst kind of person. You don't understand anything! We care so much about this issue because one its a basic equality issue and two it is about helping others. Also not all gay men have sex by "inserting their willies in places where they don't belong" <-- hateful statement there made by you. Also, learn to spell buddy it makes you look like an idiot when you put words like "rason" when you mean reason also use proper grammer next time you comment.
by chal0326 March 6, 2010 9:48 PM EST
People do know that HIV/AIDS is not a gay specific disease anymore, right? 1/5th of all AIDS cases every year are from a heterosexual male or female. This is why blood is tested. Simply excluding ALL homosexual men from donating blood is absurd. Not all of us practice unsafe sex. Just like I'm sure not all heterosexual couples practice safe sex. How do you think "accidents" happen?
Reply to this comment
by DickSmegma March 7, 2010 6:29 PM EST
Disregarding the fact that your statistic is completely made up, it still leaves 4/5 of all new AIDS cases emerging from homosexual males.

That's called 'bad odds.' The tests are not infallible, either. I don't appreciate leftist kooks trying to increase the risk we all have of getting HIV from a blood transfusion just so they can garner a few more votes next time around.
by squeakof2006 March 5, 2010 7:40 PM EST
Gays giving blood is one thing, but allowing HIV/AIDS positive people to immigrate is quite another. Let the homosexuals donate. We have bigger issues. And how do they know if a person is gay, anyway, unless the gay person says something about it? This is one thing that the gay community deserves to participate in as much as anyone else.
Reply to this comment
by pugilist66 March 5, 2010 5:13 PM EST
These senators are morons. Not only is this a totally ridiculous issue, but no one with a shred of common sense would think that this is a good idea. No one who engages in risky behavior should donate blood-gay or straight. Engaging in homosexual sex is only one of many issues that would exclude someone from donating blood. With all the f-ups in the medical field, public safety should outweigh the need for these people to be politically correct.
Reply to this comment
by ilikepieisgood March 5, 2010 7:22 PM EST
Engaging in unprotected heterosexual sex is also one of the causes of transmitting HIV/STDs. Also among causes of blood-borne illnesses include: bad hygiene, bad genetics, infections, etcetcetc. So to simply state, the mere act of being ALIVE means you might have a blood-borne illness that can be transmitted. So do we ignore the screening technologies we have and simply ban EVERYTHING out of fear?
by jjfrost500 March 7, 2010 12:45 AM EST
ok ok -lets not argue and bicker lets just leave it the way it is-the ones who gave the world the gift of aids in the first place-THE GAYS
by puzzler125 March 5, 2010 5:08 PM EST
Gee, what happens if a Caucasian, African-American, Asian, lesbian, married, older person, 19 year old, housewife, CEO, woman lawyer, male dentist, ANYONE donates and doesn't yet know they have contracted AIDS? SEE? It's the same for everyone.
Reply to this comment
by bundye March 5, 2010 12:01 PM EST
You probably souldn't do this.
Reply to this comment
by stn_sage March 4, 2010 10:38 PM EST
SORRY, folks! In the scheme of things, this is NOT a top priority issue!

With approximately 300 bills waiting for the Senate to act upon, and they're messing around with this? Absurd! And, totally irresponsible!

People need to decide whether or not ANY of these eighteen DESERVE to be sent back?! They dodge major issue in favor of the obscure?! GEEEZZ!
Reply to this comment
by jgg000101 March 4, 2010 10:52 PM EST
if you think this is bad, here in california where the air is chunky and the state is broke, our esteemed leaders are meeting to authorize a bill to eliminate cursing for a day.
by akonikui March 5, 2010 2:54 PM EST
Are you suggesting the senate can handle 300 bills but not 301?
Why is it that conservatives suggest congress is suddenly incapable of multitasking when gay rights are being discussed?
Do you not understand how the legislative process works?
See all 49 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook