Winning the Arguments
The following section outlines some of the common questions and debates
relating to the ban on blood donation by gay and bisexual men. It is important to familiarise yourself with these arguments so you can make a strong case to students in your union and the media about why the blood ban is so unfair and discriminatory.
If you feel there are still arguments not covered or you have any further questions,
Scott Cuthbertson, NUS LGBT Officer on scott.cuthbertson@nus.org.uk
Q: Isn't the blood tested before being used?
The blood is tested for HIV, Hepatitis B & C before being used. The Blood Service write on their website that the record for testing is exceptionally good. Last year patients received over three million units of blood and blood products. Out of these, hospitals reported only 315 transfusion-related problems.
Of these, 213 were caused by human error at the hospital, 96 were patients experiencing some form of reaction against the 'foreign' blood and only 6 were due to an infection transmitted from the transfusion.
Q: So why are donors vetted if the blood is tested?
The NBS say that they need to defer donors “who have a higher risk of
carrying a blood borne infection, because of their lifestyle, medical or
travel history. Not all infections make you feel unwell, and until your body
has produced antibodies or enough of the virus to be detected, the blood
safety tests back in our labs will not reveal their presence. This gap
between exposure and the test picking it up is known as the 'window
period'”.
Q: What is the window period?
The window period is the time between infection and the time it takes to detect the infection in the blood. Nucleic Acid Testing is different from traditional testing because it looks for the actual presence of viruses. Most other tests detect the presence of antibodies. Since NAT was introduced it has reduced the 'window period' after transmission of HIV from 22 to 11 weeks.
Q: If a woman who has had sex with a man who has had sex with a man is deffered for six months why is a man who has had sex with a man not deffered for an equal period?
This is a question we frequently ask: if women cease to be high risk
after six months why do men remain high risk for their lifetime? This is
another reason we believe the blood ban to be unjustified.
Q: Is it true that the majority of new cases of HIV infection are in the heterosexual community?
Yes, but while this is the case, proportionately the risk is still higher
amongst gay and bisexual men. Rates of infection in the heterosexual
community have recently increased much more sharply than in the
homosexual community, however rates are still rising across the board
despite the safe sex message.
Q: It is known statistically that gay and bisexual men have a higher rate of HIV and other STIs than other groups in society. With this in mind isn't it correct to ban all gay and bisexual men?
Indeed gay and bisexual men do have an increased statistical risk, but that
does not mean to say that everyone within that group is higher risk. Someone
who hasn’t had sex with a male partner in ten years or someone who is in a
monogamous same-sex relationship is much lower risk than someone who has
multiple heterosexual partners, but they are still banned from donating for life.
We believe in a system where individual risk is assessed and not the risk of a
whole group. When the sexual identity of gay men automatically puts them
into the high risk category without taking into account their behaviour, then it
can be argued that it is that sexual identity that is being discriminated against.
Q: The blood service says that if gay men give blood the chances of HIV infection will increase by 60%
In reality a 60% increase is the equivalent to 1 infected blood product
every 20 years. Although this figure doesn’t sound as bad it is still undesirable.
This figure came out of research conducted in 2003. This report however has been
widely criticised as it is based on a number of assumptions. The report stated
"Many assumptions were required to generate estimates of the risk of HIV
infection entering the blood supply. The accuracy of the estimates is therefore
uncertain and the probable ranges around the estimates were wide."
The research predicts a significant increase in infection through transfusion if the
current UK and US lifetime bans are dropped in favour of a one year ban.
However, no such increase has occurred in those countries like Australia which
have one year bans, bringing into question the studies’ other dire predictions.
The research also does not take into account the replacement of a blanket gay
blood ban with a ban on potential donors who engage in unsafe sex.
Q: Doesn't the law say that gay and bisexual men can't give blood?
No, the implementation of the European Blood Directives, covering blood safety and quality took place on the 8th of November last year, says that the Blood service must not allow those people who are high risk to give blood. We believe that not all Gay and Bisexual men are high risk and therefore would be able to give blood under the new law. Indeed other European countries are subject to the same directives and allow donations from gay and bisexual men.
Q: What would be the risks if gay and bisexual men were allowed to give blood?
Many gay and bisexual men ignore the rules and give blood, believing
that the rules discriminate harshly against them. Currently half of the new cases
of HIV which have been detected by the UK transfusion services amongst men
who have sex with men were new donors who did not perceive themselves to be
at risk of HIV. The other half were gay men who had become infected between
donations and who had not previously declared their lifestyle. If the rules were
changed to be fairer, we believe gay and bisexual men would comply more. A
question relating to actual sexual activity would most likely prevent these cases
getting through and the risk to blood stocks would decrease.
Q: The ban applies to men who have had oral or anal sex with or without using a condom. Does that mean that condoms are unsafe?
No, absolutely not. The blood service could be accused of sending out contradictory messages to those of HIV and sexual health organisations who say that a condom can help protect you. The fact that the blood service view all sexual activity in the same way is yet another reason why this ban should be lifted. Sexual Health messages talk about high-medium-low risk activities, if you are in any doubt about risk you should contact your local sexual health provider.
Q: Giving blood is an altruistic act; the primary responsibility is to ensure the safety of the blood supply and therefore the blood service should ban gay and bisexual men shouldn’t it?
While giving blood is altruistic, to be told you cannot give blood
because you are at high risk of HIV, even if your actual risk is low is
discriminatory and stops much needed blood being donated. Donating blood is a
responsibility, not a right. But in a democratic society, people should be free to
exercise their responsibilities without discrimination. Safety of the blood supply is
of paramount importance for the many people that need it, that’s why we want
people who are at low risk, which includes some gay and bisexual men, to be able
to give blood, increasing already dwindling blood stocks.
It is wrong to suggest that gay and bisexual men do not care about the welfare of
others, the fact that they want to give blood like any other person demonstrates
their concern, why should gay and bisexual men not be altruistic too?
Q: Gay and bisexual men aren’t the only group to be deferred, surely that means that the ban isn’t homophobic?
People who have been abroad to a risk area are asked to wait for 12 months before giving blood, as are women who have had sex with gay or bisexual men; individuals who have had piercings are deferred for 6 months. Men who have had sex with men at any time in their lives are not “deferred”; they are permanently banned from donating blood. This means, for example, that a man who had sex with another man over twenty years ago (before the emergence of HIV and AIDS) cannot give blood, even if he has not had anal or oral sex with a man since.
Q: What would be the risks if gay and bisexual men were allowed to give blood?
We do not encourage anyone to break the existing rules regarding
blood donation, even if we may not agree with them. Many gay
and bisexual men are not always aware of all the risks to them
and their body and we encourage regular sexual heath check-ups.
Q: If the blood service is discriminating why shouldn’t I try to ban them from my campus?
The NBS provide vital blood supplies, many thousands of people across the country rely on the service and could die otherwise. It is important that any campaign to change the policy of the NBS does not affect the ability of NBS to collect blood donations. This is why we are asking others to ‘give blood, because we can’t’. It’s important that students’ unions encourage blood donation on campuses and that no one is put off giving blood by our campaign.
| 
Log in
You are here »
Document
