Limiting gay men donating blood: Discriminatory or rooted in science?
In the wake of the horrific Orlando shootings, there has been renewed attention given to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) so-called ban on blood donations from gay men. A congressman called the ban discriminatory, and demanded it’s repeal — a call joined by the American Medical Student Association.
I can understand how many gay men feel. I often donated blood at various American Red Cross locations. Either they loved my blood or have way too many volunteers, because I was seemingly besieged with calls every eight weeks (the minimum waiting time between blood donations). Then in February of this year, I was diagnosed with DLBCL — a form of lymphoma.
During my treatment, the Red Cross called, and I told them I couldn’t donate this time because I was undergoing chemotherapy for lymphoma, and to call me back in a few months. The worker apologized, and told me he would put me on the permanent deferral list. It was then I realized: My diagnosis of a blood-borne cancer meant I couldn’t donate for life. Despite a lack of definitive scientific evidence, the unknowns were judged to be too great. After all, what if lymphoma is found to be caused by a virus, like many liver failures were later found to be caused by hepatitis C?
Being on the deferred list wasn’t easy to bear; I feel like I am permanently marked, damaged goods. But nevertheless, despite my empathy for what many gay men may feel about the policy, the F...
Source: Kevin, M.D. - Medical Weblog - Category: Journals (General) Authors: Vamsi Aribindi Tags: Conditions Infectious disease Source Type: blogs
More News: Blogging | Cancer | Cancer & Oncology | Chemotherapy | Family Physicians | Food and Drug Administration (FDA) | Hepatitis | Hepatitis C | Infectious Diseases | Liver | Lymphoma | Politics | Science | Students | Universities & Medical Training | Urology & Nephrology | Waiting Times