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: Tags: Conditions Infectious disease Source Type: blogs