Greg's time on breakfast

[Nik B.]

this is old news I know.

Exclusion of Men who have Sex with Men from Blood Donation

The National Blood Service (part of NHS Blood and Transplant) has a duty to ensure a sufficient supply of safe blood for patients in England and North Wales. This includes a clear responsibility to minimise the risk of a blood transfusion transmitting an infection to patients.

Whilst our stringent testing procedures make such transmissions extremely rare, we believe that any transmission is one too many. However, it is also important that the policies which are in place to help protect the safety of the blood supply are based on the best available scientific evidence, reviewed on a regular basis, and explained clearly to the public.

Currently the policy is to ask those in groups shown to have a particularly high risk of carrying blood-borne viruses not to give blood. This includes men who have ever had sex with men, with this exclusion resting on specific sexual behaviour (such as oral or anal sex between men) rather than sexuality. There is, therefore, no exclusion of gay men who have never had sex with a man, nor of women who have sex with women.

The reasons for the current policy of permanently excluding men who have ever had sex with men from blood donation are as follows:

Blood safety starts with the selection of donors before they give blood. By excluding groups known to present a particularly high risk of blood-borne viruses, we are already reducing the risk of infected blood entering the blood supply.

Every blood donation is tested for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis and human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV). However, despite improvements in blood screening tests, a small number of infected donations may be missed because of the 'window period' between getting the infection and the test showing a positive result.

While safer sex, through the use of condoms, does reduce the transmission of infections, it cannot eliminate the risk altogether. Men who have sex with men continue to be disproportionately affected by HIV and account for 63% of HIV diagnoses where the infection was likely to have been acquired in the UK.1 Epidemiological evidence in the UK also shows that there has been a significant increase in sexually-transmitted infections which can also be blood-borne, such as hepatitis B and syphilis, among men who have sex with men. Between 2002 and 2006, for example, there was a 117% increase in syphilis infections in men who have sex with men.2

Research shows that completely removing the current exclusion on blood donation from men who have sex with men would result in a fivefold increase in the risk of HIV-infected blood entering the blood supply. While changing deferral to one year from the last sexual contact would have a lesser effect, it would still increase this risk by 60%.3

The criteria across all of the UK Blood Services for accepting blood donors on the basis of virus risk are regularly reviewed.4 SaBTO are currently reviewing the evidence base for donor deferral and exclusion in the UK in relation to sexual behaviours. As part of this review, new research was presented in July 2009 and a public meeting was held in October 2009. The research which has been examined so far includes:

Monitoring the frequency of infections which the National Blood Service finds when it tests blood donations and collecting information about how the donors probably became infected. This information is updated and reported on the Health Protection Agency (HPA) website every six months.

Using data collected by the UK Blood Services and HPA to estimate the risk of blood infected with HIV being given to patients, and looking at the likely effect of different exclusion criteria on this risk.

Trying to determine which groups in the population are most likely to have sexually-transmitted infections that might harm blood recipients.

In summer 2010 a final piece of research is due to be presented:

Studies of the sexual behaviour of people who give blood, how well people (especially men who have sex with men) comply with the current rules about who should not give blood, and what people think about these rules.

Once the review is complete, SaBTO will make recommendations to the Government as to whether any changes to the current policy are warranted. These recommendations will be based on the best and most up-to-date scientific evidence available.

NHSBT welcomes the review of donor selection criteria by SaBTO, which seeks to maintain current high standards of blood safety whilst ensuring the rules are clear, appropriate, and based on recent evidence.

Terrence Higgins Trust (THT) also supports the review, and has asked people to abide by the current regulations until any further decision is made on the basis of evidence:

So, is this just? Is it something that has a solid basis in fact? or is it just purely descrimination, a wolf in sheeps clothing. I won't comment at this time because I want this to be an impartial vote. But just remember that it's been very cleverly worded; rather than saying gay men it says men who have had sex with men. I will also say this is a life ban, and also listed on their exclusion page as people who "may never donate".

[yorkieboy]

Unsure, I'm not a doctor so difficult to say whether it's true or not, but I'd be very very surprised if it's not based on solid fact given the neccessity of people giving blood. Giving blood is not a privilige it's someting that someone does because it's a good thing to do, so I don't see why they'd ban gay people from giving blood for any other reason other than it's not safe. I think the wording is such because you can be gay but not have had sex.

[Nik B.]

As my ex so loves pointing out, that's homoromantic. I should of mentioned really that in all the research I did earlier, I found little recent evidence to suggest the nsbs claims. But I'll moan about that another time. Also, saying that it increases the risk so substanially, even when safe sex has been practiced, is slightly strange. Also, it doesn't descriminate those who have been infected, it's a blanket ban. Finally, the wording is extremely clever. To the point of contradiction almost.

[MrDoovdeHaxorz]

I don't see a problem as long as the blood gets tested, which should be happening with every donor, shouldn't it?

[Guest PineapplesLikeAarons]

What about lesbians..? :L

[KingTutsWWH]

What about lesbians..? :L

Hahahahaha. This is my favourite post of the day so far. Priceless.

[cxx666]

Had to say no on this one. Ok yes HIV / Aids is more commonly assosciated with the gay community but straight/bisexual people who have unprotected sex stand a risk of contracting it if the other person has it.

Men, or even women, who use prostitues and don't use protection are also at a high risk of getting it purely because a prostute would have sex with many many differnt people and could be a very likely breeding ground for various STIs

Sexuality shouldn't come into it