National Gay blood drive day

[Unlogisch]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

It is infinitely easier to contract a disease through anal sex than it is vaginal.

If you actually had any degree of real, informed, medical knowledge you would know that this statement is categorically incorrect - and I'm not talking about your use of the word 'infinitely'. Go do some actual research.

- - - Updated - - -

I find it sad that a group complains they can't do a thing when they'd equally complain were they to get tainted blood or organs because of a mistake or lapse somewhere in the chain of events. That a given lifestyle has a higher percentage should be a definer in deciding what is best or not best for a material that can be utilized upon the whole of society, negatively or positively.

The problem with this statement is that you've equivocated being gay with a lifestyle stereotype. I know very, very, few gay or bisexual men who fit into that stereotype and those who do aren't exactly the type to go give blood. The vast majority of us have lifestyles which are effectively no different from that of any straight person - with the exception of the fact that we date and maybe even marry/enter into civil unions with members of the same sex - so you've really made a hasty generalization here.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

.. The problem with this statement is that you've equivocated being gay with a lifestyle stereotype. I know very, very, few gay or bisexual men who fit into that stereotype and those who do aren't exactly the type to go give blood. The vast majority of us have lifestyles which are effectively no different from that of any straight person - with the exception of the fact that we date and maybe even marry/enter into civil unions with members of the same sex - so you've really made a hasty generalization here.

NO, I equated a percentage of the population who are more likely to have a given disease and how they are a minority within the larger population, number wise not entirely different than the percentage of the population who is prior military and has medical reasons for why they can't give blood. It's not about lifestyle in that regard but about medical issues and the disproportionate amount of positives for the disease within a given grouping. All I see here personally is another "I'm Gay and your discriminating against me" scenario while trying to ignore its an actual medical justification that has been applied to various groupings not just gay for multiple reasons and affects / effects groups just as large though just as small within the greater society.

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

... And secondly....as much as it pains me to admit that she has a good point, Thalassa does bring up an excellent explanation.

I suspect I may have missed something somewhere.... but why would it pain you to admit that Thal has a good point? She's full of good points and interesting information.

Or maybe it's a uk/us difference again....

[Unlogisch]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

NO, I equated a percentage of the population who are more likely to have a given disease and how they are a minority within the larger population, number wise not entirely different than the percentage of the population who is prior military and has medical reasons for why they can't give blood. It's not about lifestyle in that regard but about medical issues and the disproportionate amount of positives for the disease within a given grouping. All I see here personally is another "I'm Gay and your discriminating against me" scenario while trying to ignore its an actual medical justification that has been applied to various groupings not just gay for multiple reasons and affects / effects groups just as large though just as small within the greater society.

See, the problem is that the "medical justification" is flawed - much in the same way as it is as applied to otherwise healthy ex and current service members who have been stationed in locales that prevent them from giving blood in spite of having no sign of any blood borne illness or toxicity.

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

I suspect I may have missed something somewhere.... but why would it pain you to admit that Thal has a good point? She's full of good points and interesting information.

Or maybe it's a uk/us difference again....

Spill over from another thread.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

See, the problem is that the "medical justification" is flawed - much in the same way as it is as applied to otherwise healthy ex and current service members who have been stationed in locales that prevent them from giving blood in spite of having no sign of any blood borne illness or toxicity.

To me I admit the theory, testing and processing maybe fallible for the justification yet I'd still support that over even a single person being infected and subjected to a life of anger, Heath harmed and / or injury because of trying to make another group feel good about itself. No one person or group of persons should be placed into the position of carrying the weight of that load and potential repercussions simply to make another person or group feel good. To me that is the height of personal ego about ones importance and rights over another. Being denied the right to give blood does not rob them of any right that would negatively influence their lives or lifestyle. My right to donate blood or lack there of does nothing to change who I am or what I can contribute to society or possibly remove from inflicting upon another by not donating. To imply anything less to me is to say the potential of harming them is more important than the restriction to possibly protect them from some disease and the pain and suffering associated with it.

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

If you actually had any degree of real, informed, medical knowledge you would know that this statement is categorically incorrect - and I'm not talking about your use of the word 'infinitely'. Go do some actual research.

OK sport....here ya go. Doesn't seem like anything has changed since I was taught that ten years ago:

According to UNAIDS, HIV is more common among gay and bisexual men than adults in general in all areas of the world, even Africa. In North America, an estimated 15 percent of gay and bisexual men are infected with HIV; the rate is the highest, 25 percent, in the Caribbean.
Previous research has shown that being on the receiving end of anal intercourse is equally risky whether you're a man or a woman. The risk was estimated at 1.4 percent per sex act with an infected person -- about 18 times more risky than male-to-female vaginal intercourse.

18 times more risky than vaginal intercourse? That's a wee bit more wouldn't you say? In fact, it goes on to say:

The study authors estimate that if receptive anal intercourse were only as risky as vaginal intercourse, HIV cases would fall by 80 percent to 98 percent among gay and bisexual men over five years. They also estimate that cases would fall by 29 percent to 51 percent if more gay and bisexual men had sex in long-term relationships instead of casual encounters.

Doh! Looks like I may be on to something huh?

I'm not doing any more research for you but you can peruse this at your leisure to get the full article.

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/news/articles/2012/07/20/biology-leaves-gay-men-highly-vulnerable-to-hiv-study

Buh bye now. Thanks for playing.

[Unlogisch]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

Buh bye now. Thanks for playing.

I'm not sure which is more pathetic: the fact that you seem to think that you've won something here or the fact that you're probably going to use those statistics to justify your own skewed worldview.

As it stands, I think I'm simply going to ignore you from now on because you seem to get off on being an ass.

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

I'm not sure which is more pathetic: the fact that you seem to think that you've won something here or the fact that you're probably going to use those statistics to justify your own skewed worldview.

As it stands, I think I'm simply going to ignore you from now on because you seem to get off on being an ass.

You asked for facts, scooter. And what you are doing is ignoring me because the FACTS don't support *your* skewed world view. Take care. Thanks for playing along.

[neráida]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

Other countries allow gay folks to donate. If their blood supply is as safe as a blood supply can be and they use comparable precautions to ours, why are we even having this conversation? Obviously, it doesn't matter anymore.

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

Other countries allow gay folks to donate. If their blood supply is as safe as a blood supply can be and they use comparable precautions to ours, why are we even having this conversation? Obviously, it doesn't matter anymore.

Other countries are communist too. Should we do *that* just because "other countries do it?"

[Tylluan Penry]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

Other countries are communist too. Should we do *that* just because "other countries do it?"

Possibly. It might be a good idea...

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

Possibly. It might be a good idea...

I don't think so.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

It's sad to me that this thread appears more about Gay rights than about concern for public health and safety. An assumption that testing will catch something when it's pretty apparent on many fronts that testing is only as effective as the person doing the testing. As such many mistakes are made at many levels and tainted blood or corrupted testing allows negative things to pass through the system. I've seen blood tests come back positive for various things that created false positives due to sickness for instance, seen other things missed completely such as TB which I saw a guy get from a blood transfusion a few years ago.

But hell lets forget safety and such so we can not offend some segment of society. Mankind is doomed to extinction at this rate.

[Monster]

Re: National Gay blood drive day

It's sad to me that this thread appears more about Gay rights than about concern for public health and safety. An assumption that testing will catch something when it's pretty apparent on many fronts that testing is only as effective as the person doing the testing. As such many mistakes are made at many levels and tainted blood or corrupted testing allows negative things to pass through the system. I've seen blood tests come back positive for various things that created false positives due to sickness for instance, seen other things missed completely such as TB which I saw a guy get from a blood transfusion a few years ago.

But hell lets forget safety and such so we can not offend some segment of society. Mankind is doomed to extinction at this rate.

Bingo. You hit the nail on the head. They don't want equality...they want special, protected status. Everyone wants to be a victim now.