It is now just a 12 month deferral, instead of a lifetime ban.
I think it's a good step, but still not enough. After all, a gay man in a monogamous relationship can't donate unless he doesn't have sex with his partner for a year, but a promiscuous straight man with hundreds of sex partners a month can.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fda-hiv-idUSKBN0U423Y20151221
Anonymous
Favorite Answer
They seem to fail to realize that gay people are no different from straight people.. except their choice in partners..
Brian B
I think we should just require gay men or anyone with a history of IV drug use to pass a clean blood screen before donating. If you can prove you are STI and HIV negative, there should be no reason to prohibit your donation.
mommanuke
I don't think anyone should be banned from donating if what we fear is a detectable thing. The test for HIV positive antibodies is quick, as is the one for Hepatitis C. Of course, now we have to add rabies to the list, since those four people died in Oklahoma because the organ donor had been exposed to rabies and didn't know it.
I don't think people realize how much is banned here due to the extreme litigious nature of our society.
Anonymous
I give blood and I'm straight, you should see the form we have to fill in. All blood over the pod is meticulously screened. Should homosexuals give blood? Good question Jolene.
Liberals sequester from fact
That started in the 80s when homosexuals spread aids.