VIDEOS: The people’s voices

ARTICLE: The ban on blood

By Josh Weaver

Policies set in place by the Food and Drug Administration barring certain individuals from donating blood date back to 1983, coinciding with the increased concern of spreading the then newly discovered AIDS virus.

Since that time, the FDA has maintained the restrictions on people who’ve, since 1977, engaged in male-to-male sexual relations, and females who have been intimate with a man who has been with a man.

Jayson Gawthorpe, an openly gay student at San Jose State University, said he gave blood when he was in high school, but was no longer allowed to give blood after he came out of the closest.

“This law, the policy … is old, it’s no longer necessary,” Gawthrope said. “In the interest of protecting people, they are overlooking a huge population that doesn’t need to overlooked anymore.”

As recently as March of this year, the FDA upheld its long-standing policy that bans gays from donating blood amongst challenges from the Red Cross and two other blood groups, the AABB and America’s Blood Centers, according to an Associated Press article.

Some college students were inclined to agree with the organizations, saying sexual orientation should not be the question and that they felt the rules in place were more discriminatory than merely precautionary.

“I don’t think it should matter at all,” said Saul Villalta, a student at SJSU. “I mean, it doesn’t matter if you’re gay or not. The blood’s all the same, right? It’s just different types.”

The three groups that oppose the current ban argued that because significant improvements have been made in detecting HIV-positive blood, the ban should be lifted and instead a one-year deferral should be utilized — meaning people would have to wait one year after male-to-male relations to give blood — according to the AP.

“It has nothing to do with their lifestyle, it has to do with the virus,” said Susan Belanger, a nurse with one of Stanford’s moving donation stations.

The ban is not just centered in the United States. Other countries have also instituted restrictions on blood donations.

A protest held earlier this year in Dublin was aimed at the Department of Health in Ireland and its ban on gay people giving blood. The Irish Blood Transfusion Service has enforced the prohibition since the mid 80s, according to an article published on irishhealth.com.

“The IBTS is turning away willing donors for no other reason than the fact that they have had sex with another man,” said spokesman Steve Conlon in the article.

Back in the U.S. the FDA remains steadfast in its ways, saying on its Web site there is still too great a risk for transmitting AIDS through transfusions, which is the major concern.

The FDA also states that although the current technologies have reduced the risk of HIV transmission, it is still difficult to detect all infected donors.

BLOG: A donation experience

Warning: graphic descriptions ahead.

By Adam Murphy 

In my pursuit of information about blood drives, the medical staff of the Stanford donation bus lassoed me into giving blood.

After agreeing to give blood, I filled out the necessary paperwork and undertook the necessary medical tests.

People were being shuffled in and out the whole time, completing the necessary paperwork in the front of the bus, giving blood in the middle of the bus and filling up on cookies and orange juice in the rear section of the bus.

The blood hauler, which made me feel claustrophobic, was so full of people that it took some serious maneuvering to get through the aisles, and the low ceiling meant I had to stoop to avoid hitting my head.

After I took a seat, the medical aides went over the standard procedures involved as they set everything up.

The veins on my arms looked like gutters about to burst with the blood being forced down into my hand when they wrapped on a blood pressure monitor.

My heart skipped a beat when I saw the needle: It looked like a sharpened PVC pipe.

The extra large-sized needle entered my flesh with a little sting, not as bad as I thought it was going to be. Now I could just sit back and relax.

I closed my eyes and started to daydream, thinking about the rest of my weekend. My dreams were cut short by simple, “uh-oh,” coming from the lips of a medical aide.

A large bump had formed on my arm because I was having a reaction to the needle, and my body was sending platelets to the area of entry, trying to stop the blood flow.

The needle was extracted from my arm harshly, and then the blood started flowing.

My good intention was leaking down my arm and onto the floor, despite the best efforts from the medial aides.

My arm kept bleeding, mixing with the iodine to give my blood a gold tint as it coated the arm of the chair. After some serious pressure the bleeding stopped.

“Do you want to give with the other arm?” a voice said somewhere behind me.

My mind screamed, “No!” But I was already in the bus, so I relented and begrudgingly stuck out my other arm for Round 2.

Same procedure — except this time they used a different needle that might spray my blood, so the medical aide had to wear a transparent face mask. Very reassuring.

Despite my apprehension, the needle found its mark without spewing blood over the whole bus. The medical aide’s aim was true, and my arm didn’t have the reaction it had the first time, so I sat back, closed my eyes, and did my part for the greater good.