Quote:
Originally Posted by Saya
Statistically in NA they represent the largest demographic, although other demographics are over represented (Natives in Canada for example.) Thing is, a gay couple was in a monogamous relationship for the last five years, they still can't donate, but a woman who engaged in unprotected anal sex several times in her life can do so?
|
So you're suggesting they should actually be screening more people out?
(I know you're not.)
I'm guessing that women who've engaged in unprotected anal sex are not considered to be in a 'high-risk' group for aids, unless their partner was a man who previously had sex with another man.
It seems to me I've seen this asked and explained somewhere ... it's just been a while since I've seen it.
I notice on
this list of requirements from bloodbook.com that a person who is rraped has to wait one year, which is no longer than the deferral for people who get tattoos, piercings or acupuncture, so I am sure it all comes down to statistical analysis.
By the way, they also list this notatification - "For up-to-date information or opinions about American Red Cross rules about Blood donor deferrals, call 1-800-448-3543" - so I'm guessing you might be able to ask the direct question there.
Could there be errors in the decision making that determines what goes on the list - sure. And the standards are always undergoing revisions. But examples like the
Congratulations! You Get a New Kidney... and HIV story in Spooky News suggest to me that they need to err extremely on the side of caution ... and that includes working within the statistical evidence they have in hand.