I work in laboratory medicine (the folks who do the disease testing and transfusion matching), so this is a bit of a soapbox thing for me. They
absolutely need to change the rules.
Calling it an "LGBT" ban is a bit of a misnomer, though; lesbians and bi women aren't targeted by any of the questions.
Don't they now screen all blood anyways now. Sorry for my ignorance on the matter, but I really don't know and have always been curious.
Yes, they do screen all blood for HIV, Hep B and C, West Nile, syphilis, HTLV, and Chagas disease. However, this isn't perfect because it usually takes about six weeks from the time someone is first infected before they will show up positive on a screening test. But they can still infect others even during that initial window.
However, looking at the research, I don't believe that this rule does, in fact, keep the blood supply safer than it would be without the rule.
If they lifted the MSM ban and added in a 12-month deferral for
everyone from the last time they had unprotected casual sex, the blood supply would be kept even safer than it is now. Right now, straight people (and lesbians) can have whatever risky sex they want as long as it isn't with a prostitute or IV-drug-user, and they are still eligible to donate, which is pretty ridiculous.
It is strange that they still ban LGBT blood donations. I can understand why they wouldn't allow people had maleria or cancer or West Nile or Sexual transmitted disease, drug users or anemia but if they check the blood why ban LGBT blood donations. I heard they even accept diabetics? I might be wrong about that though.
They don't screen for malaria directly because it's not endemic here; they do have temporary bans if you've traveled to areas where it's prevalent though.
Cancer and diabetes aren't in any way contagious so as long as a person meets the general health requirements to donate (pulse/temp/weight/hematocrit/etc), their donation will be accepted and would do no harm to its eventual recipient.
Are they still afraid of the AIDS epidemic? They don't use the same needles again? If they are healthy, why not? I just they are afraid of other disease? Do they believe gays are disease carriers? I believe they are anymore than straights are?
Statistically, we
are still more likely to have HIV than straight folks. We are only 10% of the population (and presumably half of that is the ladies), but gay men were 63% of the new HIV infections in 2010.
However, the focus of the blood donor screening should be on behavior and not identity. If a 12-month deferral is sufficient for straight people after having sex with someone they KNOW had HIV/AIDS (and that is the current FDA standard), then there is absolutely no reason for a lifetime MSM ban.
If anyone's interested, this is the current FDA-recognized donor questionnaire:
https://www.aabb.org/resources/dona.../Full-LengthDonorHistoryQuestionnairev1.3.pdf
