FDA set to ban gay men as sperm donors

[im10ashus]

New rules aimed at preventing spread of AIDS, officials say

The Associated Press
Updated: 3:25 p.m. ET May 5, 2005


NEW YORK - To the dismay of gay-rights activists, the Food and Drug Administration is about to implement new rules recommending that any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the previous five years be barred from serving as an anonymous sperm donor.

The FDA has rejected calls to scrap the provision, insisting that gay men collectively pose a higher-than-average risk of carrying the AIDS virus. Critics accuse the FDA of stigmatizing all gay men rather than adopting a screening process that focuses on high-risk sexual behavior by any would-be donor, gay or straight.

“Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he’s been celibate for five years,” said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.


Traiman said adequate safety assurances can be provided by testing a sperm donor at the time of the initial donation, then freezing the sperm for a six-month quarantine and testing the donor again to be sure there is no new sign of HIV or other infectious diseases.

Although there is disagreement over whether the FDA guideline regarding gay men will

continued...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7749977/

Where will they stop?

[amandae]

1. Yet another way to perpetuate the stereotype that only gay men get AIDS

ANY man can contract AIDS. The screening process is in place to prevent ANY infected sperm from being donated/used, so I don't understand why this is an issue other than another way to discriminate against homosexuals.

[Bluebear]

2. This is JUST IN CASE you can get "the gay" genetically

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. *siiggh*

[Bouncy Ball]

3. RI-DICK-ULOUS!!!

Fucking ridiculous.

[im10ashus]

4. Agreed!

There's a poll on that link as well. Overwhelmingly disapproving of the ban. At least for now, until the freepers get hold of it. GO VOTE!

[me b zola]

17. 71% disagree with the ban!

[wildeyed]

5. Ridiculous.

Anyone can carry the HIV virus.

“The part I find most offensive — and a little frightening — is that it isn’t based on good science,” Cathcart said. “There’s a steadily increasing trend of heterosexual transmission of HIV, and yet the FDA still has this notion that you protect people by putting gay men out of the pool.”

This policy is based on bigotry, not science. I am so sick of this crap.

[jonolover]

7. I would just lie...

...and say that either I am not gay or haven't had gay sex for five years, whichever is possible on the form. I am not in such a situation in actuality. My (non-proselytizing) religion completely allows uttering a lie for something that is genuinely wrong, and this qualifies as such.

I've had it with these people!

[leftofthedial]

8. what if being gay, or being "predisposed" somehow to be gay is genetic?

If that were true, would it be appropriate for "customers" of a sperm bank to choose non-gay sperm?

[im10ashus]

9. That's a whole new can of worms! n/t

[gollygee]

10. All the gay people I know have straight parents

getting sperm from a straight person certainly doesn't guarantee a child won't be gay.

[leftofthedial]

11. that's a good point

but what if there was a statistical difference?

I don't think sperm banks should refuse sperm from a gay donor, I'm just wondering if being gay is a noteworthy factor? Truthfully I have no idea. What info, if any do sperm banks pass along to their customers?

[gollygee]

15. I have two questions to that

1. Is there a statistical difference? Unless there is evidence of that then it isn't worth worrying about.

2. Is the donor's sexual preference not already listed? If not, how does anyone know if a donor is gay? Hair color, eye color, IQ, etc., I think are listed. This might already be listed.

I'd think if a woman was concerned about it she could choose a different donor. There's no reason to not allow gay men to donate at all.

[gollygee]

12. How stupid

all sperm donors should be tested for AIDS for god's sake. Are they going to assume straight men are safe from AIDS and not test them? I doubt it. This has nothing to do with AIDS. NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING. It's all about keeping gay men from reproducing IN CASE being gay is inherited. I wonder if there's ever been any research into that because every gay person I know has straight parents.

[Touchdown]

13. It's consistent with the other rule for over 20 years.

Gay men are not allowed to donate blood either. One of the questions is "Have you ever had sexual relations with another male since 1979?"

A yes answer disqualifies you. If anybody's relatives have died because of a lack of blood trasfustions, please send your thanks to the FDA.:eyes:

[gollygee]

14. Really?

I would hope they would assume every single person is at risk and test everyone donating. I wouldn't feel safe getting a transfusion if I knew they were only worried about gay men passing on AIDS.

[im10ashus]

21. Actually, Touchdown...

You can thank the Red Cross for the transfusion thing. They are responsible for that. But point well made.

[Ms. Toad]

22. Well, it is slightly different...

sperm is routinely frozen for six months, then the donor retested. If the donor doesn't show up for the retest, the donation is tossed. If the donor tests positive, the donation is tossed. That dramatically decreases the chance that the donation carries the HIV virus.

With blood, the donation is not held for 6 months - it is used relatively immediately. There is no time (nor is there a mechanism in place) to retest the donor to make sure the the HIV virus was not present but not yet creating antibodies (which is what the tests can catch).

Because of this, there is far less reason for any sexuality based filter for sperm donation than there is for blood (and as far as I am concerned the restrictions should be risky activity based for both, with perhaps more severe restrictions for blood donors because the blood is used immediately)

(Mom of a 14 year old daughter conceived by DI)

[ruggerson]

16. The gay rights groups

should just counsel people to lie.

And they should do this very publicly as an act of civil disobedience.

Screw these Republican morons, let them fester in the filth of their own idiotic bigotry.

[Duncan Grant]

18. Must be some religious GOP political appointee clamoring for a promotion.

You can bet that scientists are less susceptible to this sort of lunacy. There's not a single point of their argument that has any validity.

I hope it's clear to everyone just how far this madness has gone. We can stop being in denial about it.

[Duncan Grant]

19. I got to kick this.

:kick:

[im10ashus]

20. What does kick it mean? n/t