This is an interesting story...

Gato_Solo said:
Most of the heterosexuals that have HIV are drug users, or those who slept with drug users. :shrug: As you've stated, all blood should be checked and the donors checked before they donate, but some may be positive, and the test misses that finding. People make mistakes, and the screening may be to narrow down those mistakes. Who knows?
Click to expand...

And again, are you expecting everyone to be honest? As I said, I understand why they ask the question, I just don't think it really does anything other than ally the masses fears. :shrug:
 
Thulsa Doom said:
Has your luggage been in your posession at ALL times?

yes.

ok thats good enough for us.
Click to expand...

But then you've got to go through the X-ray machines and the metal detectors. Of course, if I was running them, you wouldn't get through without setting it off at least once (sensitivity of the machines is adjustable).
 
As I said it does ask about totalsexual history so I think that was a question. my new school doesnt have blood drives so I cannot say for sure if it changed
 
chcr said:
And again, are you expecting everyone to be honest? As I said, I understand why they ask the question, I just don't think it really does anything other than ally the masses fears. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Most likely, that's exactly what it's for...If you're honest, then they save 'X' amount of dollars screening the blood, also...
 
I agree but i feel you cant be 100% safe with just answers. I feel tests are necessary to be totaly honest with you
 
freako104 said:
I agree but i feel you cant be 100% safe with just answers. I feel tests are necessary to be totaly honest with you
Click to expand...

I never said that they weren't...I posted the original article to show that some people have no clue about how things work, and then asked questions about how the questionaire was written. By it's very nature, the questionaire is discriminatory, but not for the reasons the protesters are saying... ;)
 
freako104 said:
and now it comes full circle
Click to expand...

Not really. Think about it.

Statistics (yeah, I know) show that a certain activity will increase your odds of being infected with HIV. The questionaire is there to 'weed out' such risk-prone people to make the blood supply safer for everybody. Answering that questionaire is completely voluntary, and so is giving blood. By protesting this questionaire, those students only did one thing...they made themselves look stupid. Nowhere does it state that you couldn't receive blood because you engage in risky behavior...THAT would be something to protest. What they are saying is that blood donation by people who may, or may not, have HIV is perfectly fine with them. Now, suppose the Red Cross removes any questions dealing with homosexuality from their questionaire, and somebody gets tainted blood linked to somebody who was involved in risky behavior? What do you think is going to happen?

If they don't want to donate because of questions about unsafe sex, then they have more issues than we need to know about anyway. All they want is to have their picture in the newspaper or on CNN. If they were serious about their protestations, they would've come up with a workable solution...i.e. if you donate blood, you pay for your own HIV test on the way out. They won't do that, though. They'd rather somebody else pay...either out of their pocket, or with their life because somebody decided that their risky behavior was nobody elses business. :shrug:
 
blood linked to somebody who was involved in risky behavior? What do you think is going to happen
Click to expand...


unless they have a reason to reject(tattoo not yet a year old, piercing) they may not be rejected and it can spread.
 
freako104 said:
unless they have a reason to reject(tattoo not yet a year old, piercing) they may not be rejected and it can spread.
Click to expand...

What the students are saying is this...homosexuality, in and of itself, does not make a person unable to donate blood. I agree on that one point, but they go a little further in their opinions. They said that any questions about homosexual activity is off-limits, and that is where I say they are wrong. They aren't vocal about intravenous drug use, or tattoos under a year old, so why are they upset over the homosexuality questions? All those questions are used for is to weed out the folks who answer truthfully about their risky behavior. The rest are eliminated after their blood is tested, and they are positive for some blood-borne disease. All it is is a tool to save them some money. If they don't like it, then, my idea is, to make them pay for their own HIV testing. Put it into their college charter, or charge their student funds, and, when they have to pay for their own idiocy, how fast do you think they'd protest to reduce their fees?
 
in all truth I like the history of sexual activity both hetero and homosexual. but also tattoos and piercings, health history and other things. as for your last question theyd shut the hell up if the knew
 
freako104 said:
in all truth I like the history of sexual activity both hetero and homosexual. but also tattoos and piercings, health history and other things. as for your last question theyd shut the hell up if the knew
Click to expand...

Give the man a cookie.

The minority of protestors protest because they feel their rights are being violated somehow. The rest (majority) do so because they think it makes them look good. The ones who feel wronged aren't the problem. The others, who try to 'help' are doing so only because it fulfills their own, hidden agenda. Don't ask me what it is, because I don't know. What I do know is this, though...Starting with that Louisiana statute allowing a cop to search you for his/her own safety, arresting a person in Texas just because he didn't give his name, a groundswell of alarm over gun ownership even though legal owners aren't the problem...a slow, quiet, dismantling of our bill of rights is taking place, and the only thing people are interested in is whether somebodys feelings are getting hurt...It's time we all woke up. something is going terribly wrong here...and it ain't no conspiracy theory.
 
I semi-regularly donate blood.... They wouldn't let me do it on four occasions:

  • When I got a tattoo
  • When I got my tongue pierced
  • When I had an operation
  • When I had just recovered from a cold.

And yes, they're very strict about associations with homosexual liaisons, whether or not you've been to certain geographical regions like Africa and England. Whether or not you associate with anyone who has hep c, etc.
 
Gato_Solo said:
Most likely, that's exactly what it's for...If you're honest, then they save 'X' amount of dollars screening the blood, also...
Click to expand...

I hope not.
 
chcr said:
I hope not.
Click to expand...

Think of it this way...100 people want to give blood. That's 100 testing kits you need to have. 12 people are disqualified, so now, you only need 88 kits. You still test all the blood, but you've saved those extra 12 kits for later. Now do you get how the money is saved?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top