CDC, FDA, CBC, and WHO consider homosexuality a health risk

reply to post by Nutter


Look even testing a person who is at high risk of AIDS is a risk to the people doing the testing. So why take the extra risk?

[edit on 12-10-2009 by StinkyFeet]

reply to post by StinkyFeet


Those people already do the testing of the blood that is donated. Some of it is indeed infected. Yet they don't contract the disease? Go figure. Latex gloves must work.

If we're looking at this topic from strictly a medical standpoint, these are the facts:

All blood is laboratory screened for:

ABO Typing - provides determination of Blood type: A, B, O, or AB.
Rh Factor Determination - indicates positive or negative Blood type. Blood Group Antibodies - indicates unexpected antibodies that may be a result of prior transfusion, pregnancy or other factors.
Hepatitis B Surface Antigen - indicates a present infection (hepatitis) or carrier state of hepatitis B virus.
Antibody to Hepatitis B Core - additional test that detects a present or past infection with the hepatitis B virus.
Antibody to Hepatitis C Virus - indicates antibody to a virus that causes hepatitis C (responsible for non-A non-B hepatitis.) The mean incubation time is six to eight weeks.
Alanine Aminotransferase (ALT) - identifies a liver enzyme that, when increased, may indicate undetectable forms of hepatitis.
Antibody to HTLV - 1 and 2 - indicates the antibody to a virus that causes adult T-cell leukemia, among other things.
Antibody to HIV 1 and 2 - indicates an infection with Human Immune deficiency Virus.
Syphilis - screens for this dangerous venereal disease

source

Since all blood is screened, the question ultimately is whether the blood bank wants to use medical personnel time, lab supplies and lab testing time, etc. if they feel a donor is a "risk". The blood itself will be screened for HIV regardless of how the donor is perceived at the blood bank, or how that donor answers the required questions.

Many people who have disease-free blood are not allowed to donate because of their sexual orientation. The questionnaire isn't an accurate indication of who would make an appropriate donor. (And like others have mentioned, not all people are honest when filling out the questionnaire anyway.) This is a problem that I hope there is some resolution for, especially in areas that need a better blood supply.



[edit on 12-10-2009 by Orion65]

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by halfoldman
the infection rate for woman-to-woman/lesbian sex is relatively low.

"But still exists. Which is the point of my diatribe about statistics and such. Sorry I wasn't able to inform you of all people. I thought you said you were POZ?"

Not sure I'm getting your point here. Although it is a moot point and speculation, the likelihood of HIV spreading in an exclusively female society is unlikely. It exists because we do not have such a society. Yes, menstrual blood and vaginal sex can spread HIV, but without males I still find the spread unlikely. It remains, as I say, speculation, but the wider anxieties also play a role in the way HIV is discussed, so on misleading statistics I probably agree. For me any conspiracy is in the source of the virus, not as some suggest, the victims or HIV-tester. How is the tester exposing his/her body fluids to HIV-positive blood/semen? Or are we going back to the days where HIV-poz children were banned from school because everyone thought they could get it via casual contact? Oh please.

Originally posted by northof8
Outside Africa homosexuals are by an large the transmitters of this dreadful disease. We are supposed to embrace them. Now a PC Troll Patrol member is trying to derail the conversation with the comparison that masturbation and the female sex drive were once considered a mental illness?

Maybe they were but now we know that masturbation and the female sex drive are not mental illnesses. Homosexuality is debatable but that is another thread but the PC Troll Patrol will turn this on into just that which, makes me believe they are mental cases more and more.

The fact still remains that homosexuals by and large are a greater danger to the blood supply than heterosexual people.

It seems here that agenda is to deny the facts and embrace ignorance... True to the theme of the homosexuals and their radical twisted view on health...

It's the the incoming ignorance of propaganda (old propaganda might I add) and hate that sparked this thought. No one has the absolute scientific capability to track HIV biologically through some form of imprints that they leave behind.

Why is this ?

Because microscopic organisms do not leave footprints and are prone to mutation at any time.

Liberate you mind, my friend.

ALL RIGHT!! THATS IT!!!

Look I'm not a Gay dude and the only problem I see with Gay dudes is that there are not enough of them around.

Every cute girl I ask out on a date all ready has a guy.

There are to many strait men in California believe it or not. Could some of you pleas turn Gay?

I'm specifically asking strait men who apparently have a huge problem with Homosexuality. Please if your going to dislike Gay dudes turn into one.

Strait Gay dislikers need to realise that Gay men have existed forever! In Grease they used to own the world. In old Japan there were no strait men for a time and women were only for child birth. In Roam you became a man by getting a stiff one up the poop hole by an old dude.

GET OVER IT!! Stop hating Gay people and instead try to pray the Gay voices in your head away if you have them.

And you Gay guys pleas tell me why you would want to give blood anyway? You should understand that a lot of people are afraid of getting aids and this law works in your favor so if some kid gets HIV through a blood transfusion you guys are no longer held responsible and are not burned at the stake. People are crazy and this like homosexuality will never change. So you too Get over it.

Now will someone pleas tell me what exactly is wrong with prostitution!!!!!

TA!!

Izzy.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by Izarith]

Acunpunture is also considered risky.

As having multiple partners or drug injections.

And bad tooth treatment...

Let's be honest humans for a minute, guys. People should not be treated differently because of their sexual orientation. It is very wrong to assume most gay have AIDS, have hundreds of sexual partners and participate in orgies all the time. I have gay family and friends, but although I strongly disagree with their sexual orientation (sorry, just the way I am), I still love and respect them for their human qualities.

I would have to agree that the wording used in the OP was very provocative and understandably has upset some people. However, we cannot ignore the facts that the chance of AIDS being prevalent among gay, sexually-active males is proportionately one of the most high-risk groups. Maybe this lies in the fact that males generally have a much higher sex drive than females and are willing to have unprotected sex more easily than women are.

At the end of the day, people who need access to blood should have every confidence that the blood they receive is healthy for their bodies. As I said earlier, prevention is far better than any cure. When it comes to something so serious, all measures of prevention (that do not directly harm another person) should be considered. This is not a Gay Rights Issue I am afraid to say.

[edit on 13/10/2009 by Dark Ghost]

reply to post by detachedindividual

The ban should be upon the act itself, not on the sexual identity of the person.

Totally agree here dude, won't be long before everyone will be up in arms about the new questionnaire asking the prospective donor, when they last took one up the arse.

Being a homosexual is not the problem, the activities they indulge in is , hold on though ! Other people do it as well ? This can't be true can it ?

LOL I can just imagine the pastors wife having to tick yes or no as to whether she's done any uphill gardening of the last few months lol.

reply to post by Izarith

Now will someone pleas tell me what exactly is wrong with prostitution!!!!!

I will, - Other people make a lot of money out of doing something I love to do.

Being a fat ugly bastard and also being hampered by the fact that I have no vagina and am heterosexual, I have a pathological hatred of these people doing my dream job.

If I can't be a prostitute then no one should so there

Originally posted by StinkyFeet
reply to post by Nutter

 

Some gay folk scream Homophobe more than Jesse Jackson and the Rev. Al Sharpton scream racist. They aren't demomizing, they are just trying to keep people safe FROM A DEADLY DISEASE.

This is the way to warn people -

What?! Ok SEX is risky without protection, its not just homosexual sex! My gawd what is it with people and homosexuality?! Sex no matter who your partner is without protection is risky to everyone involved and even to those in the future one sleeps with.

I dont donate blood simply because of tattoos yearly and piercings and weight sometimes. I was told I was too small and well I donated anyways and passed out.

I mean what are they doing making a list of homosexual males in some database? I mean wth?! Sorry for the ranting but this stuff is just ridiculous.

Originally posted by halfoldman
Yes, menstrual blood and vaginal sex can spread HIV, but without males I still find the spread unlikely.

You may find it unlikely, but ask any lesbian. They still worry about HIV because it is spread through oral sex. Yes, that includes lesbians.

What is the Risk of HIV for Lesbians?

According to the Centers for Disease Control, documented cases of female-to-female transmission of HIV appears to be a rare occurrence. The CDC reports there are case reports of female-to-female transmission of HIV, but it does not specify how many. From the CDC web site: "The well documented risk of female-to-male transmission of HIV shows that vaginal secretions and menstrual blood may contain the virus and that mucous membrane (e.g., oral, vaginal) exposure to these secretions has the potential to lead to HIV infection."

lesbianlife.about.com...

It may be rarer than man sex, but it still DOES exist. And has been documented by the CDC.

How is the tester exposing his/her body fluids to HIV-positive blood/semen?

I'm not the one who suggested that. Maybe ask Stinkyfeet that question.

reply to post by Nutter


Hmm.. that's not fun. Hard to put a mouth condom on... And unless you are meticulous about a good manicure, the cuticles around finger nails provide plenty of locations for bodily fluids to seep in as well.

Maybe the solution is open and free sex until a natural immunity to the various forms of the virus naturally emerges? *grin*

Originally posted by rogerstigers
Hmm.. that's not fun. Hard to put a mouth condom on...

Not really.

The female condom is a sleeve-like device made of polyurethane. It has a small closed end, and a larger open end. Each end contains a flexible ring.

womenshealth.about.com...

I swear the educational system in this country (and the world) is too conservative. We need to get past all this and educate people. Talk about less risk.....a well educated person has the best defense.

And unless you are meticulous about a good manicure, the cuticles around finger nails provide plenty of locations for bodily fluids to seep in as well.

Very true.

Maybe the solution is open and free sex until a natural immunity to the various forms of the virus naturally emerges? *grin*

Maybe it would just be better to not get the virus to begin with? That means using condoms, gloves, and yes, vaginal condoms. This includes all sex, i.e. oral.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by Nutter]

reply to post by Nutter

Maybe it would just be better to not get the virus to begin with? That means using condoms, gloves, and yes, vaginal condoms. This includes all sex, i.e. oral.

Is this what you have in mind ?

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by rogerstigers
Maybe the solution is open and free sex until a natural immunity to the various forms of the virus naturally emerges? *grin*

Maybe it would just be better to not get the virus to begin with? That means using condoms, gloves, and yes, vaginal condoms. This includes all sex, i.e. oral.

[edit on 13-10-2009 by Nutter]

Just lightening the mood a bit. I can't imagine we could get everyone to agree to something like this anyway... It was a tounge in cheek remark. (yes, pun intended)

[edit on 10-13-2009 by rogerstigers]

reply to post by rogerstigers


No worries. I had an incling that you were being facetous.

Oh, and moocowman, that was funny too. It would be hilarious if it weren't true though.



[edit on 13-10-2009 by Nutter]

"Nutter" and others, lets be honest. If you access your HIV risk on Medhelp and other sites 'mainicured nails' would have you ejected. Although I would dispute this, they even regard oral sex as "safe". The real risk factors for men are the fissuring/tearing involved in anal sex, and particularly the cells on the underside of the penis in uncircumcised "straight" men. This is where most HIV is spread. It is not an easy virus to contract, and a number of factors are involved. HIV needs a certain statistical momentum to survive and spread. I would argue that lesbianism or medical needle-stick injury could not suffice to keep the virus actively spreading. But that's hypothetical, to the detriment of HIV prevention, people LIE on how they got it. To sum up, with modern rapid tests, needle-stick injury is virtually impossible. A bigger danger (as I've seen on the Crime Channel) are the odd sociopathic doctors and nurses, who infect patients deliberately. The odds here are higher than getting it from an open HIV-victim, but still very low.
Take this scenario, if you want to be paranoid: YOU ARE ARRESTED INNOCENTLY AND RAPED IN JAIL BY AN HIV-POZ THUG. So forget manicures and dated needles, and focus on YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS.
So, stay safe, condomize and watch your civil rights.

The AIDS virus is a manufactured bio-weapon that was originally concocted in a defense department lab...

It's first use was to wipe out large portions of Africans....then it found it's way to the homosexual and intravenous drug communities...

WOW.. tptb got a three for one!!

Instead of blaming the victims of this eugenics program maybe we should be blaming the sick perpetrators.....

Shouldn't love win out over hate.? If two people that happen to be of the same sex fall in love and want to spend their lives together shouldn't that be respected?

I"ll take peace and love over war and hate any day..

PEACE and LOVE...