Back when the AIDS crisis was first becoming a major public issue, gay and bisexual men who had had sex with another man since 1977 were prohibited from donating blood. Now, 32 years later, they still can’t donate, despite the fact that modern HIV screening processes are so advanced.
The Food and Drug Administration’s 17-member Blood Products Advisory Panel met last week to review the status of the rule and whether or not it’s appropriate to retract it. They decided the prohibition needs to stay in place – even without an official vote.
Mother Jones pointed out why this ruling was a disappointment, considering it doesn’t actually seem to be a majority opinion.
When Investment Rhymes with Canada
Canada has a proud history of achievement in the areas of science and technology, and the field of biomanufacturing and life sciences is no exception.
Last month, a different committee of medical experts convened by the Department of Health and Human Services voted 16-2 in favor of a hypothetical rule that would let men give blood so long as they had not had sex with another man for at least a year. And while even this may be overkill—modern blood tests can detect HIV within a few weeks of infection—it is less discriminatory than the current ban.
The panel’s decision is frustrating for those members of the LGBT community who believe firmly that research showing that the prohibition isn’t necessary is already available.
“It was met with an alarming amount of resistance that I just didn’t expect,” said Ryan James Yezak, founder of the National Gay Blood Drive, who gave a presentation for the panel. “That’s simply not true,” Yezak told Mother Jones about the claim that research is lacking. “There is evidence that supports moving to a one-year deferral, at the minimum.”
Yezak referenced the one-year deferral policy in place in Australia and a study demonstrating its success. He even brought up the fact that the Red Cross and American Medical Association support the idea of a similar policy. But the panel wasn’t convinced.
“I felt like it went in one ear and out the other,” Yezak said. “I may as well have not been there, because I don’t feel like the discussion reflected what happened at the HHS meeting.”
It rarely happens, but there is a possibility that the FDA could still put a policy like this in place without the approval from the BPAP. Chances are slim, though, even if there is a national blood shortage.
[Photo from flickr user ec-jpr]
