Canadian Blood Services (CBS) says it plans to introduce the new behaviour-based questionnaire approach “no later” than Sept. 30. It will apply to both blood and plasma donations, outside of Quebec.
It will mean that when all donors are screened before rolling up their sleeves, they’ll be asked whether they have recently engaged in anal sex in the context of new or multiple sexual partners within the last few months. If they have, they would not be able to donate until they had gone three months without engaging in that activity.
I thought that change (2022) was the end of the discussion.
Tragically, no. I thought so too until quite recently. They did improve things but it’s pretty rough
Since a viral load can be reduced to zero through medication, HIV-positive folks can be non contagious. The use of condoms, even if the viral load is not suppressed through medication, seriously reduces the risk of HIV transmission. They don’t ask questions about condom usage. To be clear I’m not suggesting that HIV-positive folks should be donating blood, just that the actual factors for transmission are way more specific than “butt stuff = AIDS” the way that they imply. The result of this is still excluding queer folks end up getting excluded with language that’s less overtly hostile and more implicitly hostile.
The screening doesn’t exclude people based how many partners a person has slept with, or whether they have used protection (both of which are massive risk factors for transmission) and instead basically forbids anyone who engages in anal sex from donating blood.
I don’t know about Canada; but over here you only get those questions if they deem you a high risk group and; depending on your responses; if they think you’re gay and had sex in the last year, you’re not allowed to donate.
It sounds like Canada is only okay w gays donating blood if they’re in a heteronormative couple, which; I’m willing to bet; is as a depressingly tiny minority of gay men like it is in the United States.
Sometimes, the smart prejudice is subtle or hidden in the details so that it’s more palatable to the rest and/or to confuse those who don’t look too closely.
Are they?
I thought that change (2022) was the end of the discussion.
Tragically, no. I thought so too until quite recently. They did improve things but it’s pretty rough
Since a viral load can be reduced to zero through medication, HIV-positive folks can be non contagious. The use of condoms, even if the viral load is not suppressed through medication, seriously reduces the risk of HIV transmission. They don’t ask questions about condom usage. To be clear I’m not suggesting that HIV-positive folks should be donating blood, just that the actual factors for transmission are way more specific than “butt stuff = AIDS” the way that they imply. The result of this is still excluding queer folks end up getting excluded with language that’s less overtly hostile and more implicitly hostile.
The screening doesn’t exclude people based how many partners a person has slept with, or whether they have used protection (both of which are massive risk factors for transmission) and instead basically forbids anyone who engages in anal sex from donating blood.
They also are prudes about trading cocaine for sex.
The last time I donated blood (quite recently) I was asked if I had had a new sex partner or more than one sex partner the last 3 months.
I was asked if I had had sex with anyone within the last year that had previously had/ tested positive for hiv/aids.
I was asked if I had taken any hiv/aids preventers.
Is it the follow-up questions to these initial screening questions that are homophobic?
I don’t know about Canada; but over here you only get those questions if they deem you a high risk group and; depending on your responses; if they think you’re gay and had sex in the last year, you’re not allowed to donate.
It sounds like Canada is only okay w gays donating blood if they’re in a heteronormative couple, which; I’m willing to bet; is as a depressingly tiny minority of gay men like it is in the United States.
Sometimes, the smart prejudice is subtle or hidden in the details so that it’s more palatable to the rest and/or to confuse those who don’t look too closely.