Okay heres the link to the article I’m talking about: http://www.gazette.uwo.ca/pdf/Gazette-2007-11-14.pdf
So theres this debate going on around campus about Canadian Blood Service’s policy on not allowing men who have had sex with men (MSM) to donate blood. Its become this big uproar with protest demonstrations by a group called Stand Against Queer Discrimination (SAQD). I think this is a load of annoying bullshit. The policy was never meant to discriminate again homosexuals. It was directed at a high-risk activity that is associated with high rates of HIV transmission. This doesn’t mean that Gay men are promiscuous or “dirty”, just unfortunately HIV has become more prevalent in their form of sexual activity. The statistics are there and really SAQD should be addressing the issues of HIV transmission is MSM, not CBS’s policy on blood donation. But anyways, here is a letter to the editor I wanted to send in, but didn’t because I’m scared of this SAQD group coming after me… Protest groups on campus are dangerous sometimes!
“Here are some other facts about CBS’s bloody policy that seems to have been overlooked in this debate:
Currently CBS’ indefinite deferral policy also includes two other groups that SAQD has failed to mention in their arguments. Anyone who has received blood transfusions in Africa, engaged in sexual activities in Africa or lived in 8 listed African countries is not allowed to donate blood. Anyone who has lived in the United Kingdom and areas of Europe from 1980 to 1996 are also not allowed to donate blood.
Why isn’t there a S.A.A/E.D (Standing Against African/European Discrimination) group? Because these groups understand that the policy is not directed at their ethnic, racial or cultural backgrounds: it is a protective policy against statistics that have indicated high rates of HIV/AIDS and CJD in Africa and Europe, respectively.
So why is that that one group feels singled out? I think it’s because they don’t understand that CBS is not directing their policy at gays and homosexuals. It is directed towards a high-risk activity that unfortunately seems to be correlated with an increased risk of HIV transmission. Gay men who do not engage in MSM are still allowed to donate, and Lesbian women are allowed to donate too! In fact, as another student pointed out, those men who are not allowed to donate blood still have the option of donating their time and money.
So instead of lying on the floor (with misspelled tombstones: Jacob Orosco was 17 when he died), I invite the SAQD to direct their time and energy to more purposeful activities such as volunteering with CBS. By attempting to ban CBS from campus, they are risking someone’s life by preventing a kind-hearted student from donating blood.
Volunteer positions with CBS are available at www.blood.ca“
I’d also like to point out something else no one has researched. CBS was created after a scandal in 1980-1996 in which the Canadian Red Cross was brought to court for infecting 2000 people with HIV and 20 000 people with Hep C in a span of 10-15years. The Canadian Red Cross’s blood donation services were shut down and the government created CBS to start a new and more effective blood service system. People have to realize that Canada’s blood supply was considered one of the poorest in the world in the early 1990’s. We must have strict restrictions on our blood supply or we risk the health of the general population and our health industry reputation in the world. Stephen Harper just offered to pay over a million to survivors of the HIV-tainted blood. Sadly, the majority are dead now. I’m not saying that blood came from someone who engaged in MSM because it could easily have come from anyone of any sexual orientation or ethnic background due to poor screening back then. But we need to be extra careful nowadays and that is EXACTLY what CBS is doing. If SAQD is successful in banning CBS from campus, I’m going to be on of the first people writing to USC to fight it.
