News
College protests blood drives
Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.
Also by Carolyn Potts:
- Donors to pay dean's salary (December 5, 2008)
- Being Buddhist in a bustling world (December 3, 2008)
- Faculty weighs in on role of student push in voting (October 30, 2008)
- Biddy celebrates UW's future (October 24, 2008)
- Hoffman: Israel is on the watch (October 23, 2008)
Sharing tools:
E-mail this article:
San Jose State University will no longer sponsor blood drives set up by university employees or registered student groups on campus in protest of “a discriminatory government policy.”
SJSU President Don Kassing suspended all blood drives “on the grounds that the U.S. Federal Drug Administration’s lifetime blood donor deferral affecting gay men violates our non-discrimination policy,” he said in an e-mail to SJSU staff.
The FDA currently has a policy stating that any man who has had sex with other men since 1977 —the year the AIDS epidemic came to the United States — will be deferred from donating blood. The administration created the policy in 1983 when the risk of contracting the HIV virus from a blood transfusion was first recognized.
“The policy goes back to original research that showed that homosexual males were at a higher risk for HIV than others,” said Sarah Stevermer, communications and public relations specialist for the American Red Cross.
The university’s policy on non-discrimination states “discrimination of any kind, including … sexual orientation is an affront to the entire university community and is strictly prohibited,” Kassing said in the e-mail to SJSU staff.
Considering the many different screenings that are used to test for diseases such as the HIV virus and Hepatitis B, the American Red Cross has recommended to the FDA that they reassess their deferral policy, Stevermer said.
According to the FDA website, the administration continues to stand by their policy, regardless of the testing that fails to detect less than one in a million HIV-infected donors.
With more than 20 million transfusions of blood, red cell concentrates, plasma or platelets every year, the FDA says even a failure rate of less than one in a million poses a significant risk.
Blood collection agencies near San Jose are not happy with Kassing’s blood drive restriction; at least four blood drives have been canceled because of it, said SJSU’s Media Relations Specialist Pat Harris.
If the University of Wisconsin — with its campus of more than 40,000 students — adopted the same policy as SJSU of suspending all blood drives on campus for the sake of discrimination intolerance, it would have a significant effect on blood banks.
“We get 20 percent of our blood from high schools and universities,” Stevermer said. “If UW did that, it would have a big impact, especially since we have a blood collection agency here on campus.”
Emma Zeldin, events coordinator for the Madison Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer Campus Center, thinks this is a step in the right direction.
“Sometimes you have to make drastic changes to be heard,” she said. “And [the FDA’s deferral policy] is highly discriminatory.”
Zeldin said that nothing will change until homophobia is less rampant in the government and people are more accepting. She says this should not just target homosexual males.
“The important thing is just to acknowledge that many different kinds of people have careless sex,” Zeldin said, “not just homosexual males.”
7 Comments | Leave a comment
Leave a comment
Top Classified Ads (view all)
Place your classified ad online and have it show up here. Your ad will hit thousands of viewers a day!
DON'T READ ME! Too late. If you're reading this, guess how many other people are reading it. See... advertising in The Badger Herald does work!
IP hash: ede94c2d
Nice. Punish those who actually need the blood because you don’t agree with the government’s policy. Real humanitarian.
IP hash: b18628f4
Statistically, African Americans are at greater risk for HIV infection also. Will the Red Cross be banning THEM from donating blood next?
IP hash: d59c084e
“According to the FDA website, the administration continues to stand by their policy, regardless of the testing that fails to detect less than one in a million HIV-infected donors.”
R”egardless”??? Not a chance that the policy has anything to do with this result?
Is the rate of AIDS in homosexual males so low that we don’t have to worry?
It’s just like wondering why the crime rate is lower when more criminals are in jail.
IP hash: 5b8d1dda
The policy is discriminatory against homosexuals, Africans, and a couple of other groups, but this response is totally inappropriate. It should be taken up in court — not paid for with the lives of innocent people.
IP hash: 20ec8ebf
In the long run, correcting the policy now will save more lives in the future when 10 percent more people can donate blood. I wish I could.
IP hash: 20ec8ebf
Also, while we’re talking about the greater good here, are 999,999 successful blood transfusions not worth one mishap? And that’s assuming those million blood donations are all HIV+, so really you could say allowing gays to donate blood could potentially result in one mis-screening for HIV in about 100 million blood donations. Seriously, FDA, reconsider!
IP hash: f188f75c
“The policy is discriminatory against homosexuals, Africans, and a couple of other groups…”
Let’s review the requirements…anyone who lived in Europe for 5 or more years since 1980…..or 3 MONTHS or more in England from 1980-1996. (This is due to Mad Cow disease, for which they cannot test the blood.)
All those people who spent a semester abroad in London from 1980-1996…I sure hope they were screened!
But in the end, it’s all probabilities. (Doesn’t a Big Mac sound good right now??)