Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Gay blood donors would bring “infection and death” claims Red Cross

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Bob Hoskins 12 Aug 2008, 12:32am

    I’m a gay guy and I am not offended by the restrictions. It is NOT discrimination to protect the blood supply and I’m disappointed in these extremist gays who try to say otherwise.

    Just so you all know, the extremist gays do NOT represent everybody who is gay. I support the ban and I hope it continues. And I say this as an HIV negative gay man. I would not want any blood transfusion I’d need after surgery contaminated by HIV so I appreciate the red cross taking the steps necessary to secure the blood supply.

  2. You really support a ban that is based on prejudice and hysteria rather than sound science and medical opinion?

    I’m not sure who the “extremist gays” you refer to are, but I’ve not seen anyone trying to represent everyone that’s gay – just speaking-out and trying to make things better and more equal for everyone. Presumably you would consider members of the French Resistance or those who tried to alert the world to what was really going on in those internment camps (read:death camps) during the second world war as extremists too?

    Noone would want a blood transfusion to be anything other than safe, but this blanket ban is far from safe. It precludes hundreds of thousands of suitable donors from increasing a dwindling supply. If I needed a blood transfusion I’d want it to be safe, but more importantly I’d want there to actually be some blood!

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all