Many Americans donate blood every day, given the myriad of diseases and accidents in which a blood donation is a lifesaving measure. However, that does not mean that every American has the opportunity to donate blood, as MHS alumnus David Sherlock, who is currently a sophomore at Binghamton University, soon learned when he tried to donate a few weeks ago.

He began the registration process like any other person would. “I got my finger pricked, my blood pressure taken, and was asked to answer a series of questions on their computer,” Sherlock said.

Such questions asked if he had ever used any intravenous drugs, slept with a prostitute, or engaged in any form of sexual activity with another man since 1977. Thinking nothing of it, Sherlock truthfully answered these questions, which included responding “yes” to the last one.

He was then approached by a representative from the American Red Cross telling him that he was immediately deferred from donating. Soon after, the representative told Sherlock that he wasn’t simply deferred from donating; he was banned for life.

“I asked if anything was in motion to change this policy, and [the representative] informed me that nothing was currently underway,” Sherlock said. “I thanked her for her time and left the donation site with my lifetime deferral sheet in hand.”

Many other men have shared David Sherlock’s experience. The Food and Drug Administration classifies IV drug users, people who have spent more than five years since 1980 in a country that has contained mad cow disease and men who have had sex with men (MSM) since 1977 as the highest-risk blood donors in the country.

The FDA’s policy of indefinitely deferring MSM was first instituted in 1983, citing a significantly higher risk of transmitting HIV, hepatitis B, and other infections that can be spread by transfusion. The institution of the policy was also justified by past inability to properly test blood or plasma for HIV. Pressured to act, the FDA placed a ban on sexually active gay men — the group most likely to spread the virus.

“Having had a low number of partners is known to decrease the risk of HIV infection,” the FDA said in an official statement on the MSM ban. “However, to date, no donor eligibility questions have been shown to reliably identify a subset of MSM who do not still have a substantially increased rate of HIV infection.”

Still, researchers and activist groups believe that a lifelong deferral is excessive and unreasonable. Advances in medical science and technology have significantly reduced the risk of contracting HIV through blood transfusions by detecting the virus before it can infect the blood supply. In 2008, the FDA approved the use of a nucleic acid-based test for HIV to detect infected blood samples, streamlining the screening process.

“Our organizations do not believe the data regarding quarantine release errors justify a different deferral period for MSM than that for individuals with similar high-risk sexual behavior,” a joint statement by the American Red Cross, America’s Blood Centers, and American Association of Blood Banks (AABC) said. “There is no sound rationale for focusing on [quarantine release error] numbers as a justification for a near lifetime deferral…”

Additionally, members of the MHS Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA) club have voiced their concerns over the ban.

“When you think about it, anyone can get an STD,” sophomore Martin Hogan said. “I don’t think that [the ban on gay men] makes any sense.”

GSA adviser Ms. Eileen Lind suggested that the United States should look to see how other countries handle MSM donating blood.

“Spain and Italy ask [gay men] questions differently so that they are given the opportunity to donate,” Ms. Lind said. “These countries don’t necessarily ban only gay men from donating blood, but rather anyone who has participated in any activity that would be considered a high-risk for acquiring HIV.”

Scientists and researchers have also stepped forward in opposition of the FDA’s MSM policy; William Kobler, board member of the American Medical Association, called the lifetime deferral policy “discriminatory and not based on sound science.”

“This new policy urges a federal policy change to ensure blood donation bans or deferrals are applied to donors according to their individual level of risk and are not based on sexual orientation alone,” Kobler said.

Regardless of the number of partners one has had or whether or not safe sex practices were performed, a man who has had even one sexual encounter with another man in the past thirty-seven years is deferred indefinitely. Still, the AABB’s donation screening allows heterosexuals who have had sexual contact with prostitutes or someone with HIV, hepatitis B, or IV drug users to be deferred for up to only 12 months.

Moreover, banning all men who have had sex with men prevents a large number of homosexual and bisexual men, like David, from being able to perform a civic duty that could save thousands of lives.

“People perceive of giving blood as a civic duty,” Brian Moulton, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, said. “The current policy puts gay and bisexual men who are going to be honest in an awkward position during a blood drive.”

Rather than dealing with the potentially dangerous effects of such actions, the FDA should focus on reforming the stringent ban.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), sixty-three percent of those who were newly infected with HIV in 2010 were MSM. Naturally, the FDA cannot simply ignore this fact. However, that does not mean that they should instill a policy that was created in 1983 when there have since been numerous technological and medical innovations.

To be consistent with other HIV risk groups, the FDA could start by enacting a new policy for men who have sex with other men that would defer blood donation for only one year. Additionally, MSM could take biomedical approaches to HIV prevention.

As described by the CDC, there is pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in which individuals can take antiretroviral medications before they are potentially exposed to the virus, or post-exposure prophylaxis, in which these individuals could then take antiretroviral medications after possible exposure to HIV. MSM, and any high-risk group, for that matter, should be encouraged to take advantage of these preventative measures. By taking small steps first, the FDA could come to a sound method of blood donation that would not be so discriminatory against healthy, gay men.

The act of removing the FDA’s permanent ban of gay men from donating blood will not only promote social equality, but also save many lives. If the donated blood is clean and safe, what else really matters?