Staff Reports
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has announced their decision to end special requirements for gay blood donors. In a shocking move that disregards the safety of potential recipients, the FDA will now use the same eligibility questionnaire for all donors, regardless of sexual orientation. The agency is completely ignoring the increased risk of HIV that gay and bisexual men pose when donating blood. Rather than prioritizing safety concerns, the FDA wants to increase the pool of blood donors, regardless of the risk.
The Food and Drug Administration finalized new guidance on Thursday that will allow more gay and bisexual men to donate blood. https://t.co/qjCg49icHS
— Axios (@axios) May 11, 2023
Under the new rules, every blood donor will be asked the same questions about recent sexual history, eliminating time-based deferrals for men who have sex with men and women who have sex with women. The questionnaire will no longer address the specific risks that gay and bisexual men present. Prospective donors will now be able to give blood regardless of sexual orientation so long as they simply say no to both prompts about recent sexual behavior. This is a tragic move that prioritizes the LGBTQI+ community’s agenda over the safety of potential recipients.
🚨BREAKING🚨 We’re finally going to end the gay blood ban! The FDA just finalized recommendations for assessing blood donor eligibility regardless of sexual orientation, sex or gender. https://t.co/IFBHOpl74Y
— Eric Rosswood (@LGBT_Activist) May 11, 2023
The FDA barred all gay and bisexual men from donating blood between 1983 and 2015 due to HIV concerns, and imposed eligibility questionnaires for gay prospective donors. With this new decision, the FDA has overturned that commitment to safety and is putting personal beliefs before scientific evidence. Potentially dangerous blood is sure to slip through the cracks, and the risks confront the most vulnerable among us.
Although the FDA admits it evaluated its policies and individual risk assessment, the decision still seems hasty and based more on pressure from LGBT activists than sound scientific evidence. The new policy is simply a victory for the LGBT community at the expense of the health and safety of blood recipients. Dr. Peter Marks, director of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, celebrated the change in policy as a win for the LGBTQI+ community, proving that politics has overtaken public safety in this latest move by the FDA.
In conclusion, this decision by the FDA to end special requirements for gay blood donors is alarming. The implications of such a choice are potentially dangerous and the effects may be felt for years to come. A commitment to safety should not be compromised in deference to political correctness.
