Social Gays can now donate blood!

About 13 1/2 million pints of blood are donated a year in the US. That's a lot of testing if they test every pint. Some how I don't think they do.
 
About 13 1/2 million pints of blood are donated a year in the US. That's a lot of testing if they test every pint. Some how I don't think they do.

"Things are imperfect, this is my argument."
 
Donating plasma IS donating blood. You can't "donate plasma" without blood draw. This is hair-splitting.

If you dont want HIV (you dont get AIDS from blood), then pay for the cost of testing. It's weird to argue that you dont want a thing but you dont want to pay for the thing that would make sure you dont get the thing from ANYONE. Because the fact is that there's still nearly 40% of people who have HIV who arent gay.

BTW there ain't no "you guys" here. I'm heterosexual. I just think discrimination is stupid when technology efficiently addresses risks, especially being as I live in a City where the worst massacre in US History happened and Hospitals literally ran out of blood in a single night.
Relax, homophobe, you don't have to sound so repulsed by someone pointing out the risks of your 'lifestyle".

They don't efficiently address the risks, hence the time frame of the restrictions being the exact window of detection. If they're able to do it better now, great, but they didn't really say whether they have or not, they just declared that they don't care anymore. If you went to Lesotho and barebacked a shemale 2 weeks ago, I'd still prefer a lesbian's blood to rolling the dice with yours if I needed a transfusion.
 
Means that your "concerns" about the cost of blood tests are horseshit
Lol, I was like 5 when this was implemented during the AIDS epidemic, so they aren't my concerns, and they're concerns of the most irresponsible spenders in existence, that should tell you something. And if that's not enough for you, it isn't even accurate because you can get a false negative in the 90 day window.
 
The thing that’s always been amusing giving blood is the questionnaire and how it approaches that subject. Something along the lines of “If male, have you ever had a sexual encounter with another man, even once?” or something like that. I want to know who determined the even just once part. And beyond that, how many read the first part, thinking nah, but then got to the even just once and then was like, well okay.
 
if theyve always tested, then whats the issue? there still going to test. just like they always have.
so your not going to be more likely to get aids, or teh ghey
The issue is that because of political correctness people whose lifestyles were deemed high risk are now allowed to give blood when they should continue to not be able to. Why increase the risk even if slightly just so people's feelings aren't hurt?
 
And how exactly would you legitimately filter out people who engage in "risky behavior?" A f*ckin questionnaire? Booty-hole inspections?

Suggesting that anyone can legitimately purity test medical procedures is more idiotic than just spending the money by a Country mile.

well i guess you could always check their recycling boxes to see if there's any empties of bud light in there.
 
This is how we get you suckers. Turn you gay from the inside. First George Soros and Bill Gates put the nanobots in your blood with the COVID vax, now the gay blood will activate it.

xander-jeanneret-laugh.gif
Pretty soon we will have all the right wingers chopping their dicks and gluing them their daughters. Our plan is almost complete!

<{jackyeah}>
 
Doesn't matter to me, I'm sure they will screen to see if this blood is good.

Doesn't bother me.
 
Donating plasma IS donating blood. You can't "donate plasma" without blood draw. This is hair-splitting.

If you dont want HIV (you dont get AIDS from blood), then pay for the cost of testing. It's weird to argue that you dont want a thing but you dont want to pay for the thing that would make sure you dont get the thing from ANYONE. Because the fact is that there's still nearly 40% of people who have HIV who arent gay.

BTW there ain't no "you guys" here. I'm heterosexual. I just think discrimination is stupid when technology efficiently addresses risks, especially being as I live in a City where the worst massacre in US History happened and Hospitals literally ran out of blood in a single night.
If you consider the population sizes of gay and heterosexual people, that still means a very large increased relative risk. I don't think gay people make up more than 10% of the population.
 
Last edited:
As long as they’re testing it for the queers disease it’ll be ok.
 
"Things are imperfect, this is my argument."

Yes I also think a blood drive to get prostitutes to donate would be a bad idea. It's about risky lifestyle no mater what sex.
 
Can I opt out of AIDS blood?
 
if theyve always tested, then whats the issue? there still going to test. just like they always have.
so your not going to be more likely to get aids, or teh ghey
The issue some could say is that you are introducing potentially tainted blood into the pool. It increases the chance for an oversight or miss testing and then potentially tainted blood can get into the pool. This could happen with blood from straight people as well though.
 
Back
Top