Santa Clara County supervisors should oppose FDA blood ban
Please note: the title was copied verbatim from the article and in fact seems a bit of a misnomer. Given a chance to retitle it I would have said "Santa Clara County Supervisors decide to oppose FDA blood ban." As this is not an Op/Ed, the term "should" is perhaps misleading, and implies that that is the author's opinion note that of the Santa Clara County board of supervisors.
Santa Clara County supervisors should oppose FDA blood ban
POLICY CALLED DISCRIMINATORY TO GAY MEN
By Deborah Lohse
Mercury News
Article Launched: 02/15/2008 01:39:11 AM PST
Santa Clara County should formally oppose the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's ban on blood donations from gay men, a board of supervisors' committee agreed Thursday.
Since 1983, the FDA has banned blood donations from any man who has had sex with another man since 1977. FDA officials argue that such donors are 60 percent more likely to have HIV-infected blood than the rest of the population.
But the Red Cross and other blood-donation groups say blood testing is now so advanced that donations can be adequately screened for HIV; they also note that other people who are at risk of HIV infection are not banned for life from giving blood. The groups have recommended allowing blood donations from men who have not had sex with another man for at least 12 months.
Several student and nurses groups across the country have issued resolutions in opposition to the FDA's lifetime ban. The president of San Jose State University recently banned blood drives on campus, saying the FDA rule violates its non-discrimination policies.
Not everyone agreed with San Jose State's stand.
Vincent Yalon, administrative director of Stanford Blood Center, told committee members that while he agreed the FDA's policy is "overly restrictive," banning blood drives unfairly penalizes those who need blood.
He said already only 38 percent of the population is eligible to give blood, and of those, only 3 percent do so. According to the Red Cross, other reasons why
Advertisement
people may be turned down as blood donors range from recent tattoos to having lived in England between 1980 and 1996; health officials worry in the latter case about "mad cow" disease. (Go to www.redcross.org/services/biomed/0,1082,0_557_,00.html for more information about eligibility.)
The county committee, made up of two members from the five-member board of supervisors, did not seek to ban blood drives on county grounds. They noted that because blood-drive organizers are following the law, they are not violating county policies.
But Supervisors Liz Kniss and Ken Yeager said the county ought to try to get the FDA to change its policy.
Said Yeager, who is gay: "We see so many archaic and discriminatory laws that prevent gay Americans from being full participants in society."
As a result of Thursday's vote, the full board of supervisors will discuss in the near future whether to issue a formal "resolution" opposing the ban.
Santa Clara County supervisors should oppose FDA blood ban
POLICY CALLED DISCRIMINATORY TO GAY MEN
By Deborah Lohse
Mercury News
Article Launched: 02/15/2008 01:39:11 AM PST
Santa Clara County should formally oppose the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's ban on blood donations from gay men, a board of supervisors' committee agreed Thursday.
Since 1983, the FDA has banned blood donations from any man who has had sex with another man since 1977. FDA officials argue that such donors are 60 percent more likely to have HIV-infected blood than the rest of the population.
But the Red Cross and other blood-donation groups say blood testing is now so advanced that donations can be adequately screened for HIV; they also note that other people who are at risk of HIV infection are not banned for life from giving blood. The groups have recommended allowing blood donations from men who have not had sex with another man for at least 12 months.
Several student and nurses groups across the country have issued resolutions in opposition to the FDA's lifetime ban. The president of San Jose State University recently banned blood drives on campus, saying the FDA rule violates its non-discrimination policies.
Not everyone agreed with San Jose State's stand.
Vincent Yalon, administrative director of Stanford Blood Center, told committee members that while he agreed the FDA's policy is "overly restrictive," banning blood drives unfairly penalizes those who need blood.
He said already only 38 percent of the population is eligible to give blood, and of those, only 3 percent do so. According to the Red Cross, other reasons why
Advertisement
people may be turned down as blood donors range from recent tattoos to having lived in England between 1980 and 1996; health officials worry in the latter case about "mad cow" disease. (Go to www.redcross.org/services/biomed/0,1082,0_557_,00.html for more information about eligibility.)
The county committee, made up of two members from the five-member board of supervisors, did not seek to ban blood drives on county grounds. They noted that because blood-drive organizers are following the law, they are not violating county policies.
But Supervisors Liz Kniss and Ken Yeager said the county ought to try to get the FDA to change its policy.
Said Yeager, who is gay: "We see so many archaic and discriminatory laws that prevent gay Americans from being full participants in society."
As a result of Thursday's vote, the full board of supervisors will discuss in the near future whether to issue a formal "resolution" opposing the ban.