If you're gay keep your heart to yourself?

[shade_42]

CBC just issued this article about sexually-active gays being prevented from becoming organ donors. Or are they? Sounds like there are a few groups in the organ chain of command that disagree

Comments

[ramou]

We should exclude black people, you know? More of them have AIDS than anyone else? Is that true? Lots of people in Africa have AIDS, and I hear they're mostly black or something? What does that have to do with anything? Nothing, but it sure makes people feel good to single out some other group as not good enough... it's just more PC to pick on gay men than black men these days. Or, as I like to put it, gay is the new black.

Exclude someone because they have many partners, perhaps. Then make that exclusion across the board, man or woman, gay or straight.

[shade_42]

I don't think it's quite that black and white (pun intended).

Also, that becomes a question that is harder to ask these 3rd party people. So Mrs. Hefner, did your newly-dead husband have a lot of sexual partners in the last 5 years? We need to know for the organ donation. In all honesty she may not know. Then again she may not know if he's gay either.

[ramou]

Heh,that's a good way of considering it. If you're going to ask questions that might make people uncomfortable, ask questions that are immediately relevant. How much does it suck to be asked a question that is both uncomfortable, and not relevant?

Qualification: Ask the questions that are important. If people want to donate organs, they're putting the onus on their family/friends (whoever the fuck will be asked) to make sure propriety of the process is maintained. That means it's perfectly appropriate for important questions to asked of those associated. Does being gay make you high risk, or does having lots of sexual partners make you high risk? That's back to your original point, what are the numbers? What's the causal relation? Is it simple enough that it can be dumbed down to the question of "are you gay". I too suspect that the answer to that is no, or maybe nobody knows.

[finneco]

People disagree about the statistics and the studies, but from what I have heard, the distinction isn't warranted, or at least is badly phrased

[shade_42]

All good points, one question it raises for me is that if blood takes several weeks to check for various infections, would organs be take just as long?

Assuming they did, and considering we don't keep people on life support when there is someone in the next room who needs a new kidney right now, do these questions become more important? They're also less trustworthy as you are asking a 3rd party

[finneco]

in terms of growth and measurement, since all statistics will be old, the measurement of the rates of growth should not be ignored. If a steady fast trend up was recorded over a period of time in one group, and a down-trend in another group, you have to consider how old your statistics are. If your static statistics are stale, the trend may be more relevant, no?

Oh, and didn't you know, 69% of statistics are made up on the spot.

[shade_42]

Your argument suggests that the trend of infection shouldn't be neglected, and I grant you that, but it doesn't match your conclusion that the trend will be more relevant than the total if your data is older. Remember my total number and my rate of growth number will be equally old, therefore equally untrustworthy.

Your certainly correct that if I know last year's total and rate of growth I can estimate this year's total, but the moment I suggest my data is too old, all of it is suspect.

Stats don't give you exactly right answers, but with care they can give you educated guesses. Sometimes that is all we need, often that is all we've got.

[metawidget]

As with blood, I think the question should be reduced to "any new sex partners, or sex partners' sex partners, or even suspected additions to your network of sexual contact, in the past year?" (or similar period of time) Just like tattoos and dental work and stuff, but a bit more so.

Not that it'd ever be allowed to be that simple.

[shade_42]

The problem there is that it runs the significant risk of cutting off too much or your supply.

Let's play with stereotypes: Guys on motorcycles are dead sexy and are an excellent source of organs. So, if your crotch rocket successfully gets you both laid and killed (thus fulfilling your goal and mine, respectively), I can't use you anymore.

[zedinbed]

Since they test all blood collected for viral diseases anyway, I don't understand the ban on gay men donating blood. That's a potential 10% of the population and probably a 10% that tends to be above average active in humanitarian issues like blood donation.

[shade_42]

Agreed, I think in the blood donation case it is a cost vs. care issue and potentially a transport across province thing as mentioned by Finneco.

Are organs a different story because they really are a case-by-case basis and you can't wait for a time-consuming disease culture? I think the circumstances are different and so these sorts of concerns should be addressed, but I don't think this is the best way to do it.

If I get a chunk of your liver, I don't care if you you preferred cosmos, Pat's Blue Ribbon or Miller light. I do care if you have AIDs or a flavour of Hep. As it stands we are asking the about the former when we should be asking the latter.

Finding that right question and answer through questions or tech is proving tricky, and this interim solution does make me uncomfortable.

[shade_42]

Ab aside about oft-touted the 10%. That is the number most people glean from the Kinsey reports and the author himself didn't like it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_report#Sexual_orientation

I suspect those 10% and the people who have had man-on-man sex in the last 5 years are not complete overlaps.

I think asking if you've performed actions considered to be high risk is a more relevant question than whether or not you identify as gay. However 'better' is not the same as 'good'.

[zedinbed]

So, gay guys are statistically more likely to be humanitarian? I've found that an equal portion of people in populations of all varieties are both assholes and nice (not equality between those two extremes, but between the curves of different groups). This is a case of the whole over-compensative reverse bigotry that's easy to do. I only know nice gay guys, but that's because I try only to get to know nice people. When I find assholes, putting effort into finding out whether they're gay or not is not high on my list of priorities.

In short, if I'm going to be quick about coming down on people who make bigoted comments in a negative fashion, I should point out when people look to be talking out their asses on the positive end too.

[quikchange]

Hmm. Yet another case where I'm left baffled as to why simple market forces are being ignored. Given the high demand for blood, I would have thought that people would be going out of their way to accept as much blood as possible. I certainly am not inclined to donate any of mine when I hear that others more willing than I are being turned down.

[shade_42]

You're ignoring liability. The tainted Hep cases that created huge public furor don't help anyone. Yes we need the blood (or organs in this case, people seem to keep forgetting) but the governements liability to the tainted blood victimes cost them millions, was a PR disaster and caused the National Red Cross organization responsible for blood to be disbanded in favour of provincial organizations. I don't know if the provicial model is an improvement or not but the shake-up couldn't have been cheap.

If they'll take your blood, for now at least I think you should donate. You aren't punishing the people you're justifiably mad at by making this particular stand.

As for your organs, I still think you should wear a helmet when bike riding.

[quikchange]

You're correct. I was ignoring liability. Mea culpa.

I'm sill not prepared to donate my blood but signing up to be an organ donor is something I've been strongly considering. I wonder what the procedure is...

And I do wear a helmet. I even have lights!