2008 Woodie Awards
Video related to this article is available below.Issue date: 2/28/08 Section: News
UA takes on blood drive issue
Group urges University to examine FDA ban on donations from gay men
Jody Pollock
In 2006, the American Association of Blood Banks, America's Blood Centers and the American Red Cross issued a statement encouraging the FDA to modify its policy by imposing the same yearlong deferral on MSM donors as is required for high-risk heterosexual donors.
"The major blood drive collection agencies on the front lines collecting blood say there's no scientific basis, and [the ban] is no longer relevant," Zhu said. Now, she added, it's Penn's turn.
While some schools, including the University of New Hampshire, have urged the FDA to change its policy, no institution with as prestigious a medical reputation as Penn has made such a statement, said Wharton sophomore and Lambda Alliance chairperson Dennie Zastrow.
"Penn could end up setting the bar," he said.
But some argue Penn has no responsibility or right to do so.
Wharton senior and UA member Alex Flamm, who voted against the proposal, wrote in an e-mail that while he supports the switch to a yearlong deferral, "the FDA's rules are simply not a clear violation of Penn's anti-discrimination policy."
While Flamm wrote that he agrees with the end goals, he does not support University action based on "flimsy arguments of unfair discrimination" rather than on "a serious discussion of the costs versus benefits of changing the ban."
Despite these objections, the proposal is a step forward for the LGBT community on campus, said director of LGBT Center Bob Schoenberg, who called the passage "a victory." But, he continued, "there's a lot more that needs to be done."
"The major blood drive collection agencies on the front lines collecting blood say there's no scientific basis, and [the ban] is no longer relevant," Zhu said. Now, she added, it's Penn's turn.
While some schools, including the University of New Hampshire, have urged the FDA to change its policy, no institution with as prestigious a medical reputation as Penn has made such a statement, said Wharton sophomore and Lambda Alliance chairperson Dennie Zastrow.
"Penn could end up setting the bar," he said.
But some argue Penn has no responsibility or right to do so.
Wharton senior and UA member Alex Flamm, who voted against the proposal, wrote in an e-mail that while he supports the switch to a yearlong deferral, "the FDA's rules are simply not a clear violation of Penn's anti-discrimination policy."
While Flamm wrote that he agrees with the end goals, he does not support University action based on "flimsy arguments of unfair discrimination" rather than on "a serious discussion of the costs versus benefits of changing the ban."
Despite these objections, the proposal is a step forward for the LGBT community on campus, said director of LGBT Center Bob Schoenberg, who called the passage "a victory." But, he continued, "there's a lot more that needs to be done."
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 23
Robby
posted 2/28/08 @ 8:54 AM EST
The UA is getting a little carried away -- while it is one thing to debate the scientific merits of the FDA rules on who can donate blood in order to ensure that the blood supply is safe, it is another thing to question whether to hold blood drives on campus -- with such grave shortages of blood, it is a true act of kindness to donate blood so that ill and injured children and adults can get blood when they are in need of transfusions. (Continued…)
anon, nurse
posted 2/28/08 @ 9:05 AM EST
I think it's interesting that one would view blood donation as a "privilege" enough to call those excluded "discriminated against". It shows that this really is "a matter of principle" concept. (Continued…)
'08 Student
posted 2/28/08 @ 9:44 AM EST
While I am not opposed to the Lambda Alliance's actions, I feel that they are slightly misguided. The underlying problem is that publicly available information on RECENT demographic risk for HIV/AIDS infection is not available. (Continued…)
Laurie Gigliotti
posted 2/28/08 @ 10:08 AM EST
This is ridiculous. The blood donor rules are not there to make people feel good, they exist to save lives. They do not bar "gay" people from donating, just people who have engaged in risky behaviors that may have exposed them to diseases. (Continued…)
mikep89
posted 2/28/08 @ 12:17 PM EST
blood is screened - to uniaterally ban any group of people from donating blood - knowing that blood will be tested anyway is to practice discrimination - but just because some like the form of discrimination or are willing to sacrifice groups who will be discriminated does not make the practice correct. (Continued…)
Typical
posted 2/28/08 @ 12:50 PM EST
So the liberals would rather put everyone at risk of a horrific disease to assuage their own consciences/sense of righteousness than protect the public/innocent patients from even the smallest chance of contracting HIV. (Continued…)
mikep89
posted 2/28/08 @ 1:13 PM EST
this is not a liberal item - all blood is screened and it should all be screened -
if we are only relying on men to reveal if they have had sex with men since the 1970's there is the chance that somebody might not answer truthfully -
what the practice hopes to do is to provide stigma to a group of people already denied basic civil rights under the screen of responsibility. (Continued…)
Alumnus in Support
posted 2/28/08 @ 1:48 PM EST
"In 2006, the American Association of Blood Banks, America's Blood Centers and the American Red Cross issued a statement encouraging the FDA to modify its policy by imposing the same yearlong deferral on MSM donors as is required for high-risk heterosexual donors. (Continued…)
Senior
posted 2/28/08 @ 2:12 PM EST
This is almost as stupid as banning military recruiters from campus because of the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" policy. Note to the Left: if you want to institute change, do it through public opinion campaigns and the courts. (Continued…)
Who do you trust?
posted 2/28/08 @ 2:14 PM EST
Who do trust with determining the best way to maintain a healthy blood supply -- doctors and researchers at the FDA or the LGBT center? Give me a break. (Continued…)
Post a Comment