3 of 5

Write now Article Tools

Do doubt a ban on all homosexuals from donating blood is a bit extreme. If nothing else this policy reflects the nature of gross classifications of people places and things. For instance, the fact that most terrorist activities today are coming from the Muslim population has the effect of labeling all people of the Islamic faith as extremists and terrorists. Not all whites are perfect, not all blacks are rappers, not all Jews are money mongers etc.

What is most odd about a ban on blood donations from any "group" of people is the nagging question of why they cannot be tested individually to see if their blood is acceptable? Is there some unknown "G" factor in the gay population that is not traceable or detectable by modern medicine? Are they really afraid that this "G" factor will infect others and make them gay as well?

To become even more befuddled you would have to know the story behind the HIV virus which is actually a tale of political manipulation, fraud, drug company money and prejudice without compare. The story begins with the discovery and manufacture of the "T" cell counter. Even today no one really knows what a "T" cell does accept that it appears to be part of the immune system. A student intern at the USC hospital saw this machine sitting around doing nothing and asked if he could use it to take "T" cell counts from the people at the hospital (blood tests). He wanted to do his thesis on this project and determine a "norm" for this cell in the human body.

After receiving approval he stumbled across two men who had virtually no "T" cells in their bodies. By their own admission both men were homosexual and used the drug ecstasy to excess. Although not proven, it is generally believed in the medical community that this drug is what damaged their immune system. How this happened is part of the mystery. This is why they called the condition AIDS. Whether the chemicals in this drug can be transferred to another in a transfusion with the same results is also something in question.

Because the gay contingent resented any implication that their life style was not normal they put pressure on congress to remove any implications that AIDS was the result of drug use by their "group." Thus, began the quest to discover a cause for AIDS that would prove that was a disease as a result of an infection by a virus or bacteria or something. Since the lowly HIV retrovirus was discovered about the same time and didn't seem to have any purpose like the "T" cell the government started funding people to prove that this retrovirus could cause AIDS.

The fact is that the HIV retrovirus has always existed in about 12% of the world population and is not discriminatory has largely been ignored. Men, women, blacks, whites, browns and all mixes in between share this retrovirus universally. As an organism it barely exists. It is essentially a cellular aberration that is passed on genetically from mother to children. It does nothing, it cannot do anything, it only feeds off of the cell it is attached to and it cannot multiply. As a result of this it is fairly certain that people with this retrovirus have been donating blood since blood donations were invented with no documented side effects.

So, if there is a valid reason for the FDA ban on homosexual blood donations then it would have to have something to do with homosexuals using drugs to enhance the sexual experience. The overriding concern would be that these drugs could have the effect of destroying the immune system if they are transferred via transfusion. The only question in my mind is: Is anyone sure that Viagra eventually won't have the same effect?

Learn more about this author, Rahn Heart.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Critique of FDA policies banning blood donations from homosexuals?
We want to hear your view. Write now!