Never mind perennial shortage at blood banks. If you’re gay and you want to donate blood you don’t have that option – at least as far as the Capital’s best hospitals go. The blood donation form at Sir Ganga Ram Hospital for instance lists homosexuality under high risk behaviour.
The Indian Red Cross has already expressed concern that the Capital is short of over 2 lakh units of blood.
HOD Blood Bank Ganga Ram Hospital, Dr Saran says, “If the donor is adamant, we do take his blood and test it. If found contaminated we throw it away. We are not saying a homosexual will always be 100 per cent infected.”
In upmarket South Delhi, Moolchand Hospital has a similar policy and officials even say science backs them.
Moolchand Medcity’s Dr KK Agarwal says, “A blood test is never 100 per cent sure. Donors may be in a window period, may test negative and yet transmit infection to the recipients.”
Gay rights is the buzzword now across the country, but are doctors right in worrying about blood donation? They cite statistics that show 10 per cent of India’s homosexual population to be HIV positive, a number that could be much higher. And they also point out at stringent international laws.
In America, Canada and the UK, homosexuals are banned for life from donating blood. The US Food and Drug Administration also permanently bans homosexuals from donating blood or its components.
With Section 377 being struck down, some doctors say it’s now time for India to also frame a proper law for blood banks, for a clearer picture and for those getting blood donations to be assured of their safety.
there is a stigma associated with being homosexual, so how many people will admit they have had sex with a same sex partner on a blood donation form ?
It is indeed thus here in Canada. If you have ever, even once, no matter how long ago, as a male, had sex with another male, you are banned from blood donation. However, there is nothing to stop a gay or bisexual man from denying that he has ever had sex with another man and donating anyway. No one is hooked to a lie detector, and were they to do such, the number of donors would fall away sharply.
Many heterosexual people are infected with HIV and I’ve read recent statistics from North America that transmission of the virus among heterosexuals is on the rise. If blood banks rely on a ban of gay donors to avoid the risk of getting infected blood donated within the non-detection window, they are on shaky ground as it is. If there is such a window, what will prevent a heterosexual, whose blood is infected but who is in the window, from donating?
As far as I am concerned, the whole ban looks like homophobia covered by a thin veneer of scientific concern. If the window of non-detection is the real concern, then all blood should be held for the requisite length of time so it can be thoroughly tested. A heterosexual, not screened out, may well carry the virus and taint the supply and a homosexual, who would otherwise be screened out of contention, may well lie for the privilege to donate and help save lives. If the ‘window’ is a real concern, then the whole blood supply is suspect.