I'm writing in response to the Red Cross's Blood Drive presence on campus. The Red Cross is a vital and needed function for the health of our nation; the services that they provide help people around the country. However, the Red Cross's deliberate discrimination against gay male donors is not an acceptable practice.
Since 1985, the Red Cross has indefinitely deferred otherwise eligible male donors because they have been sexually active with another male, at least once, since 1977. I personally know friends of mine who have been embarrassed and angered when their charitable gift of blood was coldly denied. There are an estimated 62,300 men who are willing to donate blood, but are similarly refused.
The underlying basis of this policy is the statistical data that places gay males at a higher risk for carrying the AIDS virus. However, a study conducted by the FDA's medical officer, Andrew Dayton, found that altering the policy to exclude gays who have been sexually active within the last five years would result in a minimal increase in contaminated blood. Currently, the Red Cross reports that about 10 infected units enter the general blood supply, and are responsible for about two to three HIV infections a year. The previously mentioned policy change would add another 1.7 HIV positive units to the blood supply and another 1246 units of usable blood. Contrast all this data with the policy that temporarily defers, for just one year, heterosexuals who have engaged in sexually risky behavior.
Clearly there are different levels of policy making at work within the Red Cross. This editorial isn't a witch-hunt on the Red Cross. Their policies are dictated by scientific evidence, and not societal pressures. Unfortunately, their policies risk perpetuating the gay-AIDS fear that is prevalent today.
Name Withheld by Request