A recent thread on another discussion board treaded on the subject of hobbying and donating blood.  This is a subject on which I honestly have more gut feeling than I do facts.  As such I’d like to learn more reliable information as well as to get a feel about other opinions on this subject.  So here it goes:

• When being prescreened while donating blood, a potential donor is asked a battery of questions many of which directly ask if one has ever paid for or received money in exchange for sex.  If someone answers ‘yes’ to these questions will they immediately be refused from donating?   I expect the answer is yes that they will be refused but I really don’t know.    

• Related to the above, if an honest answer of yes to the pay for sex questions is not grounds for immediate donation refusal, is there any potential helpful use for the blood?  For example, perhaps the blood is not suitable for donation but can assist in some types of research.  

• I sense some people view this situation as a win-win proposition that frankly I think is poor judgment.  However some will argue that all donated blood is rigorously tested.  Therefore if it is clean then the donor will not receive any notification of a bad test result thus giving him/her a free ‘no news is good news’ test result and then of course a potential recipient will benefit from the donated blood.   On the other hand if something shows in the testing then the donor finds out.  So this logic path leads some hobbyists to think it is okay to donate and they lie when answering the sex questions.  How do others feel about this line of thinking?

Prior to entering the hobby, I was a multi-gallon donor.  I enjoyed giving the gift of life not to mention reaping some health benefits myself.   However I stopped once I began playing.  Although I use condoms, I almost always enjoy uncovered 2-way oral sex with providers.  I do accept that I am assuming some level of risk but it is one thing for me to accept risk myself but it is another to assume such risk on behalf of so many others. I’ll man-up to the hypocrisy of the previous sentence in terms of having a SO but that is another story altogether.  So please share your thoughts in terms of donation facts and your opinions.                          


-- Modified on 4/30/2007 1:32:13 PM

I donate regularly and have for almost 30 years.  I know that donated blood is tested for many diseases and therefore I gladly donate with the knowledge that recipients are protected if, in the unlikely event, I am carrying a communicable disease.

As for sexual relationships with providers, I honestly believe, given the nature of their work and the need for safe sexual practices, that we are by and large a safe community.  There are, obviously, exceptions.  I believe that the chances of contracting an STD is greater when having sexual relations with a stranger that you meet in public than with a provider.

These assertions assume that the provider is a professional in the true sense of that word.  She takes precautions, she gets herself checked regularly, screens her clients, etc.   I only see well-reviewed, experienced, professional providers.  I've never had an STD and I've been at this for a long time.

Maybe some would say that this is naive.  I honestly don't think it is.

I too was a blood donor before I chose to begin escorting. Although I know that they screen every donation for STD's I chose to stop once I started escorting. Today's HIV screening tests are far more sensitive than in the past, but even still, there is a gap between when a person becomes infected, and when they show a positive result. For that reason, I felt it wisest to stop donating blood until I stop escorting - whenever that may be.

I too was a regular blood donor (they did it twice a year at my job).  There is also a questionnaire that
you fill out prior to the verbal questions.  And a few stick out:
1.  Have you paid or receive payment for sex since 1977
2. Are you using this blood donation for an AIDS screening?
They ask this question because you can be carrying the virus without a positive result and you can still pass the virus.

So I have stopped donating since I started this hobby.

Have you ever woken up with someone and not remembered how you got there except that you were at a bar the previous night?

If they are really serious about this, of course.

I am trained as a nurse, phlebotomist, blood bank tech, and microbiology lab assistant. I am also certified by OSHA to teach classes to hospital staff on bloodborne pathogens and related subjects.

Although different organizations may have differences in operating procedure, the rules on blood draws, blood draw questionaires, and use of donated blood remain very similar in every state.

If you answer yes to any of the questions that supposedly put you into a higher risk bracket, your blood will not be used for transfusion, but it will still be put to good use - for research, if nothing else. It is unlikely that anyone would refuse to allow you to donate unless drawing the blood might put the technician at risk, or in the case (as another poster pointed out) where you might be in an epidemic area.

I do not know if this is a universal policy, but in my area, after the questionaire is completed, the tech will offer you two bar code stickers to place with your donated blood. One indicates "DO use my blood" and the other indicates "DO NOT use my blood". So, if you think there might be some risk but didn't want to "confess" in front of the tech, you can still do the right thing.

No, it is not OK to lie. Are you kidding me?

I too have stopped donating.

I've never read a good explanation of how blood (that is 'rejected' for transfusion) is used for research.  What is the research that requires unknown person's blood?

ok, you caught me, we're drinkin' it

human blood has many uses in the laboratory, as a medium to grow pathogens, to test effects of various drugs, sometimes just to set controls. It is frequently used in clotting research, and to study blood cancers.

many donor centers specifically advertise for blood donors who have been deferred from donating for transfusion - google "donate blood for research"

Never suggested that I thought it was okay to lie.  In fact my entire conclusion indicates that I have stopped donating since I started hobbying.  However I do know that others do under the thinking that I described in the particular bullet. So while you apparently have the opinion that hobbyists should not donate for recipient use (as did I when I posted the thread), I know that some hobbyists feel otherwise because of the testing that the donated blood goes through.  

I have no idea how many active hobbyists donate blood.  But I do know that some people have differing opinions on the subject.  Since it appears that you are a hobbyist and that you have valid reasons for your thoughts based upon your professional expertise, then perhaps it would be best to point out the risks of donation despite the testing.  This seems to be the prevalent reason why some think it is okay to donate.            

-- Modified on 5/2/2007 3:22:55 PM

-- Modified on 5/2/2007 3:24:26 PM

I did not mean to at all.
In my opinion, having protected sex does not put you into a higher risk bracket and should not prevent you from donating blood. In my opinion, giving or receiving uncovered oral sex does not expose to to a high risk of serious disease. And, paying for it doesn't change the risk factor.
But my opinion doesn't matter, and the people who make the rules are terrified of lawsuits. Before 1994 there were a number of cases of people who contracted HIV through blood transfusion; since 1994, almost none. There have also been, predictably, frequent shortages of blood.

Anyway, I guess that I believe that it is OK and valuable to donate even if your blood can't be used for transfusion, and that it isn't ok to lie on the intake even if you don't believe that you are not a risk. You have to play by their rules.

The question about sex exposure comes from the FDA and national blood bank organizations. It is based upon the theory that high risk behaviors define a group that is more likely to carry a specfic infection known to be associated with a certain behavior. While the current testing is extremely sensitive there still is a short or not so short (depending on the virus) period when the donor is acutely infected, can transmit the infection but the testing is negative. This is part of tiered strategy that identifies known risk behaviors and excludes the donor from the proces and then sensitve testing of a low risk population. Behavioral questions are all about improving the odds and not meant to be 100% effective. Certainly donors engage in casual unprotected sex which probably is more risky than the typical hobbiest-provider meeting and that question is not asked. If the questions are answered yes most blood centers should/will not draw the unit. Most donor centers that collect blood do not have an alternative uses for the unit and the bags and time to draw involve a minimal risk to the donor and the cost of the bag.
First principle - do not lie on the donor form
If you answer truthfully and cannot donate so be it.

I've struggled with this since I started playing, but it has since become moot: I had two malignant melanomas (level I) removed last fall, which put me automatically on the 5 year deferral list for blood donation.

There are lots of things that will defer a person from donation..it almost seems as if the rules are getting tougher all the time, and eventually there won't be anyone eligible.

I had a melanoma over 40 years ago and was told I could never donate.

Occassionally questions about blood donations come up in social settings, work, etc.  I realized that if I just said I can't donate that left the reason up for speculation so I now qualify why.  And I also get a yearly HIV test to make sure that nothing has snuck up on me in my year of partying.
 Congratulations on catching the melanomas early.
B