FDA Ban on Gay sperm donors

CNN.com - FDA wants sperm banks to bar donors who've had gay sex - May 5, 2005

Not the newest news, but I have been wanting to comment on this one for a while. If you have, for some strange reason, read my blog before, you may guess how I feel about this. Yes. The nut jobs have struck again.

This is, at its very core, discrimination at its worst. The science behind it makes no sense. Or, more accurately, there is no science behind it. As far as I know, there is no study that shows that gay men "pose a higher-than-average risk of carrying the AIDS virus". Common sense should tell us that men, regardless of their sexual orientation, who have had unprotected sex with someone who is HIV positive (or even someone he did not know) is a higher risk than a gay man in a long term, monogamous relationship.

The critics quoted in the CNN article make a lot of sense. It is much more practical to base screening of donors on their behavior rather than their orientation. This quote from Leland Traiman in the CNN article should highlight that: "Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he's been celibate for five years." And Mr. Traiman should be accurate, seeing as runs a sperm bank!

Last Words: It is discriminatory, I recommend screening of behavior!