Susan's Place Logo

News:

According to Google Analytics 25,259,719 users made visits accounting for 140,758,117 Pageviews since December 2006

Main Menu

Blood test woes--and lying to the blood bank

Started by Arch, November 03, 2011, 10:02:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Arch

Well, my hematocrit has been creeping up a little here and a little there. I am on a "standard" dose of T. Based on my previous blood work from a few months ago, the doctor I saw at the clinic was thinking I should reduce my T dose a little, by about 25%. I was worried about my depression and my SAD, and so was he. He said we could revisit this issue in the spring. But the latest blood work is higher than last time. It was in the high forties a couple of years ago, and now it's at 51. The danger zone is basically 52 and up. I'm running a higher and higher risk of heart attack or stroke.

I just talked to the nurse on the phone, and SHE was suggesting that I cut my dose in half. I will consider reducing my dose, but not by that much and not all at once. She's going to get hold of the doctor again and get back to me.

She also suggested that I give blood on a regular basis. This is what one of my acquaintances does to reduce his RBC. I have always wanted to give blood but have been barred from doing so because I'm honest about my sexual history. When I was in my twenties and still living as a woman--and when I had my old name--I told them that I had had sex a few times with a practicing bisexual male. They said thanks but no thanks, and I never went back. That was in the mid-eighties, at a high point in the AIDS crisis, but the policy has not changed.

They won't have kept records on me, but anyway I have a different name now and could easily lie to them about my thirty-years-past sexual escapade so that I can donate. But I'm living as a gay man, and that presents problems. First, when asked whether I have had sex with men, I would have to say yes. That's an automatic disqualification. Second, well, I have ideological objections to hiding that I am gay. In addition, I resent that the policy is still in effect. And there's still that bisexual lover from 1981.

He's a college professor now (I googled him) and seems to be fine. I have tested negative myself and am in good shape. I'm not sexually active. And I have gay friends who lie to the blood bank because they would rather donate blood than stand on principle. What's the harm in lying? I would be helping my community and myself. I wouldn't have to cut back my T dose, or not much, and my moods would remain relatively stable.

I keep telling myself these things, but I'm not convinced that lying to the blood bank is an acceptable thing to do. And I would have to hide my gayness. That seems repugnant to me, a point of pride, even though it would last for maybe an hour, half a dozen times a year.

I don't mind other people's perspectives on this issue, but I guess I mostly needed to unburden myself.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Cindy

Arch,
Do you have heamachromatosis? That will increase you heamatocrit and regular blood donation decreases it. However the blood donation is discarded, unless a research group wants it and has the appropriate approval.

I would advise a bit of caution in lying to the blood bank. Their HIV screens are now very sensitive, as are the Hep and STD screens, I also understand totally your altruistic motives, but what if someone did get infected. How would you feel if maybe it was you? The screens are for best practice and I know many people feel they are discriminated against unfairly for being 'gay' or whatever. But remember the blood banks got sued to the edge of existence for passing on HIV.  They are in a no win situation, and I also know they are desperate for blood donations as well, so if they could change the laws they would..

I cannot give blood (for  transfusion) either because I work with HIV infected people so I have a risk, I also have possible links to 'mad-cow' disease exposure , which may explain a lot :laugh:. But I give blood regularly for research groups, maybe you can tap into that (sorry very bad pun). If you have a local teaching hospital they may be able to help. Just a thought.

Oh and make sure your cholesterol and BP is being measured regularly.

Hugs my friend

Cindy

  •  

Arch

I haven't been formally diagnosed with anything with a particular label. Hemachromatosis has not been mentioned at all.

Maybe I can donate through other channels. Have to do some research. If they ask questions like whether I have ever had sex with men, though, that poses a problem, doesn't it? Just as it does with the blood bank?

I'm not worried that I might be infected because I had the relationship with the bi guy a full thirty years ago, was in a monogamous hetero relationship for twenty years, haven't had sex since the breakup (and don't intend to), and have tested negative both years ago and recently. And if the blood bank's HIV testing is so much more sensitive than it used to be, there's really no reason I shouldn't donate.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Cindy

It does seem a double standard. Have you checked recently on what the ask?
  •  

Arch

I checked a year or two ago, and nothing had changed. I just checked again, and I noticed that you cannot donate if you have hemochromatosis. I was thinking, "Well, I don't know that I have that." Then I kept going and found out that you can't donate if you're on Finasteride; you have to wait four weeks.

I don't find any reason that my 1981 sexual escapade would disqualify me, but being a male who has had sex with a male is automatic disqualification. I suppose I could "lie" about that because I know that I haven't had the experience they have in mind when they ask that question.

But the Finasteride...I wasn't on it the last time I checked the guidelines because I remember carefully going down the list of prohibited medications. I might have to ask some of the local guys and find out if any of them know where I can get "bled" outside of the blood bank. I'm really scared to just cut my T dose in half all at once, especially at this time of year when I'm already struggling.

One good thing...I guess this means that I really am a red-blooded American boy!
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Cindy

I reckon having sex with a male 30 years ago is ignorable. I reckon there are healthy people who don't know who they has sex with last weekend. :laugh:

I'd give the BB ago.  They screen like crazy anyway.

  •  

Asfsd4214

Here's what I can tell you.

Finasteride is an absolute no-no because it has such high propensity to cause birth defects. (that's my understanding anyway)
I personally don't think you should lie to them and donate anyway. If the blood supply really ran short they could widen the rules if need be.

It's not actually men who have sex with men they care about. That's how the rule is worded, but the thinking behind it is actually about ANYONE who has sex with a man, who themselves (the partner) also has sex with men. Hence the rule about women who've slept with bisexual men.

I really wish I could donate too. Unfortunately, unless I lie, I'll never be able too (I have multiple permanent disqualifies, one of which is universally recognized by all  systems world wide as a lifetime disqualification, neither of which are related to my being transgender), it sucks, but I myself don't feel I have the right to lie in a situation like this.

Good luck.
  •  

lilacwoman

weird sort of principles that compel a person to donate possibly contaminated blood rather than accept that it is best they keep their possible contaminations to themselves?

In Uk we had a big scandal during the first AIDs crisis as our NHS would not pay healthy UK folk $20 to donate a pint of blood but they were happy to buy gallons of filthy stuff from USA.

I've never donated as I had jaundice when I was about 11 and thats seen as a no-no for donating.

My boss has donated lots over last ten years but last year had a skin cancer scare so now she's barred.
  •  

Arch

Quote from: Asfsd4214 on November 05, 2011, 04:16:24 AM
It's not actually men who have sex with men they care about. That's how the rule is worded, but the thinking behind it is actually about ANYONE who has sex with a man, who themselves (the partner) also has sex with men. Hence the rule about women who've slept with bisexual men.

Yes, I can see this, but my blood bank words it so that my "bisexual" escapade only matters if it was within the last year, and it clearly wasn't. (I guess this means that they are less strict now, contrary to what I said before.) Since this is the only sexual encounter that would actually bar me from donating, I'm safe as far as that goes. In order to be absolutely truthful, I would need to come out as trans, but I am not very comfortable doing that.

Anyway, it's a moot point as long as I am on Finasteride.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Arch

Quote from: lilacwoman on November 05, 2011, 10:32:27 AM
weird sort of principles that compel a person to donate possibly contaminated blood rather than accept that it is best they keep their possible contaminations to themselves?

Weird that you don't seem to realize that ALL blood is "possibly contaminated." It's all a matter of degree and damage control. And I think we all know that the blood bank guidelines don't take into account gay trans men who haven't actually had the kind of sexual encounter that the blood bank considers risky.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Asfsd4214

Quote from: lilacwoman on November 05, 2011, 10:32:27 AM
In Uk we had a big scandal during the first AIDs crisis as our NHS would not pay healthy UK folk $20 to donate a pint of blood but they were happy to buy gallons of filthy stuff from USA.

Ironic that you call blood from the US filthy stuff. I live in Australia and the rules are quite clear. You've been and lived in the US? That's no problem. You've been and lived in the UK at certain points? You could be disqualified for life.

And it's hardly Australia specific. Concerns about mad cow have resulted in a reputation that the UK blood supply is seemingly some of the riskiest in the world.

So yeah, fascinating that you would call US blood filthy.  ;D
  •  

Devlyn

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but drawing off blood helps you medically, and donating it would be a bonus? If it's too much hassle to get it accepted by a blood bank, couldn't your doctor take blood and simply dispose of it? Probably a stupid question.
  •  

Arch

Quote from: Asfsd4214 on November 05, 2011, 08:11:29 PM
Ironic that you call blood from the US filthy stuff. I live in Australia and the rules are quite clear. You've been and lived in the US? That's no problem. You've been and lived in the UK at certain points? You could be disqualified for life.

The rules here in the U.S. are the same; if you have spent a total of three months in the UK during a certain time frame, you are barred from donating--and you can't donate if you spent five years anywhere in Europe during the same time frame. You also have to wait a year after returning from Iraq. Yet I would never think of making a remark about "filthy British blood"--or filthy Iraqi blood or filthy European blood or filthy any kind of blood, for that matter.

At any rate, my OP was a meditation on the letter of the law versus the intent of the law, and I still think it's an interesting issue. I've known quite a few ethical people in other situations who have withheld information or checked one box instead of another because they knew that the wording of a rule or guideline was not quite accurate or complete--the way it was phrased was not fully consistent with what it was designed to do. Generally speaking, screening systems, surveys, and questionnaires are far from perfect, and they're certainly not perfectly worded.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Arch

Quote from: Tracey on November 05, 2011, 08:59:25 PM
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but drawing off blood helps you medically, and donating it would be a bonus? If it's too much hassle to get it accepted by a blood bank, couldn't your doctor take blood and simply dispose of it? Probably a stupid question.

I don't think it's stupid; I think it's quite an intelligent question. I've heard that people with certain syndromes can get blood drawn through their health care provider as a health-preserving measure if they can't donate to the blood bank. Assuming that this is true, I would be happy to look into it as a possibility. But my ex is canceling my insurance in a couple of days, and I can't afford the COBRA payments because they are astronomical. So I have to figure out something else. First step, start tapering my T dose and see how low I can go without compromising my mental health. I'm starting today.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •  

Asfsd4214

Quote from: Arch on November 05, 2011, 09:05:57 PM
The rules here in the U.S. are the same; if you have spent a total of three months in the UK during a certain time frame, you are barred from donating--and you can't donate if you spent five years anywhere in Europe during the same time frame. You also have to wait a year after returning from Iraq. Yet I would never think of making a remark about "filthy British blood"--or filthy Iraqi blood or filthy European blood or filthy any kind of blood, for that matter.

At any rate, my OP was a meditation on the letter of the law versus the intent of the law, and I still think it's an interesting issue. I've known quite a few ethical people in other situations who have withheld information or checked one box instead of another because they knew that the wording of a rule or guideline was not quite accurate or complete--the way it was phrased was not fully consistent with what it was designed to do. Generally speaking, screening systems, surveys, and questionnaires are far from perfect, and they're certainly not perfectly worded.

You're completely right. But personally I ask myself "what if I'm wrong, what if somehow, my blood is a danger, and i deliberately lied and put other people at risk", I don't want to risk being responsible for that.

Also I know the rules are the same regarding the UK in the US, but obviously it says nothing that the US will accept American blood so I used Australia as an independent example.

On another note, it's unusual for blood banks to pay for donations, specifically because it encourages people to lie on the test.
  •  

Arch

Quote from: Asfsd4214 on November 05, 2011, 10:52:00 PM
You're completely right. But personally I ask myself "what if I'm wrong, what if somehow, my blood is a danger, and i deliberately lied and put other people at risk", I don't want to risk being responsible for that.

Me neither; this is why I was so uncomfortable in the first place. But we all have to realize that even if we fully meet the stated criteria, there is still a very small risk for the person who receives the blood. Anyway, I've combed over the guidelines very carefully, and as far as I can tell, the only thing that actually disqualifies me is the Finasteride. I don't plan to stop taking it anytime soon.

I understand that my city's blood bank has openly stated that it doesn't want to follow the "anti-gay" guidelines but pretty much has to because of the Red Cross. I don't know how true this is, but I've heard it from more than one person.
"The hammer is my penis." --Captain Hammer

"When all you have is a hammer . . ." --Anonymous carpenter
  •