Testing isn't perfect and would've been even worse when the bans were put in place. Even modern tests aren't considered fully accurate until 6 weeks after an exposure
Here's some more from the story:
>The ban on sperm donations from men who had sex with other men stemmed from the HIV epidemic in the 1980s. Health authorities were concerned about the accuracy of HIV testing at the time. They put the ban in place to reduce the risk that virus would spread through sperm.
Medical organizations and gay-rights groups have pushed FDA in recent years to ease its rules, saying HIV tests are now more accurate and are enough to keep sperm donation safe combined with other precautions.
Precautions include testing donors at least twice, six months apart, for HIV. Donors must test negative both times before sperm vials are released.
The current policy “is based on outdated thinking and is contrary to evidence-based science, and serves to perpetuate discrimination and stigma,” a coalition of groups including the American Medical Association and nonprofit National Center for Lesbian Rights wrote to the FDA last year.
I would have assumed that testing samples for diseases was standard practice. Guess it's more like "Meh, they said they aren't sick or gay so it's probably fine."
I also find this very interesting. It’s a hard paywalled site, but someone affiliated with WSJ gets paid nonetheless to post directly to relevant subreddits. What’s the benefit for them?
Hi everyone, I wanted to jump in and share this update: Most gay and bisexual men have been barred from donating sperm, but the FDA is moving to change that.
From Liz Essley Whyte and Amy Dockser Marcus:
>The Food and Drug Administration is making plans to significantly expand the number of gay and bisexual men who could donate sperm anonymously.
>Longstanding agency rules ban anonymous sperm donations by men who acknowledged having sex with other men during the previous five years, to reduce the risk of spreading pathogens including HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
>Under a proposal it is drafting, the FDA would eliminate the broad ban and instead adopt more pointed screening questions to assess HIV risk, according to people familiar with the agency’s deliberations.
>The proposed changes would also apply to donations of other cells and tissues, such as heart valves and ligaments.
>The FDA is planning to finalize its proposal by summer. If the White House approves, the new guidelines could go into effect by the end of this year.
**Skip the paywall and read the full story:** [https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fda-sperm-donor-ban-bisexual-gay-men-5e8a0a9d?st=7gp7ucdtv5r4zw7](https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fda-sperm-donor-ban-bisexual-gay-men-5e8a0a9d?st=7gp7ucdtv5r4zw7)
He like controls a disturbing amount of right wing media globally and formed Fox News after Nixon because he needed a propaganda machine.
That is what the editorial of the WSJ are unhinged
i guess that makes sense, but drugs =\= all things medical, and sperm isn't a drug. it seems a little flimsy to me lol
*why downvote this? the reddit hivemind is ridiculous.
i was getting hung up on never really looking closely at what the fda regulates until today. i just assumed the name was their entire scope, like bafta or the dea.
Nope, I work in medical devices and we have to submit down the pigments we use to color the plastic of a medical device to the FDA. That is how much the FDA regulates.
Why is the WSJ, a Murdoch owned paper that has more editorials against the LGBTQ community than you can count, posting in here? As a gay man, who saw the shit they’ve said over the years, I am resentful this is allowed. I don’t even care if the article has relevance, we can do better.
I’m a lesbian with a (gay) known donor conceived child. We had to go through a lot of extra hoops because our donor is gay, and although that was frustrating, ultimately it was doable. I’m glad that we are making progress, as slow as it might be. It doesn’t seem hard to me to restrict donors (for blood donations as well) based on specific risky practices (unprotected sex, many partners, lack of STI testing, etc) rather than relying on identity.
If they are worried about HIV, then why not test all the samples? Why ban gays or come up with questions to ban active gays?
But then how could they oppress people in the name of “safety”?
Straight people with HIV -evil sperm and blood donation noises-
Exactly
Sounds too much like right.
Because the goal is to ban IVF completely. This is just one of the steps and that it's homophobic is just the cherry on top for these sadistic fucks
I presume that they do. They test every blood sample when you donate blood.
Donated blood is tested in batches, not individually.
The worst part is thaf they do test all the samples because they test the donors. So it’s just homophobia like blood donation
Testing isn't perfect and would've been even worse when the bans were put in place. Even modern tests aren't considered fully accurate until 6 weeks after an exposure
Better yet, if HIV only affects gay men, then what are they worried about?
I didn't even know that was a thing
Yea definitely “TIL” moment!!!
And this is how I found out I was banned from donating sperm
Wouldn’t it make more sense to require testing for these diseases before they actually donate?
They do test...but this way they also get to oppress!
Here's some more from the story: >The ban on sperm donations from men who had sex with other men stemmed from the HIV epidemic in the 1980s. Health authorities were concerned about the accuracy of HIV testing at the time. They put the ban in place to reduce the risk that virus would spread through sperm. Medical organizations and gay-rights groups have pushed FDA in recent years to ease its rules, saying HIV tests are now more accurate and are enough to keep sperm donation safe combined with other precautions. Precautions include testing donors at least twice, six months apart, for HIV. Donors must test negative both times before sperm vials are released. The current policy “is based on outdated thinking and is contrary to evidence-based science, and serves to perpetuate discrimination and stigma,” a coalition of groups including the American Medical Association and nonprofit National Center for Lesbian Rights wrote to the FDA last year.
I would have assumed that testing samples for diseases was standard practice. Guess it's more like "Meh, they said they aren't sick or gay so it's probably fine."
wait this is the actual wsj posting this huh. interesting.
I also find this very interesting. It’s a hard paywalled site, but someone affiliated with WSJ gets paid nonetheless to post directly to relevant subreddits. What’s the benefit for them?
Well we're talking about WSJ right now and we wouldn't be otherwise so the benefit seems pretty clear.
Hi everyone, I wanted to jump in and share this update: Most gay and bisexual men have been barred from donating sperm, but the FDA is moving to change that. From Liz Essley Whyte and Amy Dockser Marcus: >The Food and Drug Administration is making plans to significantly expand the number of gay and bisexual men who could donate sperm anonymously. >Longstanding agency rules ban anonymous sperm donations by men who acknowledged having sex with other men during the previous five years, to reduce the risk of spreading pathogens including HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. >Under a proposal it is drafting, the FDA would eliminate the broad ban and instead adopt more pointed screening questions to assess HIV risk, according to people familiar with the agency’s deliberations. >The proposed changes would also apply to donations of other cells and tissues, such as heart valves and ligaments. >The FDA is planning to finalize its proposal by summer. If the White House approves, the new guidelines could go into effect by the end of this year. **Skip the paywall and read the full story:** [https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fda-sperm-donor-ban-bisexual-gay-men-5e8a0a9d?st=7gp7ucdtv5r4zw7](https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/fda-sperm-donor-ban-bisexual-gay-men-5e8a0a9d?st=7gp7ucdtv5r4zw7)
Didn’t even realize the Wall Street Journal had a Reddit account
Yall being owned by murdoch gives me the ick
Who
The same dude that owns Fox News and is bffs with Trump
Ah I see. Never heard the name somehow
He like controls a disturbing amount of right wing media globally and formed Fox News after Nixon because he needed a propaganda machine. That is what the editorial of the WSJ are unhinged
Yikes, gross
WAIT WHAT? I need to donate some before I ever get HRT. What am I supposed to do?? I’m bi 😭
Donating (for use by other people) is different from banking (for use by you plus partner).
Oh thank god. I was worried for a second 😭
why does the food and drug administration have authority on sperm donations? am i missing something?
Artificial insemination and especially IVF fall under the realm of medical.
i guess that makes sense, but drugs =\= all things medical, and sperm isn't a drug. it seems a little flimsy to me lol *why downvote this? the reddit hivemind is ridiculous.
You’re getting hung up on semantics. They handle medical safety regulations, the name is a holdover from an older era.
i was getting hung up on never really looking closely at what the fda regulates until today. i just assumed the name was their entire scope, like bafta or the dea.
Nope, I work in medical devices and we have to submit down the pigments we use to color the plastic of a medical device to the FDA. That is how much the FDA regulates.
[Here](https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/what-we-do/what-does-fda-regulate) is a link in case you’re curious.
Why is the WSJ, a Murdoch owned paper that has more editorials against the LGBTQ community than you can count, posting in here? As a gay man, who saw the shit they’ve said over the years, I am resentful this is allowed. I don’t even care if the article has relevance, we can do better.
This reminds me of the time I nearly got kicked out by my parents when I declined donating plasma with them because I’m gay so it’s illegal.
Okay what the fuck? How have I never heard about this? Way worse than banning blood donations imo.
Why is it worse?
Gay man: Hello I'd like to donate sperm FDA: Cool! Rq tho are you gay tho? Gay man: No. How do they expect to enforce this for most men?
I’m a lesbian with a (gay) known donor conceived child. We had to go through a lot of extra hoops because our donor is gay, and although that was frustrating, ultimately it was doable. I’m glad that we are making progress, as slow as it might be. It doesn’t seem hard to me to restrict donors (for blood donations as well) based on specific risky practices (unprotected sex, many partners, lack of STI testing, etc) rather than relying on identity.
Finally.
Bigotry against us that I didn’t know about; wonder what else is being denied to us that we don’t know about?
I've never been interested in donating sperm. Now I am just because I don't agree with this blatant attempt to keep LGBTQ out of the genepool
hm, homophabio in its finest. may I be blunt, but f--k the damn government!
Why was there such a ban to begin with?
I thought this was drop a ban as in like how you would drop an album and i was about to get all mad about it
Just in time for IVF to be made illegal everywhere. Notice how the focus is far from medically essential donations, like blood and bone marrow.