One Ohio University faculty member comments on the recent article which highlighted the Red Cross donation system.
I write in response to the article in the October 15 issue regarding restrictions on who can donate blood for the Red Cross. I think the most important thing to remember in this is that it is not about anyone’s wish or desire or “right” to donate blood. Rather, it is about the recipient of
a blood transfusion having confidence that the blood he or she is receiving is not tainted.
I have a personal experience with this issue that may be a bit unusual. I started donating blood when I was a freshman in college in 1975, and I donated regularly for the next 25 years, reaching a milestone in that time of giving more than 8 gallons (more than 64 separate donations) of blood. I still have the little 8-gallon pin they give you in a drawer somewhere. I fully expected to continue to donate blood (and achieve more donation milestones) for the rest of my life. But this all came to an abrupt halt after one fateful donation in 2000.
About two weeks after making a blood donation in June 2000, I received a letter from the Red Cross stating that my blood could not be used because routine screening had turned up an “indeterminate” indication of the HIV virus. I was also no longer allowed to donate blood. Well, of course, I was shocked — and scared. At that time, I had been married to and had had a monogamous relationship with the same woman for 21 years. I had not prior to 1977, in 1977, nor since 1977 had sexual relations with another man. Yet, here I was showing a partial positive for the presence of the HIV virus. How could I possibly have this disease? I did some research and discovered that other medical conditions can give a false positive for HIV, lyme disease being one of them. I found this somewhat reassuring even though I did not have lyme disease.
Over the course of the next six months, I visited my regular doctor several times, additional blood tests were done, and eventually the false positive disappeared. To this day, I do not have AIDS, and I do not believe I am a carrier of the virus (no blood test since has shown anything), but I have not donated blood in 15 years, and I doubt I will ever be allowed to again.
Do I think all of this is a little silly? Yes. Am I heartbroken? Do I feel that my humanity has somehow been impugned? Do I feel discriminated against? Of course not. I fully understand why the Red Cross takes the precautions it does, and I commend them for it. As I said at the top of this letter, the most important aspect of the Red Cross’s blood program is to have an untainted blood supply, not to assure that any particular individual be allowed to donate blood. Yes, the Red Cross probably should review its restrictions and change them if warranted. But I’m not going to lose any sleep over it if they don’t. If you are someone who is not allowed to donate blood for whatever reason and want to serve the Red Cross, there are myriad other ways to do, and it is a simple matter to find one of them.
Daniel A. Gulino is an associate professor emeritus.
