Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
The Post - Athens, OH
The Post

MULTIMEDIA


In the Know with Meg O

In The Know With Meg O: FDA might allow blood donations from gay men

This week, the Food and Drug Administration could lift the ban that prohibits gay men from donating blood.The ban has been in place for 31 years and was spurred by the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s. When the FDA was trying to figure out how to quash the disease, it grouped gay men with intravenous drug users and completely banned them from donating blood for life, which at the time was a reaction to a lack of a blood test. But because science has progressed since the ’80s, there are now tests that show if someone is HIV-positive within weeks of exposure.However, the lift of the ban is conditional and would not allow all HIV-negative men to donate blood. Rather, the ban will only be lifted if the man has not had sex with another man in the last year, even if he is in a monogamous relationship.A ruling that favors donations from gay men would be a big step in societal growth toward total acceptance of the LGBTQ community. This ban is so antiquated. When it was put in place, people thought only gay men could get AIDS. But as the understanding of the disease became widespread, the ban has been a source of discrimination to a large section of the population.However, the change to the prohibition is not a true source of eliminating discrimination. For men in a monogamous relationship, not being allowed to donate blood is still offensive and seems unnecessary. I hope the FDA will grow with the times to show the rest of the country that gay men should not be discriminated against for something that affects a very small amount of the population.



The Post

Letter: Several key facts omitted from Op-Ed on McDavis’ leadership skills

I am writing in response to Richard Vedder's Op-Ed piece in Monday’s (12/01/14) The Post. Mr. Vedder's comments concerning Ohio University's need for a "New Leadership Era" are, as the Op-Ed’s title states, only his opinion.I do wish to address several of the comments in Mr. Vedder's piece. First is the fact that, while Mr. Vedder raises the issue of the expansion of athletic facilities, he fails to mention how much of their cost was paid for by donations.Second, he references OU's building program. As a former economics professor, I'm sure Mr. Vedder has taught "cost/benefit" analysis. As an engineer, I can tell you that, in many cases, it is not cost effective to rehab a structure. As to the Academic Center for Athletes, Mr. Vedder fails to mention that OU currently has one. This project is intended to upgrade those facilities. It will, by the way, be funded through donations.Finally, I would think a former professor would be able to express his opinions absent sarcasm/condescension.Kenneth Job is an Ohio University alumnus.


The Post

Editorial: Smoking ban to benefit all of Athens

We agree with the city of Athens’ smoking ban (effective Jan. 1) and Ohio University’s plan to abolish tobacco products on campus (beginning Fall Semester 2015).Athens City Council voted to charge $50 for smoking a cigarette in city parks or parking lots, and for disposing cigarette butts on sidewalks or streets.The decision is a push to keep the city clean and environmentally friendly — two things pretty much everyone can get behind.This opinion is a change of pace for us, as we generally take the stance that personal freedoms (speech, expression, assembly, etc.) should be protected.But we think the benefits of a smoke-free society outweigh the infringements on smokers’ personal freedom to light up in a public area. Few non-smokers are singing the praises of secondhand smoke.Simply put: We are sure that the campus and uptown areas will be better off because of the university and city’s decisions to diminish tobacco use.Editorials represent the majority opinion of The Post’s executive editors.

Powered by SNworks Solutions by The State News
All Content © 2016-2024 The Post, Athens OH