[article] FDA to ban gay sperm donors

damien

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/politics/11574587.htm

Five-year rule would affect only anonymous cases

NEW YORK — The government plans to implement rules recommending that any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the previous five years be barred from being an anonymous sperm donor.

The Food and Drug Administration has rejected calls to scrap the provision, insisting that gay men collectively pose a higher-than-average risk of carrying the AIDS virus. Critics accuse the FDA of stigmatizing all gay men rather than adopting screening that focuses on high-risk sexual behavior by any would-be donor, gay or straight.

“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,” said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.

Although there is disagreement over whether the FDA guideline regarding gay men will have the force of law, most doctors and clinics are expected to observe it.

The practical effect of the provision — part of a broader set of cell and tissue donation regulations that take effect May 25 — is hard to gauge. It is likely to affect some lesbian couples who want a child and prefer to use a gay man's sperm for artificial insemination.

The provision's symbolic aspect is what troubles gay-rights groups. Kevin Cathcart, executive director of Lambda Legal, has called it “policy based on bigotry.”

Many doctors and fertility clinics already have been rejecting gay sperm donors, citing the pending FDA rules or existing regulations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

The FDA rules do not prohibit gay men from serving as “directed” sperm donors. If a woman wishing to become pregnant knows a gay man and asks that he provide sperm for artificial insemination, a clinic could provide that service even if the man had engaged in sex with other men within five years.

Stark

Yet another decision by the FDA based on agenda rather that public interest.

athena 2000

“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,” said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.

Well it doesn't take brains to be an idiot. I refer to the FDA.
These new FDA rules remind me of governmental mandates that put the burden on the local clinics (or other civil entities) to fulfill their guidelines with no practical support. They don't think the new rules through to their obvious conclusions. Safe cell and tissue donation is important, but to bypass screening all donors for high-risk sexual activity is completely irresponsible.

FranknFurter

Well, in fairness, the FDA really shouldnt consider *any* sperm as a food source, now shud they