WASHINGTON — A federal health panel is considering easing a ban on blood donations by most gay men amid a growing body of evidence that the sharpest restrictions may no longer be necessary and calls from lawmakers for a fresh look at the policy.
Key gay advocacy groups and organizations representing hemophiliacs and other heavy users of blood products also have narrowed their differences over the need to adjust rules for who can give blood.
At issue in a two-day hearing by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Advisory Committee on Blood Safety and Availability starting today is the quarter-century-old donor policy, which bars any man who has had sex even once with another man since 1977 from ever donating blood.
Women who have sex with men who have sex with other men are deferred from donating for at least a year since the initial sexual contact.
The restrictions were put in place in the early days of the HIV-AIDS crisis after it became clear that gay men were at increased risk of getting and transmitting HIV and other infectious diseases.
The Food and Drug Administration estimates gay men likely to donate blood have an HIV infection rate 15 times that of the general population.
Pressure for a review of the policy has been building for several years, driven by improvements in testing that can detect HIV in the blood within two weeks of when a person has been infected.
Then and now
There were nine cases of HIV known to have been transmitted via blood products between 1994 and 2002 and none, in tens of millions of transfusions, between 2002 and 2007, the last year for which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has complete data.
In 2006, the American Red Cross and two other blood banking groups, which between them collect almost all of the blood in the U.S., recommended permitting gay men to donate blood if they abstained from sex for one year.
Two years later, the American Medical Association also urged an end to the broad ban, though it advised a five-year waiting period before donation.
Last December, Rep. Mike Quigley, D-Ill., and nine other House members asked the FDA to revisit the issue and three months later, so did a group of senators led by Massachusetts Democrat John Kerry.
Kerry’s letter said there is “a clear and unscientific double standard” in the current policy because behavior that puts heterosexuals at higher risk for HIV, such as unprotected sex with an intravenous drug user, a person with HIV or a prostitute, warrants only a one-year deferral from donation.
The FDA last examined blood donation protocols in 2006 but left current restrictions in place.
Not looking for repeal
The Gay Men’s Health Crisis, which issued a report this year calling for a review of the donor policy, said it is not seeking a complete elimination of the ban, but a fine-tuning that will factor in the risks posed by individuals, not an entire class of people.
“We’re not looking for a complete repeal or an overhaul. We’re looking for a revision that will allow some gay men to become donors,” said Nathan Schaefer, director of public policy for the New York-based organization. “We do not have a specific policy that we’re recommending.”
At the other end of the blood supply spectrum, advocates for hemophiliacs and other heavy users of donated blood, who have opposed previous efforts to soften donor restrictions, acknowledge that the current broad ban may no longer be scientifically supportable. But they urge further study before making changes.
The two sides issued a statement Wednesday pledging to work together “to examine and evaluate alternative policies for (gay) blood donors that maintain or enhance the safety of blood and blood products.”
The advisory committee is expected to make nonbinding recommendations to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and FDA leadership, FDA spokeswoman Shelly Burgess said.
“Change is coming,” predicted Mark Skinner, president of the World Federation of Hemophilia.
The question is “what comes first — policy revision or additional research,” Skinner said, adding he believes that more study is needed to figure out what the proper deferral period for gay men should be.
