The German Aidshilfe has described the renewed blood donation guideline of the German Medical Association (BÄK) as still discriminatory and has called for new rules. “For the umpteenth time, the BÄK has presented an unacceptable regulation and previously ignored the perspectives of numerous competent associations,” said the association. The goal of the traffic light coalition to put an end to discrimination against gay men and trans people had failed, the statement said.
The German Medical Association announced on Thursday that a renewal of the blood donation guidelines will come into force on September 4th. Accordingly, sexual orientation and gender identity may no longer play a role in risk assessment in the future. Gay associations, among others, had repeatedly rated the previous practice as discriminatory. Sexual behavior is considered risky if the risk of contracting a serious infectious disease is significantly higher. In the future, this will include sex with more than two people in total and sex with a new person if anal intercourse was practiced.
The aim of the risk analysis is to prevent the transmission of an infection to the recipient of a blood donation as far as possible. In the future, anyone who has had such risky sex will not be allowed to donate blood. The last four months before the donation are crucial. There are no special exclusion criteria for men who have sex with men (MSM) and for trans people.
“Adoption is stigmatizing”
According to Aidshilfe board member Sven Warminsky, the new criteria still exclude most gay men, without stating this clearly. Accordingly, the association considers the regulation for anal intercourse to be wrong – the sexual practice itself is not a risk. “This assumption is stigmatizing,” the statement says. The provision for deferring people who have had sex with an HIV-positive person is also incorrect. According to the association, there is no risk of transmission during sex with effective HIV therapy. It is incomprehensible why protective measures such as condoms and HIV prophylaxis are not taken into account in the risk assessment.
The association called for new rules that should not be developed solely by medical societies. Associations would have to be involved in the process.
