“Gay” Activist Groups Welcome New Rules for Blood Donors – Do You?

“Gay” Activist Groups Welcome New Rules for Blood Donors – Do You?

a man standing in front of a building: Married couple Steven Smillie and Tyler McNeil mark the changes to blood donation rules at Edinburgh Donor Centre in Scotland - PA© PAMarried couple Steven Smillie and Tyler McNeil mark the changes to blood donation rules at Edinburgh Donor Centre in Scotland


The new eligibility criteria, which came into force on World Blood Donor Day on Monday, mean donors will no longer be asked if they are a man who has had sex with another man, NHS Blood and Transplant said.

Instead, any individual who attends to give blood regardless of gender will be asked if they have had sex and, if so, about recent sexual behaviours, it added.

Anyone who has had the same sexual partner for the last three months will be eligible to donate, meaning more gay and bisexual men will be able to donate blood, platelets and plasma while keeping blood just as safe, it added.

The changes will come into effect for donors in England, Scotland and Wales.

Ella Poppitt, chief nurse for blood donation at NHS Blood and Transplant, said: “Patient safety is at the heart of everything we do.

“This change is about switching around how we assess the risk of exposure to a sexual infection, so it is more tailored to the individual.

“We screen all donations for evidence of significant infections, which goes hand-in-hand with donor selection to maintain the safety of blood sent to hospitals.

“All donors will now be asked about sexual behaviours which might have increased their risk of infection, particularly recently acquired infections. This means some donors might not be eligible on the day but may be in the future.”

The changes to the donor safety check form will affect blood, plasma and platelet donors but the process of giving blood will not change.

Eligibility will be based on individual circumstances surrounding health, travel and sexual behaviours shown to be at a higher risk of sexual infection, NHS Blood and Transplant said.

Under the changes people can donate if they have had the same sexual partner for the last three months, or if they have a new sexual partner with whom they have not had anal sex and there is no known recent exposure to a sexually transmitted infection (STI) or recent use of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) or post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP).

Anyone who has had anal sex with a new partner or with multiple partners in the last three months will be not be able to give blood but may be eligible in the future, it said.

The changes were welcomed by charities including the National Aids Trust, Stonewall and Terrence Higgins Trust.

Robbie de Santos, director of communications and external affairs for Stonewall, said: “We welcome today’s historic change, which will help ensure more gay and bi men can donate blood and represents an important step towards a donation selection policy entirely based on an individualised assessment of risk.

“We want to see a blood donation system that allows the greatest number of people to donate safely and we will continue to work with Government to build on this progress and ensure that more people, including LGBT+ people, can donate blood safely in the future.”

But the Terrence Higgins Trust said that the Government had kept a “discriminatory restriction” in England which will affect black communities’ ability to give blood.

The restriction relates to a three-month deferral period for anyone who has a “partner who has, or you think may have been, sexually active in parts of the world where HIV/Aids is very common” and references “most countries in Africa”, the charity added.

Its chief executive Ian Green said: “It’s great news that far more gay and bisexual men can safely donate blood from today.

“But the excitement of that announcement is significantly dampened by another discriminatory question being retained by government in the blood donation process in England, which presents a significant barrier to black donors in particular giving blood.

“This is despite it being removed in both Scotland and Wales, and the blood service actively encouraging black communities to donate plasma and blood due to shortages.”   Source…


Should health rules be totally independent of  “discrimination” considerations?   Is there anything in health care that should not be subject to the whims of the “Discrimination Police”?

Of course, the key question is this:  why were homosexuals prohibited from donating blood in the first place?  If there was no good reason, then that’s odd, to put it mildly, However, if there was/is  a “health” reason, then surely it is wrong to  place the wider population at risk, on grounds of equal treatment – i.e. not wanting to “discriminate” against homosexuals.  Notice that even the remaining rule – a three-month deferral period for anyone who has a “partner who has, or you think may have been, sexually active in parts of the world where HIV/Aids is very common” and references “most countries in Africa” – is being challenged by the Terrence Higgins Trust.  Surely, this is a matter of huge concern? 

What if the above restriction is, in time, removed under LGBT+ pressure?    Isn’t it cause for concern that for reasons of political correctness, the population at large may be put at risk by the NHS – an NHS, remember, which is allegedly so anxious for us all to “stay safe”? 

Comments (20)

  • westminsterfly

    What does “We screen all donations for evidence of significant infections” mean? What about insignificant levels of infection? As I understand it, some people taking HIV medicine have undetectable levels of the virus in their system – undetectable, but they are still there, because if they stop taking the medication, the virus multiplies again and they get ill. Also – don’t forget – we now have the added fear that if any of us need a blood transfusion in the future, a lot of it will inevitably be tainted with the controversial and untested spike proteins from the covid vaccines. I think this was done purely for political reasons and the relentless appeasement of minority groups, and not putting patient safety first. I would be very concerned now if I ever needed a blood transfusion.

    June 14, 2021 at 12:21 pm
  • Laura

    I could not believe it when I read this news. I remember the leaflet you used to get from the NHS transfusion service, which had a whole section on “who can never give blood” and homosexuals were top of the list – it actually said any man who has had sexual contact with another man even once. So, I went onto the transfusion website just now to check the list of who can and cannot give blood. Gays are last on the list and the messaging has changed drastically.

    I’m with Westminster Fly – I would be very worried now if I ever needed a blood transfusion.

    June 14, 2021 at 12:46 pm
    • westminsterfly

      And blood transfusions are not as rare as you might think – I have two close family members who have both needed transfusions.

      June 14, 2021 at 1:05 pm
  • Antoine Bisset

    This baloney is from the NHS that killed dozens if not hundreds of people in Scotland because NHS Scotland bought blood products (plasma etc) on the cheap from the USA. In the USA selling blood is a way of getting some money to buy drugs. There are still some people around who are suffering as a result.
    Next, is the matter of answering some very intrusive questions. Maybe homosexuals are happy to answer such questions – a matter of “pride” – but I am not. I stopped giving blood after they continued to ask questions out loud in public, even after my complaints. I really did not want my medical conditions rehearsed in front of my work colleagues.
    Three months is an arbitrary figure, plucked from nowhere. When you have sex with someone you are, it has been said, also having sex with everyone they have previously been with. Homosexuals are notoriously promiscuous, and between that and the possibility of someone actually telling lies (oh, no, surely not) this is one of the daftest and most dangerous moves that the NHS has made.
    One question, is every donation tested for all possible horrors?

    June 14, 2021 at 12:47 pm
    • westminsterfly

      Yes I wondered about that three month figure . . . I understand that this is supposedly the length of time from infection with HIV to when it becomes detectable in the bloodstream – but we are all different so who’s to say that with some people it may take four months or longer to become detectable? It’s a known fact that there are some people who appear to have some form of natural immunity to HIV – there have been recorded cases. It does seem like Russian Roulette to me.
      I agree about lack of privacy and breach of confidentiality in the NHS. I recently had to undergo a minor medical procedure and was herded into one of a row of semi-open cubicles and I could hear with crystal clarity three or four of the patients around me talking about their conditions and giving private details. I assume people could hear me. The NHS really isn’t fit for purpose.

      June 14, 2021 at 2:56 pm
  • Glypto Dropem

    I guess I will be stockpiling my own blood if I ever need a non-emergency surgical procedure.

    June 14, 2021 at 1:49 pm
    • Antoine Bisset

      Well, another benefit would be running the 10,000 metres in the Olympics, like Lasse Viren.

      June 14, 2021 at 9:22 pm
  • Athanasius

    Given that governments everywhere are coercing the global population into receiving highly dangerous vaccines for a non-existent world health crisis, it is hardly surprising that they are now prepared to expose citizens to HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases with this new ruling. We have some very evil people running this world right now and they are intent on depopulation by one means or another.

    I noticed today when I went to shop at Morrisons that they have the LGBT rainbow flags up on the windows of their stores. This is currently being orchestrated across the board, with banks, food manufacturers, superstores, etc., all promoting this Marxist counter-Christian culture under the pretext of community charity. I made a point of complaining tot he manager of the store, reminding her that people from all backgrounds shop in these stores and therefore the company should not be promoting a political ideology in favour of a very small section. I fully intend tomorrow to make a formal complaint to the Trading Standards people since this kind of thing, along with the Marxist BLM “taking the knee” nonsense is also being pushed on our culture.

    Bottom line is we’re all going to have to stop using stores like Morrisons or any other business that abuses its position in society to push evil, while those of us who like football are going to have to be brave and stop watching it. They’ve already pushed women’s football for sometime, another way of assaulting Christian culture, so it’s really time we all took steps to hit them in the pocket.

    Just as I write, I can hear Boris Johnson on the TV in the background lying to the public again about the “new variant” of CIVD in order to delay the full lifting of restrictions on June 21, as he promised. He has his two partners in crime alongside him, as usual, Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance, a pair of liars who are assisting Johnson in his continued crimes against the British people. Sooner or later the British people are going to have to open their eyes to these demons.

    June 14, 2021 at 6:27 pm
    • westminsterfly

      Please tell me somewhere where the ‘rainbow’ logo / flag isn’t on display? Persecuted minority? I don’t think so. Even in my home town our black and white zebra crossing in the main thoroughfare has now been replaced with a ‘rainbow’ crossing. I spoke to our local (Lib Dem) councillor about it and he made vague noises about the NHS/Covid and that ‘it can mean whatever you want it to mean’. Yeah right. My bank displays rainbow logos as well. I turned on the computer at work today and Windows 10 brought up a random ‘LGBTQI’ desktop. My local Tesco sell ‘trans’ congratulations cards (‘You’re trans-tastic!’ – I kid you not) and other similar things (as well as abortifacients and contraceptives in the pharmacy). What can you do? Given my circumstances, I truly haven’t got time or am best placed location wise to use various tiny independent shops to get all I need. It’s a one-stop shop for me, once a week, and I have to use the Tesco pharmacy because of necessary medication, but then every single pharmacy in the UK – either online or in-store – sells abortifacients and contraceptives – without exception. I agree with you, but even with my eyes open to these demons, what can one do? Live in a field and eat grass and not take medication and get ill? I think realistically the best we can do is to challenge this sort of thing wherever possible, and limit the amount that we remotely cooperate with evil as best we can. To avoid it totally would be nigh on impossible in today’s world (especially in Outer London – it might be a bit easier on the Outer Hebrides or somewhere like that). I can’t remember the quote properly or the Saint who made it, but I remember reading some quote that as long as we live on this earth, we always have our feet in the mud, or similar words to that effect. I’m truly not making excuses for myself, but I think that to stop remotely cooperating with all these evils, would be impossible for most of us. As for sports, I agree with you 100%. These are not necessary for survival like food and medication.

      June 14, 2021 at 8:48 pm
    • editor


      A couple of years ago, I was so irritated at seeing the LGBT+ logo across my local bank / ATM, I went into the branch and said I wanted to lodge a formal complaint about this, since I don’t want to be confronted with an ideology which I find offensive every time I need to check that I’m not yet down to my last £million, so how do I go about lodging a formal complaint? The bank assistant looked puzzled in the extreme, explaining that she would fill out the form and submit the complaint. I had to give my personal contact details etc and the reason(s) for my complaint, On completion of the form, she said she would send it to wherever it was to be sent. When I asked if I would receive a reply, she shrugged and said she assumed so. That shows how few complaints they get, a cynical sense which was later confirmed when I received no reply.

      So, I’m afraid I agree with WF on this – between moaning about the LGBT+ dominance around us and the terrifying experience of being surrounded by masked people at every turn, I am increasingly concerned about being hauled off by half-a-dozen men in white coats in the not-too-far-distant future.

      It’s definitely ridiculous that we have to put up with these idiocies. but that is, I fear, the way t’s going to be, until we get a good pope who will consecrate Russia. Nothing less will see off the madness around us.

      We discuss it all here, not merely to let off steam and offer support to the troops, but, to educate readers who may be unaware of the fact that there is another school of thought apart from that put forward by the PC / WOKE brigade on various issues. That said, apart from doing things like lodging formal complaints (or even informal complaints) about the madness around us, there’s not a lot more we can do to change things. Our MPs and MSPs are useless: they have clearly sold whatever passes for their souls to “wokeness” and the entire diabolical disorientation around us.

      To your final sentence I say – absolutely. I agree. Roll on…

      June 14, 2021 at 10:20 pm
      • Faith of Our Fathers

        Personally ED as far as am concerned ( if it’s to do with my Granddaughters) the talking with these Perverts is Finished. And that includes their Pervertetd Teachers also. What it must be like for Parents to hear From their Child that they now want a So Called Sex Change . Is to me unimaginable.

        June 14, 2021 at 10:45 pm
      • westminsterfly

        Here’s one organisation that DEFINITELY should be ditched. If any of you are National Trust members, toss your sub in a.s.a.p. I tossed mine in years ago after the Felbrigg Hall, Norfolk scandal where NT volunteers were coerced into wearing rainbow lanyards against their will, and NT insisted that the long-dead owner of Felbrigg Hall was ‘gay’ although there wasn’t a shred of evidence to prove this. I gave my reason for tossing my sub in to NT staff over the phone and the woman I spoke with couldn’t have been more rude and dismissive if she tried. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/06/14/national-trust-tells-volunteers-wear-rainbow-face-paint-glitter

        June 15, 2021 at 8:55 am
      • Josephine

        Westminster Fly,

        I remember reading that about the National Trust and meant to mention it to a friend of mine who always has a “pass” to take her children to various NT venues. I am not sure she’d do what you did, though. She is quite easy-going, although she is not approving of the LGBTQ+ lifestyle.

        June 15, 2021 at 10:50 am
      • westminsterfly

        I would tell her to keep the children away from these places unless she wants them to be indoctrinated with not just LGBT stuff, but also BLM and other PC propaganda. There is an organisation now which are trying to oust the PC brigade who hold high offices in the NT. https://www.restore-trust.co.uk

        June 15, 2021 at 11:27 am
  • Faith of Our Fathers

    Athanasius am with you all the way here and as far as am concerned they can shove their Football where the Sun don’t Shine . Am probably a couple of Decades older than you and can remember Clearly 40.000 Rangers Fans Chanting Wilsons a Darkie. At Paul Wilson who was the First Coloured Man to play for Celtic. I actually thought that Celtic would show some Principles rather than Money and refuse to take The Colin Kaperknickers Black Lives Matter Knee but it seems not. Then again most of Celtic supporters now are Confirmed Marxists so it should be no surprise. As for the Alphabet Mob . It seems that there is no stopping them wanting to Poison the rest of us with Their Decadent Lifestyle. Also as for the 3 Month Rule Garbage Rule. Over 10 Years ago their was a Program called. Unsafe Sex And The City about The Homosexual Lifestyle in London. One Doctor said -AIDS -that people now think has more or less gone away ( because it is so called Homophobic to talk about ) is at The Epidemic Stage in The London Area amongst Homosexuals. Now that was 10 years ago and I don’t think the Program got any more than 2 Episodes was removed. They actually interviewed a Man who had been at 50 Sex Parties in one week . My God I must get out more as I haven’t been to ONE Sex Party in my entire life.

    One Fact even the most Rabid Homosexual cannot hide is that Practicing Homosexuals Die Approximately 20 Years younger than Normal People. And I say Normal because Homosexuality is Unnatural and Abnormal. Of course these Facts years ago were very clear . Now they go round about the roundabouts and say that Health Figures are harder to get . Of course they are ,for again The Truth cannot be allowed to be told . Homosexuals Die Younger.
    Anyhow if by any chance God Forbid I need a Blood Transfusion please tell them that Officially I am now a JEHOVAS WITNESS.

    June 14, 2021 at 7:27 pm
    • Athanasius


      Yes indeed.

      I always like to quote St. Paul to them: “Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

      For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.” Romans 1: 25-27

      June 14, 2021 at 11:50 pm
  • RCAVictor

    The chief nurse’s public statement is full of blatant contradictions and absurdities:

    1. “donors will no longer be asked if they are a man who has had sex with another man.” vs.” Instead, any individual who attends to give blood regardless of gender will be asked if they have had sex and, if so, about recent sexual behaviours.”

    Translation: donors will still be asked if they are a man who has had sex with another man!

    2. “Anyone who has had the same sexual partner for the last three months will be eligible to donate.”

    Question: how does having sex with one male partner for 3 months reduce the risk of infected blood?
    Answer: it doesn’t

    3. “Patient safety is at the heart of everything we do.”

    Response: that may have hopefully been the case before, but it is painfully obvious that patient safety has been thrown under the bus to placate homosexual activists. At least, on paper. See my summary.

    4. “This change is about switching around how we assess the risk of exposure to a sexual infection, so it is more tailored to the individual.”

    Response: In the New World Order, there are no objective profession-wide standards for medicine, just as with everything else. Tailoring objective standards to each individual is disturbingly similar to the double-talk in Amoris Laetitia regarding divorced and re-“married” couples. Priests must “accompany” each individual situation without applying objective Church teaching = nurse must tailor blood analysis to each individual situation without applying objective standards of infection.

    5. ““All donors will now be asked about sexual behaviours which might have increased their risk of infection, particularly recently acquired infections.”

    Translation: once again, male donors will be asked if they have had sex with another man!

    Summary: this is meaningless double-talk. It sounds to me as though the information gathered will actually be the same, just asked differently. What an idiotic, contemptible game….but perfectly obedient to cultural Marxist diktats.

    Meanwhile, I think Glypto Dropem has the right idea.

    June 14, 2021 at 7:29 pm
    • editor

      RCA Victor,

      “…I think Glypto Dropem has the right idea.”

      And so – absolutely – do I !

      June 14, 2021 at 10:29 pm
  • Faith of Our Fathers

    Victor You Have the wrong End of the Stick. I think. Do you not know that the Chief Nurse is called The Chief Nurse for a reason. Now you should know, just as I should know ,that Chiefs are usually Experts and Seldom if Ever Wrong. I mean just look at TWO Masks Fauci. 🙈🙈

    June 14, 2021 at 7:37 pm
  • gabriel syme

    This news is concerning alright. Even if a homosexual man does not have any blood-borne disease, very many gay men take (otherwise unnecessary) daily medication (“Prep”) to reduce the chance of them catching HIV via their sexual conduct. This drug or its byproducts may also show up in donated blood.

    The circumstances are another example of the state using its power to turn public services into a vehicle for boosting the self esteem of homosexuals. We would not wish anyone low self esteem, of course, but the health service is important and should be run only as a health service.

    The possible threats from this decision were brought home this week in a new story:

    A public inquiry has begun hearing from former students after more than 120 pupils at a school for disabled children were caught up in what has been called the worst treatment disaster in NHS history.

    From 1974 to 1987, those children were offered treatment for haemophilia at Treloar’s College.

    At least 72 died after being given a drug contaminated with HIV and viral hepatitis.


    NB the reference to a “drug contaminated with HIV” is that excerpt is erroneous – it was blood which was contaminated as the story makes very clear elsewhere.

    June 27, 2021 at 8:49 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: