conversely - if a hospital ER staff member looks at someone and they seem flu like, should the staff member give them a mask?
Yes, standard hospital policy. Especially if you even have some inkling it might be TB.
what if it offends the person who appears to be a risk?
also, the flu spreads while “gay” doesn’t
1 STD pint in a pool of a few million (+/-) pints.
I understand the lawsuit but in no way agree with as anything more then a frivilous one. Also, the law makes sense and afrivilous lawsuit will not get it repealed.
- he wasn’t gay
- they test the blood
Imagine if you went to give blood and the person basically said “get out fggt” I’m sure you would be thrilled.
Hospitals are the one place where compassion and logic lines get blurred and mixed.
1.)prove it (as cold as it sounds, for which I apologize)
2.)whats the expense (labor and materials)? whats the accuracy? whats the odds of human error in inventory management?
meh. I’ve been called worse things. But in reality I’d be stand offish as well, along the lines of ‘guess the shortage isnt that bad eh?’, but I wouldnt waste money and time on suing over it.
ok, I’ll buy you a dozen roses for you to take to his house and we’ll see what happens.
Nikuk, so involved in threads today. See, there are still some good discussions going on here. 
http://www.fda.gov/biologicsbloodvaccines/bloodbloodproducts/questionsaboutblood/ucm108186.htm
After reading that it’s pretty much /thread.
The first two alone…
Men who have had sex with men since 1977 have an HIV prevalence (the total number of cases of a disease that are present in a population at a specific point in time) 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and 8000 times higher than repeat blood donors (American Red Cross). Even taking into account that 75% of HIV infected men who have sex with men already know they are HIV positive and would be unlikely to donate blood, the HIV prevalence in potential donors with history of male sex with males is 200 times higher than first time blood donors and 2000 times higher than repeat blood donors.
Men who have had sex with men account for the largest single group of blood donors who are found HIV positive by blood donor testing.
And boom, headshot…
Blood donor testing using current advanced technologies has greatly reduced the risk of HIV transmission but cannot yet detect all infected donors or prevent all transmission by transfusions. While today’s highly sensitive tests fail to detect less than one in a million HIV infected donors, it is important to remember that in the US there are over 20 million transfusions of blood, red cell concentrates, plasma or platelets every year. Therefore, even a failure rate of 1 in a million can be significant if there is an increased risk of undetected HIV in the blood donor population.
Detection of HIV infection is particularly challenging when very low levels of virus are present in the blood for example during the so-called “window period”. The “window period” is the time between being infected with HIV and the ability of an HIV test to detect HIV in an infected person.
And since there is no “gay test” sometimes it’s just going to come down to a judgement call. Throw his lawsuit out and tell him to suck it up and grow a pair. Maybe if he did, people would stop thinking he was gay. lol
<3 - I perused auto sections and enjoyed an update to a few threads but had nothing relevant to say. I’m not much of “+1” kinda member anymore.
This is purely academic, i don’t care who wants to do what to who.
I do however care about people dumping coolant down drains, throwing oil into lakes, and risking something as vital as a blood pool - whether its AIDS or TB or the fat gene.
Hahahaha… I donated a few months ago. Bet some poor bastard is getting out of the hospital just itching for a Grover’s burger.
lol…
if a jewelry store in the ghetto in DC is most statistically likely to get robbed by a black person, should they stop letting black people enter their store?
They ask if you have had sex with another man.
If by robbing the store said persons caused the unknowing death of 20 random people every time then yes. OR you could limit to certain profiles instead of an entire race/skin color (which is not an even comparison by any means) like black males between the age of 14-24.