Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MacRumors Blood Drive

TigerWoodsIV said:
Who really gave this a negative lol...I mean really?
Click to expand...

i gave it a negative.

I tend not to support individually-focused charity events/actions. All to often, people will do this one event and then feel vindicated and then live their lives in such a way that it undos any benefit or charity that they previously performed.

Instead I often look to education and just overall psychology and mental health as great ways of making this world a better place.


Again, great thing to give blood and all and it is needed, just felt it singles it out at the expense of other charity work. That's all. no big deal.

but i see 4 other people also voted negative.
 
TuffLuffJimmy said:
:D:D


I would donate blood if the red cross would let gays!
Click to expand...

Doesn't make sense that this is a rule. I mean, you can be a completely monogamous relationship, or not sexually active at all! And they test for HIV in all donations... It just boggles my mind. Can't you just, say you're straight? You aren't putting anyone at risk, regardless of what closed minded bigots think. :confused:

EDIT:
Eh, after reading the Red Cross site, I see that their tests don't pick up on the O Strain of HIV, which seems to be rare, and only found in Western Africa. I still feel if you are a responsible individual (sexually), be it gay or straight sex, that you should be able to give blood-- provided you have never been to Africa, nor any of your partners. I mean-- shouldn't they ideally tell people they can only donate 3 months after their last sexual encounter to ensure that the window period (false negatives) for HIV has passed?
 
Hello everyone!

I would like to thank you for your interest in the blood drive and hopefully most people can be encouraged to go one stage further and donate.

If you have any questions about donating FEEL FREE TO ASK!
 
Blood Drive

Much as I'd love to help, I received blood transfusions during the "mad cow" period and feel it unlikely anyone would want my blood now.
 
ddolde said:
No way am I giving blood !
Click to expand...

Such a sad, sad attitude to have, given if you needed it, and there was none there... well, it doesn't bear thinking about it.

Definitely a good thing to do - it's free, puts nobody out and you can take it or leave it. I'm not sure what 'hilarious' people rated it negative.

Interesting re the mad cow thing - yet it doesn't preclude you giving blood in the UK! Is that *anybody* who's spent a while in the UK? Or just those, as above, who received transfusions during the outbreak?

+ 1 macrumors.
 
iOrlando said:
I tend not to support individually-focused charity events/actions. All to often, people will do this one event and then feel vindicated and then live their lives in such a way that it undos any benefit or charity that they previously performed.

...

Again, great thing to give blood and all and it is needed
Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad you think it's needed because you pretty much just talked me out of doing it.

I mean, if I'm just gonna go out and undo it, what's the point of even going in the first place?
 
Great cause, hopefully a lot of people will consider donating. Unfortunately I can't actually give blood, but would if I could :) Well done to you all!
 
iOrlando said:
i gave it a negative.

I tend not to support individually-focused charity events/actions. All to often, people will do this one event and then feel vindicated and then live their lives in such a way that it undos any benefit or charity that they previously performed.

Instead I often look to education and just overall psychology and mental health as great ways of making this world a better place.


Again, great thing to give blood and all and it is needed, just felt it singles it out at the expense of other charity work. That's all. no big deal.

but i see 4 other people also voted negative.
Click to expand...

How exactly does one undo the benefit of giving blood? Somehow I don't think that after giving blood somebody is likely to go out throw themselves in front of a car just because they feel "vindicated." I understand your point about one-time donations/events etc., but pick your battles. Nothing but good can come from a bunch of forum members going out and donating blood for the first time. And who knows, maybe some of them will keep doing it when they see how easy it is. Everybody needs to take a first step.
 
shinynewthing said:
Gee, I'd love too... but they wont take blood from a healthy gay man...
Click to expand...

Darkroom said:
in Canada, believe it or not, Canadian Blood Services has archaic rules stating i can't give blood because i'm gay. is it the same in the USA?
Click to expand...

I don't understand!!! Hahaha. I know I already posted about this-- but really. If you said you were straight and donated, and the blood passes all of their disease checks, they would never know! It's not like they have a gay test or something...
 
iOrlando said:
i gave it a negative.

I tend not to support individually-focused charity events/actions. All to often, people will do this one event and then feel vindicated and then live their lives in such a way that it undos any benefit or charity that they previously performed.

Instead I often look to education and just overall psychology and mental health as great ways of making this world a better place.


Again, great thing to give blood and all and it is needed, just felt it singles it out at the expense of other charity work. That's all. no big deal.

but i see 4 other people also voted negative.
Click to expand...

Lofty aims, no doubt. The type of person who gives blood once, thinks 'well that's my part done' - as you're alluding to in your statement - then never returns is the type of person who won't give blood in the first instance unless motivation like this is present. And is the type of person who it's incredibly important to get blood from, even that once. So what if they feel vindicated? I'd rather they felt vindicated having donated once.

Education, psychology and mental health won't help a patient who requires blood. Even taking your use of the term 'education' to mean educating people about giving blood, I'd have thought this drive is one way of doing exactly that.

I cannot see reason in your post - rather than give to one charity, and, of course, single it out, you'd rather give to none, and look to psychology and mental health?

In 100% agreement with BigJimmys post - particularly when he says that having taken that first step, many may return. The opportunity cost of your negative attitude towards blood drives is huge.
 
BigJimmyC said:
How exactly does one undo the benefit of giving blood? Somehow I don't think that after giving blood somebody is likely to go out throw themselves in front of a car just because they feel "vindicated." I understand your point about one-time donations/events etc., but pick your battles. Nothing but good can come from a bunch of forum members going out and donating blood for the first time. And who knows, maybe some of them will keep doing it when they see how easy it is. Everybody needs to take a first step.
Click to expand...

dont disagree with you but why cant macrumors highlight other venues that aren't tied to one-time events but instead could change a persons frame of mind such as improving education, peace, nature, etc.

Again, nothing against giving blood, my gripe is when one thing is highlighted over other more board initiatives.


Mental health and psychology are great ways of giving back to the world. I rarely give donations in the form of money to charities. I highly distrust how charities are run and where that money goes. I instead donate time and objects (clothes etc).

I dont believe in giving money to educate children how to read. I instead will take part in after-school program where I think that has a much bigger impact than sending a check to some random book charity. I rarely donate money to a dog shelter. I instead have spent time playing with the dogs and just spending time with them.
 
I'll see ye's for a pint of heavy after we donate aye? See who can stay on their legs longest.
 
Why are there "19 negatives?" How could you honestly take this in any way, shape, or form as "negative?" People are messed up...
 
allmIne said:
Interesting re the mad cow thing - yet it doesn't preclude you giving blood in the UK! Is that *anybody* who's spent a while in the UK? Or just those, as above, who received transfusions during the outbreak?
Click to expand...

I'm a Brit living in the US. Before I lived here I donated regularly, and it drives me crazy that I can't donate.

When I move back soon I will be able to donate fine there. I can *understand* the reason for the rule, but I wonder if any of the Red Cross people making the rules would deny a transfusion if they needed one while on vacation in the UK.

BTW, what "outbreak" are you talking about? Mad Cow Disease? I wouldn't call the number of confirmed vCJD cases an outbreak.
 
The important question is whether or not PC users will be able to receive our blood without having an adverse reaction. Or, maybe they'll come out of surgery feeling better then ever?
 
I am 3 pints away from completing my 8th gallon...should happen this year...
 
iOrlando said:
i gave it a negative.

I tend not to support individually-focused charity events/actions. All to often, people will do this one event and then feel vindicated and then live their lives in such a way that it undos any benefit or charity that they previously performed.

Instead I often look to education and just overall psychology and mental health as great ways of making this world a better place.


Again, great thing to give blood and all and it is needed, just felt it singles it out at the expense of other charity work. That's all. no big deal.

but i see 4 other people also voted negative.
Click to expand...


I hope somebody tells you they are all out of blood, but got plenty of "psychology" when your in a car wreck and in desperate need for blood. Your "psychology" can't be put into IV's...
 
boxandrew said:
I'm a Brit living in the US. Before I lived here I donated regularly, and it drives me crazy that I can't donate.

When I move back soon I will be able to donate fine there. I can *understand* the reason for the rule, but I wonder if any of the Red Cross people making the rules would deny a transfusion if they needed one while on vacation in the UK.

BTW, what "outbreak" are you talking about? Mad Cow Disease? I wouldn't call the number of confirmed vCJD cases an outbreak.
Click to expand...

I think the rules were put in place just as the Mad Cow scare was starting, and they were concerned that it might be far more widespread then it ended up being. Not sure why they never rescinded it, though...perhaps just CYA, or just the fact that without a strong reason changes never get made in bureaucracies like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back