Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

amitguptaneedsyou.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 247 posts

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#151

Post by mistermann »

corin_ wrote: post #133
kristopolous wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah very good then. Well since the CDC now says that blacks and women are the most at-risk for HIV, we should probably change the rules with the times then, right? What's that? It now sound horribly offensive, erroneous, and bad policy? Well sorry about that! Gotta be consistent you know.

You're wrong on the facts part, as of this month the CDC still states "men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most severely affected by HIV", with their estimated stats being that 2% of the US population are MSM, and they accounted for 61% of new HIV infections in 2009. MSM accounted for 49% of HIV infections in 2008. (Those years are most recent available data.) For more d…

Good point. Very few people seem to be aware of the actual statistics on this subject, and not terribly interested in debating it further once once someone links to actual data which is quite frankly unequivocal. A bit ironic considering how self proclaimed enlightened people tend to look down their nose at the "uninformed" masses who think HIV is a "gay disease".

I have no issue with gay people at all, and on an absolute numbers basis, infection rates are not terribly high within that overall community. I just find it immensely interesting how people's normal thought processes (even those who are normally extremely logical and data oriented) are fundamentally altered when the subject of discussion is race, gender, sexuality, or culture.

Thanks for pointing it out.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#152

Post by mikeleeorg »

watmough wrote: post #115
corin_ wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some progress has been made, in the UK now the (blood) ban only effects men who've had sex with men in the past 12 months, which is better.

Interesting, as a former, non-gay, UK resident, I'm not allowed to give blood in the US, even though I was allowed to obtain a green-card, and screened for HIV by a US doctor in London. I believed at the time this was due to the UK CJD scare. Can anyone confirm? My gf at the time, also reported being denied the opportunity to give blood, after declaring on the form that she was in a relationship with a UK national.

I can confirm that. I lived in the UK for a short six months during that scare. Whenever I went to give blood around that time, I was asked that question, then denied. I haven't gone to give blood in a while though, so I don't know if that restriction is still in place or not.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#153

Post by morrow »

corin_ wrote: post #141
morrow wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the STD test was only going to be able to rule-out donors who are positive at the time of sign-up anyhow. After submitting to the test and giving their sample, everyone becomes potentially infected until you test them again. I suppose the idea is not to waste time and resources on ineligible donors, and it seems as though they've made the decision that profiling based on sexual orientation is the best balance be…

Because testing can show the blood to be clean even for someone who does have HIV, and blood/marrow aren't (I believe / assume) things you can just stick in a fridge for a couple of years and then test again.

From wikipedia: "The vast majority of people (97%) have detectable antibodies by three months after HIV infection; a six-month window is extremely rare with modern antibody testing."

So if the transfer can work with a 3 month delay (I'm not sure if it can, just assuming), and the HIV test comes back clean, you're going to have a 97% chance of a true-negative, 3% chance of false-negative.

At that point, comparing it to the odds that the "eliglble" donor is lying about their sexual activities or is simply HIV positive and heterosexual, the ban on letting gays register seems draconian, and a scientific test-based approach seems better all around.

Especially when you consider that if no donor is found, the patient could die anyway. So if the only donor is gay, test them, and then notify the patient of the 3% chance of contracting HIV from a false-negative patient versus the 100% odds of dying from Leukemia, and see what decision they make.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV_test#cite_note-7

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#154

Post by gujk »

burgerbrain wrote: post #61
cpher wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, every time I buy something at a store, I have to give them my addresses. I hope you're kidding...

Many stores ask for it. Radioshack I believe is a prime example of this. I've never heard of them hassling you if you refuse however.

Radioshack stopped doing that a while back.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#155

Post by gujk »

eridius wrote: post #147
zasz wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It costs money to sequence DNA and calculate someone's ancestry. 23andMe loses money whenever it sells a kit. Are you seriously too lazy to save a nonprofit a few hundred bucks by spending 1 second to indicate your race? Also, every time I buy something at a store, I have to give them my addresses. Including my phone number and a few extra ways to contact me in case I move, and you know, someone is dying and needs my…

If 23andMe loses money on kits, where are they making their money?

Advertising and upsell on the website features.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#156

Post by morrow »

mistermann wrote: post #151
corin_ wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're wrong on the facts part, as of this month the CDC still states "men who have sex with men (MSM) of all races and ethnicities remain the population most severely affected by HIV", with their estimated stats being that 2% of the US population are MSM, and they accounted for 61% of new HIV infections in 2009. MSM accounted for 49% of HIV infections in 2008. (Those years are most recent available data.) For more d…

Good point. Very few people seem to be aware of the actual statistics on this subject, and not terribly interested in debating it further once once someone links to actual data which is quite frankly unequivocal. A bit ironic considering how self proclaimed enlightened people tend to look down their nose at the "uninformed" masses who think HIV is a "gay disease". I have no issue with gay people at all, and on an abs…

I'm also aware of the statistics - roughly split between gays and heterosexuals. I think the problem lies more with the epistemological side of things. As the marrow registry, how do you know whether or not someone is gay? How do you know whether someone is HIV positive? Only one of these questions actually matters for donors, and only one of them is scientifically testable.

I'd agree with people who are okay with profiling if there wasn't a reliable test for HIV, or if there weren't enough resources to test for it, but I haven't found any evidence for either of those potential claims.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#157

Post by haugstrup »

nostromo wrote: post #78

Since I'm still gay, I'm not allowed to help, no matter how many times you ask. I get why they do this and I shouldn't let it bother me, but emotionally it feels the same as if they just said, "Please become a donor, nohomo." edit: Of course I still wish the very best for Amit.

All Europeans are also banned from giving blood for forever. I'm a very recent transplant to the US from Denmark. I was a regular blood donor in Denmark and checked up on the US regulations before moving here. Even wrote the local blood bank because I didn't believe that the "if you've lived more than 5 years in Europe, you can't give blood ever" was for real. Sadly, the rule is very much real.

The blood bank was also annoyed but there's nothing they can do. I'd write my representative, but as a non-citizen I don't have one.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#158

Post by darrellsilver »

corin_ wrote: post #143
tshtf wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kevin, How do you feel about lying?

I (not Kevin) feel no moral objection to lying for a good cause. If I absolutely know that I am safe, but the policy does not allow me to donate, then I would have no problem lying to save a life. If I (and this is taking extra-wide margins) have not had any sexual contact in the past 12 months (or anything else that leads to something like HIV, such as needle use), and have always tested positive, then any doctor wo…

When I asked friends to donate for Amit, I had a hard time asking them to lie when donating. This is the limit of "lying for a good cause", especially when the person doesn't know Amit.

Re: Amit Gupta hasn't found a marrow transplant match; today's your last chance.

#159

Post by chc »

corin_ wrote: post #136
caryme wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least in the blood ban in the US, the only enforcement is the honesty policy. The irony with this is that the men who are honest about having sex with men are also more likely to be aware of their HIV status than men who lie at the blood bank. I feel the same as nostromo every time I am asked to give blood. I know I'm HIV-negative. I'm not South Asian, so I couldn't help Amit anyway.

I don't entirely agree with your irony (unless - and I've only seen this on TV... in fact I think only in the simpsons - do blood doners get paid in the US?) Certainly in the UK, where there is no benefit for giving blood, I can only assume that those who lie about it are doing so because they too know (or 100% believe, possibly incorrectly) that they are clean, and they don't want what they see as pointless policy t…

You can't think of any reason somebody might lie about being gay if they aren't paid money to do so?
Post reply on HN