The FDA Just Eased Its Restrictions On Gay Men Donating Blood Amid Pandemic Shortages

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is loosening restrictions on blood donations from gay and bisexual men amid a blood shortage brought on by the coronavirus pandemic, which has caused “unprecedented challenges” to the national blood supply.

The FDA revised guidelines published Thursday that recommended a three-month deferral for men who have sex with men. The previous policy was a full year ban.

The three-month deferral will also apply to those who recently got tattoos or piercings, as well as former sex workers or injection drug users, who were previously indefinitely banned from donating.

The new guidelines will remain in place throughout the duration of the pandemic and will be updated to incorporate public comment within 60 days of the national emergency being lifted.

The FDA has faced mounting pressure from Democratic lawmakers and activist groups to change its donation policy.

Donor centers have experienced a sharp drop in blood donations due to social distancing rules and the cancellation of blood drives.

The American Red Cross announced last month it had to cancel 2,700 blood drives – where the organization collects more than 80 percent of its blood donations – due to the pandemic.

The FDA attributed the change in policy to experience in other countries like the United Kingdom and Canada with a three-month deferral and improved testing.

“Progress!” said AIDS activist Peter Staley. “But they still need to include a no-window exception for these plasma studies, using HIV viral load tests to assure safety.”

The policy change came after weeks of pressure from GLAAD and LGBTQ advocacy groups to end the “antiquated ban” for donating blood.

“The FDA cannot let an outdated and discriminatory ban on blood donations from gay and bi men get in the way of potentially life-saving treatment for the country’s painful current health crisis,” said GLAAD President and CEO Sarah Kate Ellis before the FDA’s policy change. “Continuing to enforce this antiquated policy is dangerous, irresponsible, and flies in the face of recommendations from medical experts.”