Unbelievable news from the CDC reports that an individual has been identified to have contracted HIV/Aids after a blood transfusion during a kidney transplant. The news saddens me for the recipient, but also angers me that the donor was NOT honest about his lifestyle or health during the blood screening process.Follow the latest report from St. Louis Today: The only recorded case of HIV transmission from a blood transfusion in the last eight years has been linked to a Missouri blood donor, according to a federal report.
A man in his 40s donated contaminated blood at a Missouri blood center in June 2008, according to the report released Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
The man's HIV positive status was not confirmed until after he donated blood a second time, in November 2008. The contaminated blood was destroyed and the man was prohibited from future donations.
In the meantime, investigators found that the man's blood from the first donation had been transfused into two patients. One patient in Arkansas died of heart disease two days after receiving a transfusion during a July 2008 surgery, and it is unknown whether the patient contracted HIV. The second patient, of Colorado, received a blood transfusion during a kidney transplant in August 2008 and later tested positive for HIV.
Lab results confirmed that the blood transfusion was the cause of the HIV infection in the kidney transplant patient. The last known case of HIV transmission from a blood transfusion was in 2002.
Before both blood donations, the Missouri man told health care workers that he did not have any risk factors for HIV. In a follow-up interview with the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services, the man acknowledged having anonymous sexual affairs with men and women before his initial blood donation.
Men who have ever had sex with another man have been banned from donating blood since the early 1980s, a policy upheld in June by a federal review panel.
Health investigators determined that the man had donated blood during the window of time before HIV infection can be detected though screening. That window averages nine days for the tests used by U.S. blood banks.
The risk of contracting HIV from a blood transfusion is about 1 in 1.5 million, according to CDC estimates.
"Even the most sensitive screening technologies currently available cannot identify the presence of HIV infection during the first few days after infection," the report concludes. "Eligibility screening questions, if answered accurately, would have excluded the donor because of his sexual history. It is the responsibility of persons who donate blood to answer screening questionnaires accurately to ensure the safest blood supply possible."
I have been a supporter for quite some time that monogamous gay men should be entitled to donate, knowing that any issues with the donated blood would be appropriately screened and discarded if necessary. I continue to trust that screening process and fault the donor in this case for not citing the correct information. I encourage donors to continue and I appeal to recipients that we all have signed the waiver and understand the risks at hand. The long term benefits do outweigh the risks. At least when I look into the eyes of my daughter, I know that I made the right choice - every time.













