Connect with us

Health & Society

Stop The Unscientific Treatment Of Blood Donors

Published

on

[opinion]-stop-the-unscientific-treatment-of-blood-donors

Our health care services are in high demand for blood. Many times, the supply of blood is insufficient and there’s a risk that it will be lacking in many countries. This is a major problem in Europe and the EU.

It is therefore problematic that many countries have laws that exclude men who have had sex with other men from being blood donors. Even if these bars are not based on evidence, it is still problematic.

  • Blood from men having sex with other men is not contaminated. The fears of yesterday are not the same as those of today. (Photo: testalize.me).

It is still common today that men who have had sex with other men are not allowed to donate blood. The rules for heterosexual men are the same. The group is subject to more restrictions and a longer period of deferral than other groups.

This is the situation in countries like Denmark, Norway and Sweden. This is surprising, since the Nordic countries pride themselves on not discriminating against LGBT-group members.

As an example, blood donors who are not in the group of men who have sex only with men can be blood donors if they haven’t had a new sex partner for a specified period of time.

They can still have a sexual relationship with their partner.

Celibacy enforced

Men who have had sex with other men may have to completely abstain from all sexual contact for a few months before donating blood. This is true even if the men have a single, steady partner.

Celibacy is required of men who have had sex with other men in order to donate blood. This is not only unnecessary, but also deprives donors of health care and constitutes discrimination based upon sexual orientation.

These men are also denied the opportunity to have a normal sexual life with a partner like heterosexuals can.

This is a gross breach of the marriage relationship between these married male couples.

This is not required. Everyone who wants to donate blood should be judged on their own behaviour, not because they are part of a certain group. No matter if you’re straight, bisexual or gay, your sexual history can pose a greater risk. It is time to deal with this issue, and allow men who have had sex only with men in Europe to donate blood on the same terms that other men do. This is the case for Ireland, Spain and Germany, to name a few.

Blood from men who had sex with other men is not contaminated. The fears of yesterday are not the same as those of today. We can eliminate rules that discriminate against a group if we let science override them. This will allow all individuals to be accepted as blood donors based on their individual merits. It’s time to have blood donation rules based on evidence. This would increase the number of potential blood donors in Europe and help reduce the need for blood in our hospitals.

Jessica Polfjard, a Swedish MEP from the European People’s Party, raised the issue at the European Parliament in March. Her suggestion is to adjust EU high standards of quality and safety within the legislation on blood tissues and cells, which is currently under revision.

Discrimination is when you state that different rules are based on your belonging to a particular group and not being assessed as an individual. National regulations should be based on individual risk assessments and evidence, and not on belonging to a group. The European Centre-Right LGBT+ Alliance is in support of this initiative.

In countries where discriminatory laws still exist, there are campaigns and discussions to bring about change. The European Centre-Right LGBT+ Alliance is supporting these efforts.

We call on governments and responsible authorities of EU member countries, as well as every other country in Europe, to take action to promote evidence-based blood donations and to stop discriminatory practices against a particular group of potential donors. All blood is valuable. Can we afford to act in any other way?

Author

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Health & Society

EU treading Dangerous Waters: The Perils of Psychedelics in Therapeutic Use

Published

on

The European Commission is getting ready to review citizens’ proposals and one controversial idea on the table is the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative that supports the exploration and implementation of psychedelic treatments for mental wellbeing issues. Advocates of this initiative highlight the advantages of using psychedelics in addressing mental health concerns; however it’s crucial to carefully assess the consequences of making these substances mainstream for therapeutic use, it already happened with way too many “pharma products” and end up being dangerous street drugs, as this is what they actually were from the beginning.

The Illusory Promise of Psychedelics

Supporters of this “therapies” frequently promote these substances as amazing remedies for profound mental health challenges like depression and anxiety disorders such as PTSD are regularly highlighted by them in support of their claims. However, these early research findings are willfully misinterpreted and exaggerated. The “positive outcomes” observed in limited research studies do not automatically translate to safety and effectiveness across wider and more varied demographic groups, often the contrary. Throughout history the fascination with a quick fix for mental health issues has often resulted in disappointment and harm, if not death.

A Lack of Comprehensive Understanding

The insufficient scientific knowledge about psychedelics raises concerns within the community as the intricate workings of the human brain remain a mystery when influenced by these substances. There are risks such as psychological distress and worsening of preexisting mental health conditions that make it unthinkable to integrate psychedelics into mainstream therapy practices at all. It is crucial to acknowledge the variations in individual experiences and biological compositions to prevent unintended harm rather than aiding in treatment efforts.

Regulatory and Ethical Concerns

The push for government endorsement of psychedelic therapies raises numerous ethical questions. Should substances with known psychoactive properties be part of mainstream health care? The regulatory environment surrounding these compounds is fraught with challenges, including ensuring quality control, standardizing dosages, and preventing misuse. With the legalization movements in various regions, the potential for recreational abuse expands, risking public health and safety.

Historical Context and Social Implications

Looking back, the late 1960s and early 1970s were marked by a psychedelic counterculture that resulted in societal turmoil and increased drug abuse. The legacy of this era still looms large; many young individuals romanticize psychedelic use without regarding the severe consequences that accompanied its earlier popularity, including addiction, mental health crises, and a societal disregard for safety protocols.

A Dangerous Precedent

By calling for a more prominent role for psychedelics in treatment protocols, the advocates of the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative may unintentionally set a dangerous precedent. Replacing established, evidence-based treatments with unproven psychedelic therapies could detract from the very real progress made in mental health care. It could shift focus away from holistic approaches that consider lifestyle, therapeutic counseling, and medication tailored to individual needs.

Conclusion

The debate surrounding the ‘PsychedeliCare’ initiative should prompt a vigilant and cautious examination of the implications of endorsing psychedelics as treatment options. While there is a critical need for innovative approaches in mental health care, rushing to embrace unproven therapies poses significant risks. It is paramount that we prioritize rigorous scientific scrutiny, ethical considerations, and the well-being of individuals over the allure of quick solutions. The only clear path forward is one grounded in proven therapies, comprehensive research, and unwavering commitment to public health.

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Why chocolate should not be given to dogs

Published

on

Chocolate is a favorite delicacy for people, but for cats and dogs it is a real poison, writes the magazine ” Sciences et Avenir” and explains why pets should not be “pampered” with chocolate under any circumstances.

For them, chocolate is toxic, because it is not properly absorbed by their body. This is due to the alkaloid theobromine, which is contained in cocoa and therefore in chocolate.

The substance becomes dangerous to health when large amounts of it are stored in the liver. About 12 grams of theobromine are contained in dark chocolate, twice as much in milk chocolate, and very small amounts in white chocolate.

Theobromine does not harm humans, as the human body manages to break it down quickly.

However, it takes 20 hours for dogs to get rid of this molecule. It can build up in their liver and cause poisoning if large amounts of chocolate are ingested at once.

Among the symptoms are vomiting, diarrhea, rapid pulse, convulsions.

The same is true for cats. However, they are less attracted to chocolate than dogs because they cannot taste sweets with their tongues, although there are exceptions.

In addition, pet obesity is the subject of a number of educational campaigns aimed at owners.

A court in North West England has banned a British man from keeping pets for the next 10 years because his Dalmatian became too fat. wrote the English tabloid “Sun” in November 2009.

40-year-old man John Green, a resident of Macclesfield in Cheshire, showed extreme irresponsibility towards his dog Barney and fed him chips and chocolate.

Thus, in just three months, it became several times fatter than normal for its breed and reached 70 kg.

Green was tipped off by alarmed, vigilant fellow citizens.

Animal control officials warned Green that his dog’s health was in danger and recommended that he be put on a diet.

However, he did not follow the recommendations and the dog continued to gain weight.

The Dalmatian was eventually removed from his owner’s home in June and put on a diet in a private kennel, where staff made sure he got enough exercise.

As a result, Barney, who is eight years old, lost 40 kg.

Green pleaded guilty to causing his dog unnecessary suffering, but the court found some mitigating circumstances because the man treated Barney more like a friend than a dog and did not realize he was harming him.

That’s why Green was only sentenced to 200 hours of community service and to pay £780 in costs.

Illustrative Photo by Glenn: https://www.pexels.com/photo/high-angle-photo-of-a-corgi-looking-upwards-2664417/

Author

Continue Reading

Health & Society

Russian Orthodox Church calls on mass culture to abandon ‘images promoting alcoholism’

Published

on

On the occasion of the Day of Sobriety celebrated in the country today, the Russian Orthodox Church called on mass culture not to promote alcoholism, TASS reported.

The agency recalls that the All-Russian Day of Sobriety is celebrated on the initiative of the Russian Orthodox Church on September 11 to remind people of the harm caused by alcohol. On this day, in some parts of Russia, the sale of alcohol is limited or completely prohibited.

“The culture of attitude towards this is very important. There are many “nice jokes” about alcoholism in our everyday culture. There is nothing good about that. We know what the state of intoxication leads to. Those who deal with mass culture should make an effort that the image of the “dear drunkard” should still leave our mass culture,” said the head of the synodal department of the Moscow Patriarchate for Church Interaction on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg Forum of United Cultures with society and media Vladimir Legoida.

Asked whether it would be appropriate to ban or restrict the sale of alcohol across the country, he said “that would be wonderful”. “But it is important that people do this consciously, independently, not because someone is forcing them, and also that there is, as it is customary to say, a public consensus,” he stated.

Legoida noted that the category of “sobriety” is important for the church in general, which refers not only to abstinence from alcohol.

Meanwhile, during a press conference dedicated to the All-Russian Day of Sobriety, Russia’s Deputy Health Minister Oleg Salagai said that alcohol abuse can reduce a man’s life expectancy by six years and a woman by five years.

“The systemic measures that were adopted allowed us to really reduce alcohol consumption. Today, it can be confidently said that Russia is not one of the most drinking countries in the world,” said the deputy minister, who pointed out that in 2023 alcohol consumption in the country was about 8.4 liters per person, while at the beginning of the century the indicator was in double digits.

Illustrative Photo by EVG Kowalievska: https://www.pexels.com/photo/selective-focus-photography-of-assorted-brand-liquor-bottles-1128259/

Author

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2023 EuroTimes

Exit mobile version