Bmj.com today published information of a new research, which supports changing the lifetime blood donation ban imposed, on men who have intercourse with men.

UK Health Ministers announced the decision on the this morning in a press briefing at the Department of Health (Richmond House, 79 Whitehall, SW1A 2NS from 10am) to which journalists were invited to attend.

During the 80’s, blood services in several countries introduced a lifetime ban on blood donations, prohibiting all men who had any kind of sexual intercourse (oral or anal) with another man to donate blood, whereas most other HIV high-risk groups are permitted to donate blood one year after their last risky activity.

Several countries have since then introduced deferral periods for blood donations since men had last sex with another man, i.e. 6 months in South Africa; 12 months in Australia, Sweden and Japan; and 5 years in New Zealand. Following the lead of these countries together with advances in blood screening techniques and improved knowledge of HIV prompted calls for the UK to revise its blood donor policy.

Researcher leader Kaye Wellings, Professor of Sexual and Reproductive Health Research at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and her team wanted to examine the compliance with the lifetime ban and assess the possible effects of revising this policy. They evaluated 1,028 male British participants between April 2009 and June 2010, who reported any male sexual contact and performed 30 detailed interviews with those who had or had never donated blood ineligibly.

The authors used the study results to inform a review of the policy by the Advisory Committee on the Safety of Blood, Tissues and Organs (SaBTO) recommendations.

The study revealed that many men thought the lifetime ban to be unfair, discriminatory and lacking a clear rationale but considered a one-year deferral rule as generally feasible and acceptable. 10.6% of men reported donating blood since having penetrative sex with a man, 2.5% in the past 12 months. The reasons given for not complying with the ban included self-categorization as low risk, confidentiality concerns, and a misunderstanding or perceived inequity of the rule.

The authors state that others had discounted the experience that prohibited them from donating blood, pointing out the need to extend health information beyond gay and bisexual men saying, “Our research reveals that a small but important minority of men ineligible to donate blood under current UK rules have nevertheless done so in the past 12 months.” Many of the reasons identified for non-compliance however appear cooperative with intervention.

It is expected that a move to a one-year deferral, bringing the deferral period closer in line with other groups, is likely to be welcomed by most men who have sex with other men. The authors conclude that improvements to communication and confidentiality, and a clear explanation of the rationale, will be essential in addition to careful monitoring of its effects.

Written by Petra Rattue