Thousands from LGBTQI+ and sex worker communities can now donate plasma
On Monday, Australian Red Cross Lifeblood removed most wait time restrictions for gay and bisexual men, transgender people, sex workers and those on the common HIV prevention drug pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP).
This change means an estimated 625,000 additional Australians are now eligible to donate plasma.
Often referred to as the "liquid gold" part of blood, plasma is used to treat more than 50 medical conditions.
During the HIV crisis in the 1980s, Australia introduced an indefinite ban on men who have sex with men from donating blood and plasma in order to prevent transmission through blood transfusion.
Skye McGregor from the Kirby Institute said this was in part due to the lengthy time it took to confirm if HIV was present in test results.
"To have no deferral now around sexual activity through the plasma pathway is really significant," Dr McGregor said.
Other factors such as a 33 per cent drop in HIV diagnoses since 2014, and increased sensitivity of HIV tests — which can detect an infection within a week — have also contributed to the lifting of restrictions.
"Whilst these changes were necessary in the past to ensure that blood safety, we also know that they did contribute to stigma within particularly the gay and bisexual community," Lifeblood chief executive officer Stephen Cornelissen said.
From July 14, people in these previously restricted groups can donate plasma immediately, regardless of sexual activity. The only exception is for those who've recently had sex with a partner known to have HIV or another blood-borne virus.
"It's a beautiful moment," Joshua Smith said, who donated for the first time on Monday.
"Blood and plasma donations was one of the last things it felt like gay and bisexual people and trans communities were excluded from.
Fellow donor Kane Wheatley added: "It's one of those things that you spend your whole life thinking this is just not going to get across the line, and when it does it feels really nice to be able to be here to support it, normalise it for people as well."
Lifeblood estimates an additional 625,000 Australians may now be eligible to donate plasma. It is hoping for 24,000 new donors and 95,000 additional donations a year.
The next step is for gay, bisexual and other members of the LGBTQI+ community to be able to donate what's known as "whole blood", not just plasma.
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has recently approved a gender-neutral risk assessment for blood and platelet donations, which is the first step in the process.
This means everyone — regardless of gender or sexual orientation — will be asked if they have had sex (excluding oral sex) with a new or more than one partner in the past six months.
If they answer yes, they will be asked whether this included having anal sex in the past three months.
Anyone who answers yes will be deferred from donating blood for six months, but will be able to donate plasma.
This means gay and bisexual men in long-term, monogamous relationships will be able to donate whole blood without abstaining from sex.
This change will be implemented sometime next year, Adjunct Professor Cornelissen said.
Let Us Give, a campaign to ensure equality when it comes to blood donation, welcomed the change to giving plasma but said the whole blood rules remain "discriminatory" as they stand currently.
Spokesperson Rodney Croome said policy should centre on "the safety of a donor's sexual activity rather than the gender of their sexual partner".
He said an approach change like this would "open up a new source of safe blood for those in need and remove discrimination from Australia's blood collection system".
Those who have recently had sex with a partner known to have HIV or another blood-borne virus will still be unable to donate blood or plasma.
There are also restrictions that prevent people taking some medications, those who have medical conditions such as MS or cancer, people who are pregnant or less than nine months postpartum, and those who have recently undergone surgery from making donations.
The rule preventing people who lived in the UK between 1980 and 1996 from donating in Australia was lifted in July 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SBS Australia
an hour ago
- SBS Australia
Should you take a day off or work from home with a mild cold? What if you can't do either?
Whether it's your first or fourth cold of the season, many Australians are waking up at the moment with a sniffle, a sore throat or feeling more tired than usual. June to August is peak flu season in Australia. There are also high rates of COVID-19 circulating, along with other respiratory viruses such as respiratory syncytial virus and adenovirus. Sometimes it's clear when you need to spend the day in bed: you have a fever, aches and pains, and can't think clearly. If it's the flu or COVID-19, you'll want to stay away from others and rest and recover. But what about if your symptoms are mild? Are you sick enough to take the day off, or should you push through it? And what if you feel pressured to work? Here's what to consider. Are you likely to spread it? While it may seem like a good idea to continue working, especially when your symptoms are mild, going to work when infectious with a respiratory virus risks infecting your co-workers. If you are in a client-facing role, such as a teacher or a salesperson, you may also infect others, like students or customers. The risks may be even greater for those working with vulnerable communities, such as in aged care work, where the consequences can be severe. From an organisational perspective, you are likely less productive when you are not feeling well. So, whenever possible, avoid going into work when you're feeling unwell. Should I work from home? The COVID-19 pandemic normalised working from home. Since then, more people work from home when they're unwell, rather than taking sick leave. Some employees join Zoom or Teams meetings out of guilt, not wanting to let their co-workers down. Others — and in particular, some men — feel the need to maintain their performance at work, even if it's at the expense of their health. A downside of powering through is that workers may prolong their illness by not looking after themselves. Can you take leave when you need it? Employees in Australia can take either paid or unpaid time off when they are unwell. Most full-time employees get 10 days of paid sick leave per year, while part-time employees get the equivalent pro rata. Employers can ask for reasonable evidence from employees to show they are unwell, such as asking for a medical certificate from a pharmacy or GP, or a statutory declaration. The type of evidence required may differ from organisation to organisation, with some awards and enterprise agreements specifying the type of evidence needed. While taking a sick day helps many workers recuperate, a significant proportion of workers engaged in non-standard work arrangements do not receive these benefits. There are, for example, 2.6 million casual employees who don't have access to paid sick leave. Many workers, such as casual employees and self-employed people, often don't have much choice about whether or not to take a sick day. Source: Getty / FG Trade Similarly, most self-employed people, such as tradies and gig workers, do not have any paid leave entitlements. Although these workers can still take unpaid leave, they are sacrificing income when they call in sick. Research from the Australian Council of Trade Unions has found more than half of insecure workers don't take time off when injured or sick. So a significant proportion of workers in Australia simply cannot afford to call in sick. Why pushing through isn't the answer 'Presenteeism' is the phenomenon of people reporting for work even when they are unwell or not fully functioning, affecting their health and productivity. While exact figures are hard to determine, since most organisations don't systematically track it, estimates suggest 30 to 90 per cent of employees work while sick at least once a year. People work while sick for different reasons. Some choose to because they love their job or enjoy the social side of work — this is called voluntary presenteeism. But many don't have a real choice, facing financial pressure or job insecurity. That's involuntary presenteeism, and it's a much bigger problem. Research has found industry norms may be shaping the prevalence of 'involuntary presenteeism', with workers in the health and education sectors more likely to feel obligated to work when sick due to 'at work' caring responsibilities. What can organisations do about it? Leaders set the tone, especially around health and wellbeing. When they role-model healthy behaviour and support time off, it gives others permission to do the same. Supportive leaders can help reduce presenteeism, while pressure from demanding leaders can make it worse. Your co-workers matter too. When teams step up and share the load, it creates a culture where people feel safe to take leave. A supportive environment makes wellbeing a shared responsibility. But for some workers, leave isn't an option. Fixing this requires policy change across industries and society more broadly, not just inside the workplace.
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
Australia needs more investment in dementia research to tackle productivity losses, leading researcher says
Urgent action is needed to fight the 'darkness' of dementia, as the deadly condition threatens to affect 850,000 Australians by 2058, a leading brain researcher has said. Dementia is estimated to cost Australia's economy $18bn each year, a figure that will more than double to $37bn in 25 years. But Professor Henry Brodaty spoke to the National Press Club on Wednesday about the need for a new approach to tackling brain health. He said tackling the syndrome would increase productivity in Australia, and delaying the effects of it would allow people to work longer, especially as the workforce ages. A new approach was needed with increased investment to become a world leader in preventing or delaying dementia onset, he said. 'Think about the slip, slop, slap for skin health,' he said. 'We need the slip, slop, slap of brain health, now. 'Funding for dementia has lagged behind cancer and heart disease, even though it contributes more to disease burden. 'Research is critical to find the best ways to provide services efficiently.' He said dementia develops in Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders at 2-5 times the rate of the rest of the population, and suggested steps to counter this. 'Better care before, during and after pregnancy, and in early childhood, and particularly more education, could make a difference to this,' he said. Professor Brodaty said personalised coaching programs improved brain cognition, and increased people's fitness — pushing back the onset of dementia by a year or more. He said this could save Australia billions. 'Imagine what the return on investment would be if Australia did this?' he asked. 'Improving fitness, not only would improve cognition, it would improve fitness, physical, mental and social health.' But Professor Brodaty said Australia's National Dementia Action Plan has only $166m in funding, 'too little for what Australia needs'. 'I sympathise with the government, because there's always competing priorities and there's always other things that can be funded,' he said. 'But, when it makes sense economically, as well as personally to people, then why not do it?'
News.com.au
2 hours ago
- News.com.au
Health Check: Aussie biotechs are navigating a US regulatory minefield
Telix faces unwanted US regulatory attention – but it's not alone Amplia raises $25 million, with another $2.5 million to go A home-grown uni biotech innovation shines again Telix Pharmaceuticals (ASX:TLX) shares this morning slumped up to 16% on news that the radiopharmacy play has attracted unwanted attention from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). But the company is no Robinson Crusoe, in that US regulatory and legal glitches pose a regular minefield for ASX biotechs doing business there. The companies watchdog has subpoenaed 'various documents and information'. These mainly relate to the company's disclosures about its prostate cancer therapeutic program. 'The company is fully cooperating with the SEC and is in the process of responding to the information request,' Telix says. 'At this stage, this matter is a fact-finding request'. Telix adds the SEC's entreaty does not mean that Telix has violated US security laws 'or that the SEC has a negative opinion of any person, entity or security'. Barring more detail, the episode sounds like a case of 'probably nothing or very much something'. Overnight, Nasdaq investors were more chill about the affair, marking Telix shares only marginally lower. At the very least, the SEC's nosing around is likely to distract management from the company's busy agenda. 'In our experience of similar matters, these investigations tend to drag on for years without resolution,' broker Jefferies says. Trouble and strife Other ASX biotechs in the US have run into the odd bit of strife over patent disputes and regulatory interventions. ResMed (ASX:RMD) regularly parries with rivals Fisher & Paykel Healthcare (ASX:FPH) and Philips Respironics over sleep apnoea patents. In 2018 a jury ordered Cochlear (ASX:COH) to pay US$268 million in damages for a patent infringement. The charitable Alfred E. Mann Foundation lodged the action. In 2020 Cochlear lost an appeal. In 2013 CSL (ASX:CSL) paid US$64 million to settle an antitrust class action lodged by hospital groups. 'Business as usual' Telix says it will continue with the prostate cancer program. The SEC action also will not affect its nearer-stage imaging programs for kidney and brain cancers. Telix also reported June quarter revenue of US$204 million, 63% higher year on year, whilst maintaining calendar 2025 revenue guidance of US$770-800 million. This revenue derived mainly from Telix's prostate cancer imaging agent, Illucix. 'Dose volumes for Illuccix rose 7% quarter-on-quarter in the US, reinforcing the strength of our market position and continued customer demand,' Telix co-founder and CEO Dr Chris Behrenbruch says. He adds that 'despite emerging competitive pricing pressure', Telix has 'effective strategies' to maintain average selling prices. Next month, Telix lifts the kimono on June (first) half earnings. Jefferies expects a $50.6 million net profit, with a calendar 2025 tally of $88.3 million. Interestingly, this is a decline on the previous year's US$105.4 million, but the firm plugs in US$183 million for calendar 2026. Perhaps they lost our phone number? Speaking of US regulatory glitches, stroke drug developer Argenica Therapeutics (ASX:AGN) is yet to hear back from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as to why the agency plonked a 'clinical hold' on its US trial plans. On June 10 Argenica said the FDA had deemed the company's supportive material as not being adequate to support its Investigational New Drug application. The trial was aimed at approval under the FDA's fast-track route. Argenica expected to hear back from the FDA within 30 days, but the agency's 'resourcing challenges' have blown out this timeline. In the meantime, Argenica is on track to report topline results from its local, proof-of-concept trial in the current quarter. The 92-patient phase II study tests Argenica's candidate ARG-007, in view of safety and preliminary efficacy in ischaemic (blockage) stroke patients. Courtesy of $4 million of government and private grants, Argenica is also investigating the 'potential utility' of ARG-0007 for other neurological conditions, including traumatic brain injury. Argenica disclosed June quarter cash burn of $2.36 million and a closing cash balance of $10.5 million. Nyrada advances heart protection trial In other trial news, Nyrada (ASX:NYR) is advancing its locally developed drug Xolatryp into phase IIa stage. Xolatryp targets the unmet need of protecting the heart following cardiac injury where patients are at high risk of tissue damage. Nyrada notes there's been no significant new cardiac drug developed for more than two decades. Xolatryp could become the first drug of its kind to protect the heart actively from ischemia-reperfusion injury. Nyrada anticipates a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, enrolling 150 subjects. These patients have acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (stenting). The company hopes to kick off the study in the March quarter of 2026. We now have Ample-ia funds, says cancer drug developer Prostate cancer drug hopeful Amplia (ASX:ATX) has raised $25 million in an institutional placement and is eyeing a further $2.5 million in a share purchase plan. The deed was done at 23 cents, a 19% discount to last Friday's 'frozen' price ahead of a trading halt. Amplia shares have been on a tear on the back of remarkable phase II results, covering patients with advanced metastatic forms of the deadly disease. Last month Amplia reported 17 partial responses, which meant the tumour size shrunk by at least 30%. Two of the 55 patients reported a complete response, which pretty much means a – can we say it? – cure. Amplia now plans a US trial combining Amplia's candidate AMP-945 with a different chemotherapy. The raising takes Amplia's cash to $42.7 million, including $8.2 million of expected R&D tax refunds. Don't forget who invented it Sanofi's $2.5 billion purchase of vaccine tech outfit Vicebio again highlights the role of Australian universities as a springboard for money-making life sciences ideas. The Paris-based Big Pharma is paying up to US$1.6 billion for the UK-based Vicebio and its so-called molecular clamp technology. The deal involves an upfront payment of US$1.15 billion, with regulatory milestones of US$450 million. Discovered at the University of Queensland (UQ), the clamp stabilises viral proteins enabling the immune system to respond to them more effectively. The upshot is the quicker development of fully liquid combination vaccines that can be stored at fridge temperatures. Vicebio was formed in 2018 to develop the clamp to make vaccines against life-threatening respiratory viral infections. During the pandemic, Vicebio had a stab at a Covid-19 vaccine. Courtesy of a US$100 million Series B financing last year, Vicebio's investors include Goldman Sachs Alternatives, Avoro Ventures and Venbio Partners. Uniquest, UQ's commercialisation arm has an unquantified direct investment and benefits from a licensing arrangement. Uniquest formed more than 130 start-ups, which went on to raise more than $1 billion and glean $86 million in product sales. This included licensing the UQ-invented cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil. The UQ bright sparks responsible for the molecular clamp are professors Paul Young, Daniel Watterson and Keith Chappell. UQ describes the deal as 'the largest involving a company that is commercialising intellectual property from an Australian university.'
