Thanks for sharing that. I would have thought the Hyde Park reference
would clearly label it as facetious, as no doubt the original troll
was.

Back in 1983 when it had become clear that AIDS was spread in the blood
supply and that the infected donors were almost entirely younger males,
but the causal agent was still not quite known and there was no
commercial blood test, I seriously suggested that my hospital solicit
for, and accept donations from, only women over the age of 65.

This was greated by great derrision on the part of the blood bank
pathology people, who made liberal egalitarian noises to the effect
that I was suggesting *age and gender PROFILING.*  Why, the very idea.
However, had they accepted my proposals, they would have saved a few
lives in Long Beach, California.

"Well," I remember asking reasonably, "if you won't accept blood only
from women, how about at least asking men some questions about their
sex lives, and turn down blood from men who admit homosexual activity?"

More shock and more outrage that I might now want to be profiling
donors by their *sexual orientation.* Even worse!  So they refused to
do that, either.

Noadays, of course, we do the question part routinely. But only after
we got permission to do from the AUTHORITIES.  Before that, nobody
would bring themselves to just DO it on their own. They had to be given
permission.

Damn, some people are stupid. Pathologists aren't immune.

SBH

Thanks for sharing that. I would have thought the Hyde Park reference
would clearly label it as facetious, as no doubt the original troll
was.

Back in 1983 when it had become clear that AIDS was spread in the blood
supply and that the infected donors were almost entirely younger males,
but the causal agent was still not quite known and there was no
commercial blood test, I seriously suggested that my hospital solicit
for, and accept donations from, only women over the age of 65.

This was greated by great derrision on the part of the blood bank
pathology people, who made liberal egalitarian noises to the effect
that I was suggesting *age and gender PROFILING.*  Why, the very idea.
However, had they accepted my proposals, they would have saved a few
lives in Long Beach, California.

"Well," I remember asking reasonably, "if you won't accept blood only
from women, how about at least asking men some questions about their
sex lives, and turn down blood from men who admit homosexual activity?"

More shock and more outrage that I might now want to be profiling
donors by their *sexual orientation.* Even worse!  So they refused to
do that, either.

Noadays, of course, we do the question part routinely. But only after
we got permission to do it from the AUTHORITIES.  Before that, nobody
would bring themselves to just DO it on their own. They had to be given
permission.

Damn, some people are stupid. Pathologists aren't immune.

SBH