4 gay and 1 straight men with HIV charged for donating blood
-
Not likely, since i previously stated US thinks SG is still a fishing village also.Originally posted by hisoka:is it you alone or are there really alot of pple here harping on the US pple thinks we are part of china thingy? saw it a few times but i can't remember the names sorry.
-
my experience on this:Originally posted by hisoka:is it you alone or are there really alot of pple here harping on the US pple thinks we are part of china thingy? saw it a few times but i can't remember the names sorry.
1) My US colleague asked me where was I during the tiananmen incident. I said I was at home, in singapore. "you don't see soldiers on the streets?"
2) My american colleague's wife is a british, both living in singpapore. When news broke out that the natives were chopping off heads of christians somewhere in Sulawesi, her mother called up and asked if she had found a way to evaluate.
3) Headoffice sent a crew from US to collect info for company's newsletter, featuring Asia. They came with an itinerary to cover singapore, taipei, phnom penh and shanghai in one week, starting from Philidelphia and leave for home within the same week. Reason? 'cause "we could cover london, paris, and koln (in Germany) in one week, and we thought singapore, Taipei and Shanghai are just nearby", (actually direct flight between shanghai and taipei should take only an hour).
I laughed cause I knew the geography. If I don't, I wonder how others would be laughing at me. -
How do you know they do? If they knew they were HIV infected and did not decare it, then they would very probably have committed a criminal offence. It would then be up to the state to prove that they were guilty. The starting point must be a presumption of innocence.Originally posted by Salman:Why did they lie in the forms? don't they know they were lying in the forms?
How do you know they didn't know they were infected?
Again, many cogent reasons have been given for them lying on the forms. I do not wish to rehash that. Imo, these little lies in this context should not be enough to result in criminal liabilites. -
But would you rather an uneducated surgent perform surgery on you? I agree that for certain jobs, education is overrated and not really necessary...starting your own business for instance. However most jobs do require education in one form or another. How to do biotech research if dun study biology, or how to built rockets or bridges if one cannot even do basic calculus for instance.Originally posted by hisoka:is it you alone or are there really alot of pple here harping on the US pple thinks we are part of china thingy? saw it a few times but i can't remember the names sorry.
All i have to say is that no matter how educated you are you can still have such misconceptions especially if its widely spread among the society. and not knowing all about geography is not a good indication of ignorance isit?
but i do agree that university or even education is overrateed -
education as in education system and knowledge are 2 differnet things. i mena i do not mind for example a surgeon who isn't educated in the conventional sense of the word but knows everything the only thing is that the education is sort of like a gurantee but even then if you have entered uni you will know you learn alot of useless stuff. not sure abotu doctors but for alot of other courses you can jsut learn module by module and then jsut forget them later.Originally posted by Gablurr:But would you rather an uneducated surgent perform surgery on you? I agree that for certain jobs, education is overrated and not really necessary...starting your own business for instance. However most jobs do require education in one form or another. How to do biotech research if dun study biology, or how to built rockets or bridges if one cannot even do basic calculus for instance.
and when i say education is overrated i do not mean that it is useless or you do not need the education at all to do your jobs what i mean is that it is not as great as imagined by other pple such as educated pple are supposed to be mannered, understanding, knowledgable, etc. for that matter even if you have atgtended a course for a field you may not be skilled in it at the end of it -
No, you don't understand the biology behind it. The HIV test may be negative initially and turns positive after 3-6 months. So let's say we hold back the blood for 6 months...the virus may be inside the blood but the test can be negative whether you test it now or test it 6 months later. It is the donor who needs to be tested a 6 months later, not the blood. And you only have the word of the donor that during that 6 months he did not indulge in high-risk activity.Originally posted by lwflee:IE Virus may remain undetectable for weeks. - We quarantine the samples for months. -> Hence it is moot whether the doner lied about his sexual history.
Btw, it is NOT a criminal offence to donate blood, not knowing that you are HIV+. It IS a criminal offence to make a false declaration as to whether you are gay or have multiple sexual partners or have casual sex. -
So what you are saying is that you can't test for HIV through testing the blood sample?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:No, you don't understand the biology behind it. The HIV test may be negative initially and turns positive after 3-6 months. So let's say we hold back the blood for 6 months...the virus may be inside the blood but the test can be negative whether you test it now or test it 6 months later. It is the donor who needs to be tested a 6 months later, not the blood. And you only have the word of the donor that during that 6 months he did not indulge in high-risk activity.
Btw, it is NOT a criminal offence to donate blood, not knowing that you are HIV+. It IS a criminal offence to make a false declaration as to whether you are gay or have multiple sexual partners or have casual sex.
Re criminal offence. Really? I think i remember that knowingly transmitting sexual diseases can give rise to tortious liability in battery. Would that not translate to Criminal Assault? Actus Reus is to cause death or GBH, MR is to intend to cause death or GBH, or to be reckless.
I haven't studied Criminal Law in detail yet, but am i wrong? -
You can test for HIV but you will miss it during the window period..Originally posted by lwflee:So what you are saying is that you can't test for HIV through testing the blood sample?
Re criminal offence. Really? I think i remember that knowingly transmitting sexual diseases can give rise to tortious liability in battery. Would that not translate to Criminal Assault? Actus Reus is to cause death or GBH, MR is to intend to cause death or GBH, or to be reckless.
I haven't studied Criminal Law in detail yet, but am i wrong?
I think you misread what I said. My statement was " ..NOT a criminal offence to donate blood, NOT knowing that you are HIV+. ." This is in relation to what you said about the donors not knowing they were HIV+. It's true, they donated blood not knowing they were HIV+ and that's not the reason they were charged. They were charged for falsely declaring that they were not indulging in high-risk activities, such as being a homosexual or have multiple sex partners.