Appendix 1
Canadian Blood Services MSM Policy Change
Follow-Up Research
2014 DATA Summary
June, 2015
© 2014 Ipsos. All rights reserved. Contains Ipsos' Confidential and Proprietary information and
may not be disclosed or reproduced without the prior written consent of Ipsos.
Table of Contents
Background and Objectives
3
Methodology
4
Survey Flow
5
Intention to Donate & Trust
6
Awareness of the MSM Policy and Effect on Donation Behaviour
10
Views towards MSM Policy Change – 5 Year Deferral
14
Views towards MSM Policy Change – 1 Year Deferral
26
2
Background and Objectives
 For the past several years, Canadian Blood Services has been actively pursuing data to
inform a policy change regarding men who have had sex with men (MSM) from donating
blood. In September 2011, the board of directors passed a motion committing the
organization to re-examine this policy, with a view to reducing this lifetime exclusion to no
less than five years and no longer than 10 years – a first step in incremental change on the
policy (pending approval from its regulator, Health Canada).
 In 2012, CBS undertook to consult with key stakeholders to aid in the preparation of a
formal request to amend the policy, to be submitted to Health Canada. CBS surveyed a
number of stakeholder audiences on their awareness, views, and attitudes towards: the
MSM policy; changing this policy to allow men who have had sex with other men to donate
blood within a certain time period; and trust in CBS. To this end, CBS wanted to gauge the
impact the proposed policy change would have on intentions to donate and the perceived
safety of the blood supply.
 In 2013, Canadian Blood Services received approval from Health Canada to reduce the
current men who have sex with men deferral period from indefinite to five years from last
MSM activity.
 This presentation contains the results of a follow-up survey assessing the impact of the 5
year deferral policy change. The survey was conducted amongst three key audiences:
 the general public;
 active donors;
 members of the Community-Based Research Centre (CBRC) – a non-profit charitable organization
dedicated to using research to guide community action on health and social issues, with a special
focus on Gay Men’s Health with initiatives on HIV, sexual health promotion, and policy
development.
3
Methodology
 The methodology used for this research was an online survey. The General Public component was conducted using
the Ipsos Reid Online Omnibus. The Donor and Community-Based Research Centre (CBRC/Open-link audience)
surveys were administered using the Fluidsurveys online survey tool.
 The sample for the Ipsos Reid Online Omnibus is sourced from the Ipsos Reid Household Panel (approximately
200,000 members nationwide), which is constructed to be representative of the Canadian adult population of
people aged 18 or older (in this case, excluding Quebec). Quotas and slight weighting was used to ensure a
representative sample of the Canadian population by region, gender, and age.
 A cross-section of active donors were emailed an invitation to complete the survey, while members of the CBRC
were sent an open link by representatives of the organization, introducing the survey and asking for their
participation. The surveys were completed from Sept. 18th – Oct. 6th, 2014.
 The following table shows the number of completed survey by audience:
Fieldwork Dates
No. of
Completes
Margin of
Error*
Response
Rate
Sept. 18th – 24th, 2014
1,005
± 3.1%
N/A
Sept. 19th – Oct. 6th, 2014
1,631
± 2.4%
26%
Oct. 1st – Oct. 6th, 2014
3,081
± 1.8%
N/A
Audience
General Public
Donors
CBRC
^An urgent appeal for blood was launched by Canadian Blood Services on Sept. 30th, 2014.
 Note of caution: As the CBRC open-link was accessed more widely than anticipated, the data for this group should
be approached with caution in terms of its representation of the CBRC community and its comparability to the
2012 results. Unweighted data is shown for this group.
* While not probability samples, the table indicates the theoretical margin of error associated with each sample at the 95% confidence interval; in other words
what the results would have been had the entire adult population of each audience in Canada been polled (19 times out of 20).
** It is not possible to calculate the response rate for the CBRC audience given that it is unknown how many people were made aware of the survey given that an
open survey link was used.
4
Survey flow
 Intention to donate and measures of trust
 Information about current MSM policy (5 year deferral):
 Canadian Blood Services tests every unit of blood using state-of-the-art technology, but even the best tests are not 100
per cent accurate. Therefore, another layer of safety is critical to ensuring the safety of products supplied to patients
every day. As a precaution, some people are not able to give blood, either for their own well-being, or to reduce the
risk of passing something infectious along to a blood recipient.
 An example of this was the former policy that prohibited men who have had sexual contact with another man (MSM)
since 1977 from donating blood. This policy was based on scientific evidence that some MSM are in the highest risk
group for HIV/AIDS infection. The next two highest risk groups are also prevented from giving blood as a precaution.
On July 22, 2013 Canadian Blood Services reduced this time period so that only men who have had sex with another
man in the past 5 years are prohibited from donation. This change was based on science, expert advice and
stakeholder input. In addition, Canadian Blood Services’ regulator, Health Canada, decided that this change would not
introduce additional risk to the blood system.
 Aided awareness of policy
 Views towards policy change including: overall views, level of support, perceptions of
safety, and impact on donation intention
 Impact of current policy on past/current donation intention
 Information about potential further policy change (1 year deferral):
 Canadian Blood Services may consider further reducing the time frame of the deferral to 1 year. Should this be
proposed, it would be based on science, expert advice and stakeholder input. In addition, Canadian Blood Services
must convince its regulator, Health Canada, that this change would not introduce additional risk to the blood system.
 Views towards policy change including: overall views, level of support, perceptions of
safety, and impact on donation intention
5
Intention to Donate & Trust
6
Intentions to donate
1%
I am not eligible to donate blood
34%
42%
93%
I will donate blood in the next
six months
10%
21%
6%
I will donate blood within six
months to a year
I will not donate blood within
the next year but I might at
some time in the future
8%
Donors
9%
General Public
1%
27%
CBRC/Open-link
14%
0%
I will never donate blood
8%
3%
1%
Don't know
13%
12%
2014 Question Wording: Q1. / Q11. Which of the following statements best describes your intentions?
Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
7
Agreement with the statement: ‘I trust Canadian Blood Services to do what is
best for the blood system’
Strongly agree
CBRC/Open-link
Somewhat agree
30%
Donors
General Public
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
36%
18%
81%
36%
40%
2014 Question Wording: Q2. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
% Agree
Don't know
13%
4%
65%
11% 0%6% 2%
92%
7% 5%
11%
77%
8
Agreement with the statement: ‘I trust Canadian Blood Services to act in the
best interests of the public’
Strongly agree
CBRC/Open-link
Somewhat agree
31%
Donors
General Public
Somewhat disagree
Strongly disagree
36%
36%
3%
66%
13% 1%6%2%
92%
18%
79%
40%
2014 Question Wording: Q2. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
% Agree
Don't know
13%
6% 5%
12%
77%
9
Awareness of the MSM Policy
and Effect on Donation
Behaviour
10
Introduction to MSM Policy – 5 Year Deferral:
On-screen information for respondents
Canadian Blood Services tests every unit of blood using state-of-the-art
technology, but even the best tests are not 100 per cent accurate.
Therefore, another layer of safety is critical to ensuring the safety of
products supplied to patients every day. As a precaution, some people are
not able to give blood, either for their own well-being, or to reduce the risk of
passing something infectious along to a blood recipient.
An example of this was the former policy that prohibited men who have had
sexual contact with another man (MSM) since 1977 from donating blood.
This policy was based on scientific evidence that some MSM are in the
highest risk group for HIV/AIDS infection. The next two highest risk groups
are also prevented from giving blood as a precaution. On July 22, 2013
Canadian Blood Services reduced this time period so that only men who
have had sex with another man in the past 5 years are prohibited from
donation. This change was based on science, expert advice and stakeholder
input. In addition, Canadian Blood Services’ regulator, Health Canada,
decided that this change would not introduce additional risk to the blood
system.
11
Aided awareness of current MSM policy
Very aware
Somewhat aware
Not very aware
CBRC/Open-link
14%
45%
15%
26%
31%
16%
% Aware
Don't know
76%
Donors
General Public
Not at all aware
10%
38%
3% 7%
90%
13% 1%
76%
6%
2014 Question Wording: Q3. Before today, would you say that you were very aware, somewhat aware, not very aware, or not at all aware of the
Canadian Blood Services policy that prohibits men who have had sex with another man in the past 5 years from donating blood? Base 2014:
Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810).
41%
12
Impact of current policy on likelihood of donating
Much more likely to donate blood
Somewhat less likely to donate blood
CBRC/Open-link
2%2%
General Public
2%7%
Somewhat more likely to donate blood
Much less likely to donate blood
38%
13%
70%
No impact
Don't know/not applicable
42%
3%
6% 5%
2014 Question Wording: Q5. Which of the following statements best describes how this policy has influenced or influences your decision to
donate blood? Please select one response only. Knowing about this policy has made or makes me… Base 2014: General Public (n=1,005);
CBRC (n=3,810).
10%
13
Views towards MSM
Policy Change – 5 Year
Deferral
14
Overall views towards MSM policy change
Right direction
Wrong direction
71%
CBRC/Open-link
Donors
General Public
Don't know
53%
49%
19%
8%
14%
11%
39%
37%
2014 Question Wording: Q6. Do you think this policy change is a step in the right direction or wrong direction? Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631);
General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810).
15
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the right direction
2014: Seventy-one percent of the CBRC/Open-link audience think the policy change is a step in the
right direction. Nineteen percent of these respondents provided a response (that was coded) to the
question ‘ Why did you say that?’:
CBRC/Openlink
Mentions of: Support The Policy Change/ Right Direction (Net)
Discrimination/ discriminating against gender and/or sexual orientation
Small step to end discrimination / it's not enough
The policy is based on outdated science / old stereotypes / fear
Too long (unrealistic) abstinence period / should be reduced
Blood shortage/ more donors are needed
Gay people should be allowed to donate blood
Would greatly increase the amount of donors (incl healthy gay men) who could donate/ no loss of good donors
HIV/Aids is not just a gay person's disease
There are other high risk categories (who aren't singled out)
Screen for regular/ have had testing for STI's (incl HIV)
Restriction should be based on risky behaviour (not orientation) in both men and women
Screen for safe sex awareness/ have safe sex practices
Against the ban
Base it on scientific research not public opinion
Healthy people should be allowed to donate
Screen for relationship status/ have monogamous relationships
Proper science/ research is in place
System is improving/ becoming better
Modify policies as appropriate
2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the right direction: 2014 CBRC
(n=500). Coded responses only. (Sub codes included in Net). ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with multiple mentions
counted only once)
(n=500)
91%
31%
24%
13%
9%
8%
7%
7%
6%
6%
5%
5%
4%
4%
4%
2%
1%
1%
0%
0%
16
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the right direction
2014: Of the 53% of donors who think the policy change is a step in the right direction:
Mentions of: Support The Policy Change/ Right Direction (Net)
Proper science/ research is in place
Would greatly increase the amount of donors (incl. healthy gay men) who could donate/ no loss of good donors
Blood supply will be safe/ clean
Discrimination/ discriminating against gender and/or sexual orientation
Blood shortage/ more donors are needed
Modify policies as appropriate
Trust/ have faith in CBS judgment
The policy is based on outdated science / old stereotypes / fear
Base it on scientific research not public opinion
Gay people should be allowed to donate blood
Healthy people should be allowed to donate
HIV/Aids is not just a gay person's disease
There are other high risk categories (who aren't singled out)
Screen for regular/ have had testing for STI's (incl HIV)
Restriction should be based on risky behaviour (not orientation) in both men and women
Against the ban
Screen for safe sex awareness/ have safe sex practices
Screen for relationship status/ have monogamous relationships
2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the right direction: 2014 Donors
(n=879). (Sub codes included in Net) ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with multiple mentions counted only once)
Donors
(n=879)
67%
15%
13%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
17
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the right direction
2014: Of the 49% of General Public respondents who think the policy change is a step in the right
direction:
Gen Pub
(n=516)
Mentions of: Support The Policy Change/ Right Direction (Net)
53%
Discrimination/ discriminating against gender and/or sexual orientation
7%
7%
6%
6%
6%
Trust/ have faith in CBS judgment
Would greatly increase the amount of donors (incl. healthy gay men) who could donate/ no loss of good donors
Blood shortage/ more donors are needed
Sounds good
Blood supply will be safe/ clean
System is improving/ becoming better
Proper science/ research is in place
Base it on scientific research not public opinion
Small step to end discrimination / it's not enough
The policy is based on outdated science / old stereotypes / fear
HIV/Aids is not just a gay person's disease
Healthy people should be allowed to donate
Everyone should be allowed to donate
Modify policies as appropriate
Support gay rights
Against the ban
Equality/ freedom to choose
2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the right direction: 2014 General
Public (n=516). (Sub codes included in Net) ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with multiple mentions counted only
once)
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
<1%
<1%
-
18
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the wrong direction
2014: Nineteen percent of the CBRC/Open-link audience think the policy change is a step in the
wrong direction. Nineteen percent of these respondents provided a response (that was coded) to
the question ‘ Why did you say that?’:
CBRC/Openlink
Mentions of: Support The Policy Change/ Right Direction (Net)
Discrimination/ discriminating against gender and/or sexual orientation
HIV/Aids is not just a gay person's disease
The policy is based on outdated science / old stereotypes / fear
Too long (unrealistic) abstinence period / should be reduced (not included in net)
There are other high risk categories (who aren't singled out)
Mentions of: Oppose The Policy Change/ Wrong Direction (Net)
Precaution in order to protect public/ in best interest of public
Thorough screening/ testing of donors is important
System is not fool proof/ not completely accurate
People may not disclose their sexual orientation/ sexual history
Agree with the ban
Too risky/ concerned about the risk
Lessen risk of HIV/ Aids
More STD testing is needed
Safeguards need to be in place
Prevent tainted blood supply
Against gay people donating blood
(n=136)
87%
45%
10%
10%
9%
8%
5%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
-
Support the Policy Change/Right Direction - Only categories with values ≥8% shown
Oppose the Policy Change/Right Direction - Only categories with values ≥1% shown
2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the wrong direction: 2014 CBRC
(n=136). *Low base size. Coded responses only. (Sub codes included in Net) ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with
multiple mentions counted only once)
19
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the wrong direction
2014: Of the 8% of donors who think the policy change is a step in the wrong
direction:
Donors
(n=133)
Mentions of: Oppose The Policy Change/ Wrong Direction (Net)
52%
Too risky/ concerned about the risk
23%
Against gay people donating blood
10%
Safeguards need to be in place
8%
System is not fool proof/ not completely accurate
5%
Lessen risk of HIV/ Aids
3%
Agree with the ban
3%
Prevent tainted blood supply
3%
People may not disclose their sexual orientation/ sexual history
3%
More research is needed / studies are constantly changing
3%
Precaution in order to protect public/ in best interest of public
1%
Thorough screening/ testing of donors is important
1%
No trust in system/ agency
1%
More STD testing is needed
-
Prevent Hepatitis C virus
-
2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the wrong direction: 2014 Donors
(n=133). *Low base size. (Sub codes included in Net) ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with multiple mentions
counted only once)
20
Reasons for thinking the policy change is a: step in the wrong direction
2014: Of the 14% of General Public respondents who think the policy change is a
step in the wrong direction:
Gen Pub
(n=126)
Mentions of: Oppose The Policy Change/ Wrong Direction (Net)
39%
Too risky/ concerned about the risk
9%
Thorough screening/ testing of donors is important
7%
Against gay people donating blood
5%
Agree with the ban
5%
Prevent tainted blood supply
4%
No trust in system/ agency
4%
System is not fool proof/ not completely accurate
3%
Lessen risk of HIV/ Aids
3%
People may not disclose their sexual orientation/ sexual history
2%
Safeguards need to be in place
1%
More research is needed / studies are constantly changing
1%
Precaution in order to protect public/ in best interest of public
1%
More STD testing is needed
-
Prevent Hepatitis C virus
-
2012/2014 Question Wording: Q7_1. Why do you say that? Base: Those who think the policy change is a step in the wrong direction: 2014
General Public (n=126). *Low base size. (Sub codes included in Net) ‘Net’ is the aggregate % of all similar mentions (respondents with multiple
mentions counted only once)
21
Level of support for the MSM policy change
Strongly support
Somewhat support
CBRC/Open-link
34%
Donors
35%
General Public
24%
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
36%
7%
8%
26%
29%
5%
9%
10%
Don't know
15%
8%
26%
28%
2014 Question Wording: Q8. How much do you support or oppose Canadian Blood Services recent change in its policy regarding men who have
had sex with another man? Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
% Support
70%
61%
53%
22
Effect of policy change on perceptions of safety
Positive effect
CBRC/Open-link
23%
Donors
22%
General Public
27%
No impact
Negative effect
Don't know
60%
34%
30%
9%
9%
13%
9%
35%
29%
2014 Question Wording: Q9. Do you think this change has had a positive effect, a negative effect, or have no impact on the safety of the blood
supply? Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
23
Impact of MSM policy change on future intention to donate
I would be much more likely to donate
I would be somewhat more likely to donate
It would have no impact
I would be somewhat less likely to donate
I would be much less likely to donate
Don't know
CBRC/Open-link
11%
Donors
6% 2%
General Public
4% 8%
16%
55%
4%
11%
88%
69%
% More
Likely
3%3%
2014 Question Wording: Q10. In general, which of the following best describes the impact this policy change has had on your future intentions
to donate blood? Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
4%
27%
1%
3%
8%
12%
13%
24
Agreement with the statement: ‘I have friends, family members, or colleagues
who I think are more likely to donate because this policy change was made.’
Strongly agree
CBRC/Open-link
Somewhat agree
21%
Donors 4% 9%
General Public
6%
Somewhat disagree
24%
9%
18%
10%
13%
11%
Strongly disagree
23%
Don't know
22%
66%
12%
% Agree
45%
12%
54%
2014 Question Wording: Q11. Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: ‘I have friends, family members, or
colleagues who I think are more likely to donate because this policy change was made.’ Base 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public
(n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
24%
25
Views towards MSM
Policy Change – 1 Year
Deferral
26
Introduction to MSM Policy – 1 Year Deferral:
On-screen information for respondents
Canadian Blood Services may consider further reducing the time frame of
the deferral to 1 year. Should this be proposed, it would be based on
science, expert advice and stakeholder input. In addition, Canadian Blood
Services must convince its regulator, Health Canada, that this change would
not introduce additional risk to the blood system.
27
Overall views towards further MSM policy change (to 1 year deferral)
MSM Policy – 1 Year Deferral
Right direction
General Public
Don't know
85%
CBRC/Open-link
Donors
Wrong direction
43%
39%
9%
17%
21%
7%
40%
40%
2014 Question Wording: Q21. Do you think this further policy change would be a step in the right direction or wrong direction? Base: All
Respondents: 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public (n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810).
28
Level of support for the MSM policy change – 1 year deferral
Strongly support
Somewhat support
General Public
Strongly oppose
61%
CBRC/Open-link
Donors
Somewhat oppose
22%
16%
22%
23%
24%
12%
12%
13%
18%
2014 Question Wording: Q23. How much do you support or oppose Canadian Blood Services further changing its policy regarding men
who have had sex with another man within a 1 year time frame? Base: All Respondents: 2014: Donors (n=1,631); General Public
(n=1,005); CBRC (n=3,810)
Don't know
4% 6% 5%
31%
30%
29