What I find annoying about JWs and their blood policy is that when a JW dies, if blood was an issue, they will always try to wriggle out of loss of blood having any contribution to the persons demise.
Surely the surgeon must have done something wrong!
Surely something else must have been the matter!
She/he might have died even if they did have blood!
They swallow the societies 'view' that as long as the circulation is supported, even an exceptionally low haemoglobin level is survivable and of course through one or two examples, whether these are genuine or not, the WTBTS always manages to back this up.
However, damage is done to major organs once there is insufficient blood volume and haemoglobin/oxygen carrying cells.
The Witnesses WANT to believe that they have the best chances of survival than any one else if they deny themselves blood.
Therefore, when someone days from the WTBTS blood policy, they insist on all the other possible reasons being the cause and never, absolutely never the refusal of blood transfusion.
Tort of misrepresentation mean any thing to anyone!
LongHairGal - I agree with you that blood is dangerous medicine, but so is antibiotics! Everything in medicine carries its own risks. But the 'bogey man' of blood has been drummed into our heads. Don't forget, for us blood transfusion will always be something more to be afraid of than anyone else because that 'bogey man' will never be completely eradicated from our minds.