Hemodilution: A new secret change in blood Policy ?

by chasson 23 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  BluesBrother

  This debate over whether the blood is stored for a little while or maintained in a continuous circuit shows the legalistic approach and the rule binding approach to the "blood issue" these days. I cannot help but think of the Watchtower's own words in condemnation of the Pharisees, who had a similar approach to doctrine in Jesus' day.

  w029/1p.11par.14"NeverHasAnotherManSpokenLikeThis"***

  "On another occasion, Jesus denounced the Pharisees as "blind guides, who strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel." (Matthew 23:24) This was a particularly powerful use of hyperbole. Why? The contrast between a tiny gnat and a camel, which was one of the largest animals known to Jesus’ hearers, was striking. It is estimated that it would take up to 70 million gnats to equal the weight of an average camel! Also, Jesus knew that the Pharisees strained their wine through a cloth sieve. Those sticklers for rules did that in order to avoid swallowing a gnat and thereby become ceremonially unclean. Yet, they figuratively gulped down the camel, which was also unclean. (Leviticus 11:4, 21-24) Jesus’ point was clear. The Pharisees meticulously complied with the smallest of the Law’s requirements, but they disregarded the weightier matters—"justice and mercy and faithfulness." (Matthew 23:23) How clearly Jesus exposed them for what they were"

  If the cap fits... wear it...
• 

  garybuss

  Quote:
  
  Jehovah's Witnesses, Blood Transfusions,
  and the Tort of Misrepresentation
  KERRY LOUDERBACK-WOOD
  
  JOURNAL OF CHURCH AND STATE
  p. 135
  
  Current Blood Policy Contains Contradictions about Autologous Blood
  Transfusions
  
  The Society has never allowed its followers to pre-store their own
  blood in anticipation of planned surgeries (pre-operative autologous
  blood) because it believes blood, once outside the body, becomes
  impure.179 The Society bases this belief on Leviticus 17:13, 14 and
  Deuteronomy 12:24 and holds that once blood has left the body, it
  should no longer be used, but should be spilled onto the ground and
  covered in dust.180 In 1972, the Society applied this belief to
  hemodilution (a newly emerged technology whereby an external
  machine recirculates the patient's own blood outside his body) and
  banned the procedure.181 But beginning in 1983, the Society reversed
  itself and approved hemodilution therapy, as it now considered the
  machines an extension of one's circulatory system.182
  
  End quote #1
  
  Awake! 1983 3/22 p. 16 'Get Stagnant Waters Moving'
  "It is with this in mind, and not just to honor the requests of Jehovah's Witnesses, that Denton Cooley [of Houston, Texas] has performed open-heart operations now for over seven years, limiting transfusions wherever possible by substituting hemodilution, diluting the patient's blood with a glucose and heparin solution. If this method has given excellent results since then ... one wonders why it has not been extended to present-day surgery.
  
  End quote #2
  
  The Watchtower 2000 10/15 p. 31 Questions From Readers
  Other procedures or tests involving an individual's own blood are not so clearly in conflict with God's stated principles. For instance, many Christians have allowed some of their blood to be withdrawn for testing or analysis, after which the sample is discarded. Other more complex procedures involving one's blood may also be recommended.
  
  For example, during certain surgical procedures, some blood may be diverted from the body in a process called hemodilution. The blood remaining in the patient is diluted. Later, his blood in the external circuit is directed back into him, thus bringing his blood count closer to normal. Similarly, blood that flows into a wound may be captured and filtered so that the red cells can be returned to the patient; this is called cell salvage. In a different process, blood may be directed to a machine that temporarily carries on a function normally handled by body organs (for example, the heart, lungs, or kidneys). The blood from the machine is then returned to the patient. In other procedures, blood is diverted to a separator (centrifuge) so that damaging or defective portions of it can be eliminated. Or the goal may be to isolate some of a blood component and apply that elsewhere on the body. There are also tests in which a quantity of blood is withdrawn in order to tag it or to mix it with medicine, whereupon it is put back into the patient.
  
  End quote #3
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 

  happilyout

  Keep in mind that they were "this close" to allowing all autologous transfusions altogether...save for one changed vote on the body of old men...
• 

  cabasilas

  From the 2000 Watchtower: "There are also tests in which a quantity of blood is withdrawn in order to tag it or to mix it with medicine, whereupon it is put back into the patient."
  
  Blood that is tagged or mixed with medicine is usually not kept in a circulation loop while it's being tagged. This, to me, is the most clear change of policy by the WT Society. I think the rationale is it's a "current therapy." So tubes are not required...all that is required is that the treatment is ongoing.
  
  Talk about straining out the gnat and gulping down the camel!
• 

  Snoozy

  When Hubby was in the hospital getting chemo..the laison" troop" told me that if the tube comes off the machine or slips out of his body..they couldn't put it back in.He would lose that blood... It was separated from the body.That was in 2002..It had to be like an extension of his vessels...continous..without a break..

  Thankfully he never went any further in his treatment so wasn't subjected to all that .

  He was scheduled to go to a Witness hospital we have here in St Louis Mo but he never made it that far.

  The hospital was the only place that would have put a Portal ? in his chest (for the chemo) without using Blood.They have to put the tube directly into a major artery and many Drs.here won't accept the No Blood policy when doing that.

  Snoozy..
• 

  cabasilas

  The November 2006 Our Kingdom Ministry, p. 6 says about tagging: "Some blood is withdrawn, mixed with medicine, and returned to the patient. The length of time one's blood is outside the body may vary." This is listed as a possible acceptable procedure.
  
  
  I don't think most JWs have thought about the implications of allowing this as it contradicts earlier views that blood leaving the body had to remain connected somehow.
  
  
  Similarly, the same OKM states that autologous platelet gel is also permitted. This is where one's own blood is "withdrawn and concentrated into a solution rich in platelets and white cells. This solution is applied on surgical sites or wounds" to seal wounds or reduce bleeding.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
• 

  MsMcDucket

  Hemodilution is simply getting IV fluids put into your body. Sort of like putting too much water in Kool-Aid. When the doctors do this, less red blood cells are lost due to the dilution of the blood.

  Now when you talk about saving the blood. I've use something like a hemovac (I can't remember the name of the product.) to save the blood. The blood flows into a drain that is still attached to the person. The bag isn't removed. You just turn the bag upside down and infuse their blood back into them. There's a lot snaps on the darn device! It like a drain (hemovac) and IV bag hooked together.

  You're talking about two separate things. You should look up hemodilution in a medical dictionary; and then look up cell-saver technology.
• 

  chasson

  You're talking about two separate things. You should look up hemodilution in a medical dictionary; and then look up cell-saver technology.

  Well i will send you to the link provide. There is two types of hemodilution: Acute normovolemic hemodilution and Hypervolemic hemodilution

  Hemodilution is simply getting IV fluids put into your body. Sort of like putting too much water in Kool-Aid. When the doctors do this, less red blood cells are lost due to the dilution of the blood.

  You are talking about hypervolemic hemodilution.

  The subject here is acute normovolemic hemodilution describe in the link:

  Normovolemic hemodilution, on the other hand, involves removing a quantity of whole blood into bags and replacing it with an equal volume of fluid just before the commencement of surgery. The blood now circulating in the patient's body is significantly diluted, so when they bleed they will lose fewer red cells than if they were bleeding whole blood. At the end of the operation, or as needed, the whole blood that was drawn off at the start can be re-introduced, thus boosting the number of red blood cells. Some Jehovah's Witnesses will accept this procedure, if they feel that the blood that is temporarily diverted into bags has not totally lost contact with them and has therefore not been "shed".

  Thanks, to help us to precise what we are talking about, not hemodilution in general, but acute normovolemic hemodilution (ANH)

  Bye

  Charles
• 

  Gill

  The 'Blood Policy' has evolved in a fascinating and convoluted way in the last twenty years. From total abstention, even down to the point of vaccinations that might have used blood products in their development, to virtually total use of blood. The problem is that a lot, and I mean a lot of JWs still do not have the mental capacity to understand that they can take blood products now with NO sanctions.

  This is the ONLY problem that the Goobering Brothers have in trying to ditch the problem they have got themselves into.

  The basic R and F member does not understand. There are quite a few 'brainier' individuals who do grasp the changes but not ALL.

  That is why we find that people who are 'so so' Witnesses, don't attend all meetings, marry out of 'da troof' etc are willing to just die and take no blood products at all. That is why elderly witnesses, from 60 up just do not 'get it'.

  There are huge changes in the blood policy. As I've said before, the GB will have to jump in one direction or the other soon. They will have to completely drop any sanctions or even mention of 'Blood' or they will have to go back to a total blood ban.

  Should a JW grow the balls to sue the WT over its blood stance, on having lost a relative, the WTBTS is well and truly stuffed! It has written far too much on this subject and demonized a potential life saver, that has cost too much for many.

  Remembering that both vaccination bans and organ transplant bans were lifted completely, it may well be only a short, short while till JWs are accepting whole blood transfusion in life threatening situations.

  How long do you think it might be?
• 

  chasson

  Blood that is tagged or mixed with medicine is usually not kept in a circulation loop while it's being tagged. This, to me, is the most clear change of policy by the WT Society. I think the rationale is it's a "current therapy." So tubes are not required...all that is required is that the treatment is ongoing.

  Yes, you have found when the changement occurs. A simple remarque at the end of an article. Too funny.

  It seems that because it was a small amount of blood and the procedure was quick, they have autorized it even if the storage and the reinfuse of whole blood was in question.

  But concerning the new change in 2005, the technique used here, imply 3 units of blood (a consequent amount of whole blood) and a surgery which could take a lot of times, few hours depending on the procedure (so a long time) .

  So, even if in the link provide Jan B. Wade and surely the GB before him, reduce the term "autologous blood' to a blood stored one day before the surgery and not in the surgery procedure, it is remain that this blood is stored and reinfuse as a whole in the patient body.

  So they can say that autologous transfusions are still forbidden, when in fact they are autorized if the collect, the storage and the reinfuse of the blood to the patient take place during the surgery procedure.

  Theologically, they have far less justifications than ever to hold this position.

  Bye

  Charles