Transfusions and Risk of Heart Attack - News Article Now Circulating in Dubbieland (page 2)

ziddina

Oh, goody...

Poster #2 is a "Dubbie"...

Crap, the "quote" function muddled it... I will hi-lite the Dubbie comments with yellow...

"The facts are available for everyone to research. The fact is, there is a very high risk of infection as well as heart attack and stroke and other major health concerns associated with blood transfusions. I find it exremely hard to fathom that educated people can't or won't do the research on this subject. People criticize Jehovah's Witnesses for not allowing their children to have a blood transfusion however one of the quotes in this news item said: "Yet, incredibly, there has never been any major research into the effectiveness or safety of blood transfusions. There are also no clear guidelines on when surgeons should administer donated blood, which may have caused widespread overuse." Doctors also used to prescribe smoking cigarettes as a stress reliever. Come on people.... Lives are at stake here!!! Do you really want to risk your life or the life of your loved ones just because some doctor tells you it's neccessary? Don't you owe it yourself and to them to do the research?- James, Halifax, Canada, 04/8/2010 01:50

Ooooo, let's chew on this!! First of all, "The facts are available for everyone to research..."

Really?? Isn't that why new studies are being ordered - so that the medical community WILL HAVE FACTUAL INFORMATION to proceed upon?? The 'facts' aren't available - YET!!! [Leave it to "Dubbie" arrogance to claim that the 'facts' are already in... ]

"I find it exremely hard to fathom that educated people can't or won't do the research on this subject. ..." By 'educated people', I assume he means JWs who have read lots and lots of "Awake!™ " magazines...

"very high risk of infection as well as heart attack and stroke ..." Hmm... "LIONS and TIGERS and BEARS, Oh MY!!!" The article indicated preliminary figures of 40-60%... That 'scream' of "VERY HIGH" - well, to me, "very high" would be up in the 80% category and up...

And then there's the 'blanket' statement, "Doctors also used to prescribe smoking cigarettes as a stress reliever. ..." whereby the JW can blithely condemn ALL doctors as mis-informed idiots... Guess the doctors should have read more "Awake!™ " magazines...

"Lives are at stake here!!! Do you really want to risk your life or the life of your loved ones just because some doctor tells you it's neccessary? ..."

Wow. Watchtower double-speak and arrogant hypocrisy at its finest... Yeah, lives are at stake, especially when people REFUSE blood transfusions ABSOLUTELY - thereby risking loss of life by listening to a PUBLISHING company's opinion - instead of a DOCTOR'S opinion...!!

Sheeeeaaaassshhhhhh ....

leavingwt

This is all anyone needs to know. WT brags about the kids that have died as a result of their dogma.

serenitynow!

Reading that article is about on the same level as anything in the "National Enquirer". It used lots of scary numbers, but no real proof that blood transfusions are more risky than previously thought. I've administered blood countless times and I've never seen nor heard from colleagues about an increased risk of heart attack- that of course does not mean that it does not occur. If there were real, properly cited sources from medical journals that would give the article more credence. Nevertheless JWs will take this article and use it as another reason why they are right about blood.

palmtree67

bumping

YellowRose

I wouldn't be here today if I hadn't received a blood transfusion and that's a pure fact. I had exploratory surgery in 1995 and they found a rare type of tumor in my abdomen which tore lose from my intestines and left ovary while the doctors were searching. It was a gastrointestional stromal tumor with skeinoid fibers (associated with NF1- Neurofibromatosis Type 1__hense I'm a NF1 patient). The tumor began bleeding profusely and another doctor had to be called in the operating room to stop the bleeding. I lost over half of my blood supply and had to have a transfusion. The tumor was too complicated for them to remove so I was sewed back up and referred to Tulane Medical Center in New Orleans, La. A few months later I had the tumor removed at Tulane, but it was still a touch and go surgery and I still needed another blood transfusion again.

YellowRose

http://jehovahwitnessestruth.homestead.com/BloodTransfusions.html

For a better understanding on the blood issue and Jehovah Witnesses I have provided this link. The scripture Jehovah Witnesess use to forbid blood transfusions has been misinterpreted by them.

agonus

It's not a health or medical issue for the dubs. It never was and never will be. It's all about the leadership telling Witness parents that if their kid accepts blood or major blood fractions (or whatever the hell their lawyerese forbids) they jeopardize the child's eternal life. That's all it's about. Period.

cognizant dissident

I have actually read this new medical study and it does show cardiac patients do better without blood transfusions. So the article is not bogus. Those are usually planned operations though. There are still dozens of other medical conditions that are benefited by transfusions. Blood disorders, immune system disorders, certain cancers, and the big one is bleeding out from trauma or hemorrhage.

Just because they have that one tidbit of truth in their article, doesn't mean the rest of their stuff isn't still bullshit.

YellowRose

Hi Agonus!

I agree with what was said in the link in my earlier post..."J.W's will never lift the ban on blood transfusions. Why? They fear a mass exodus of Biblical magnitude will happen and the 'society' will crumble like the walls of Jericho. Many J.W. will be awakened and realize all the loved ones who died needlessly.

Transfusions and Risk of Heart Attack - News Article Now Circulating in Dubbieland

Share this