Blood fractions... need a sounding board..

vanyell

I'm currently in a discussion with a JW regarding the illogical basis of accepting blood fractions for transfusions vs whole blood. He compared blood fractioning to the splitting of water into hydrogen and oxygen. In short, he contends that blood fractions is not blood since oxygen is not water when split.

My understanding is that the main reason why blood fractions are called that way is because they are components of blood. When reconstituted together, they form whole blood. Whereas water split into hydrogen and oxygen doesn't necessarily combine into water.

Am I missing any loopholes in my logic?

wha happened?

what a stupid analogy. Whats does splitting water atoms have to do with God's law?

vanyell

That's correct. Actually it's splitting of molecules if you don't mind. Apparently, most of the time, it's useless to debate or argue with JWs who thinks that their logical deductions are impeccable since they own the "truth". In any case: here's my reply to those thralls: " Let's see, tell me then how inteferon (blood fraction) is made from? Is it made from scratch? Or is it processed from whole blood which is "forbidden" to be place in storage by God? Remember blood is supposed to be poured out to the ground as indicated in Leviticus. Again, you're being inane. Show me a mathematician that says a fraction of a number is not a number." Feedback is greatly appreciated.

Morbidzbaby

Splitting atoms? More like splitting hairs!! How about the fact that you can find oxygen and hydrogen in other things (um...AIR???) that are not water? Yet, you cannot find the individual blood components in anything BUT blood or bodily fluids (to my knowledge). You won't find platelets in plants. Nor will you find red blood cells or plasma in them. So, in my opinion, if you can't derive them from any other source but from blood, they ARE blood.

Just as taking apart a ham sandwich and eating the individual ingredients doesn't negate the fact that it started out as a ham sandwich, taking apart blood and being transfused with the individual components doesn't negate the fact that it started out as blood.

You can't split hairs with Biblical edicts... It either says to completely abstain, or it doesn't. In my opinion, according to JEWISH LAW (and modern day Jews), the law was not written with the intent of not having transfusions...such a thing wasn't heard of then. So to ascribe an ancient law with modern application is just ridiculous.

wha happened?

You lost them at logical. Those conversations rarely get deep. Nothing beyond childish analogies, such as the one u introduced.

vanyell

Well... it's worth a try. It's kinda irritating when he claims that I cannot refute him (in another discussion) when he wouldn't even try to do some research like why Greg Stafford would leave their beloved ORG. So I told him that since he's so enthralled with the ORG's "truth", we just see each other during Armageddon.... Though I did want to say, "and see who'll say I told you so" (which I didn't). <sigh>

wha happened?

you can use the bible and their own publications, and u will get............. a headache.

Honestly there is some really juicy research if u search the threads. I learned here that blood was one considered an organ transplant in the original blood brochure, when organ transplants were considered canabilism. Then when organ transplants were approved, blood was no longer an organ transplant. They did have it right the 1st time. Why they jumped back on the no blood thing, who knows.

The other problem is the great amount of misinformation we got as JW's regarding non blood options. They talk about blood expandures or drugs taken to increase blood production in a very deceptive way. I learned later that EPO was certainly not an emergancy type drug as it take 3 weeks to make any effect. Dubs bring that drug up alot.

vanyell

I understand your point. Their so-called bloodless surgeries/operations are predicated on the patients having the money and time to undergo the preparations for it. Trauma victims on the other hand only have the "golden hour" for the doctors to save their lives.

Morbidzbaby

wha happened, I was also amazed that the very minute amount of true knowledge I had regarding blood transfusions and the alternatives. Expanders simply give you more VOLUME, but if you're seriously lacking red blood cells and platelets, you're essentially screwed when you asked for saline Ringer's Lactate. Bloodless surgery is possible, of course, and it's the best way to go if you CAN... But refusing blood when it's there to save your life is just suicidal and stupid.

That's one of my biggest worries...that one of my kids will get into some sort of accident or health problem and my ex will refuse them a transfusion...and my child will die because their father is a deluded fuck. And I know if there was something, he wouldn't alert me until after the fact...I am not a key player in this family anymore, so I have no need to know certain things (his wife told me "What happens in this house isn't your business"). So, even being a legal parent still, I have no say.

wha happened?

yea I've mentioned it before, but going through Mom's illness before she died was a huge education on blood. When I go back and read the brochures when researching something, I have to put them down because they really can stretch the truth unrecognizable

Blood fractions... need a sounding board..

Share this