by nicolaou 739 Replies latest watchtower medical
And let's not forget the nature of Ms Barricks error - dead people. It's not something trivial, if you're going to post or tweet about something that is SO emotive and sensitive you'd better be damned sure of your facts.
On reflection I might have worded my response to her differently but I can say that my snap response to her foolish and crass tweet was at least honest - nakedly so.
I won't apologise for not talking to adults as children . .
When I have more time, and more posting ability, I’ll take a closer look at your work. In the meantime I’ll point out that 50,000 deaths due to Watchtower’s blood doctrine over a 50-year period is huge when seen in total butnearly imperceptible in real time. It is a figure that could only been seen for what it is in hindsight and with statistical compilation.
It would mean that around 2.5% of all JWs deaths over the past 50 years were caused by refusing blood. That's not a credible figure.
Hold on a minute, the 19 deaths was only for a region of New Zealand, not for New Zealand as a whole?
In that case my calculations were completely wrong. But it also suggests the figure is incredibly high.
The end result from this debate is that it's better to strive to be accurate as possible when posing opposition to the WTS.
no matter where or by what manner.
I think we can all agree that.
Adhering to facts is the utmost importance always .
If I recall, Marvin's source was looking at only one illness...... an aggressive anemia. Not open heart surgery, transplants, child birth, Cancer treatments, elective surgery, emergency surgery or Trauma etc.
Let's take trauma. It's more clear cut. "Unintentional and intentional injuries were the fifth and seventh leading causes, accounting for 6.23% and 2.84% of worldwide mortalities, respectively in 2002 World Health Organization estimates.
The over all mortality rate world wide is on average 1%.
JW's are approaching 8,000,000 publishers....... world wide a 1% mortality rate means 80,000 will die this year and next etc.
Taking just one year and the combined percentage of 6.23% and 2.84% (rounded out) comes to 9% or 7200 deaths due to traumatic injury for JW's.
Here are a few things to consider #1. these are JW's who have died from injuries so the injuries in most instances would have been severe enough to administer some form of blood. #2 JW's do not accept blood transfusions so they carry blood cards or have representatives to intercede.
Can we find any agreement that many JW's who sustained a very serious traumatic injury and refuses blood can die from that decision? What would be your guess on that number? http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057892/ "Patients with uncontrolled hemorrhage requiring immediate transfusion as part of
their initial care are the major test of a trauma center transfusion service.
Patients present and can die within minutes. To survive, the most critically
injured need red cells and plasma within a very short time and in adequate
quantities."
Since there will be approximately 7200 trauma deaths among JW's how many of those would have survived if they accepted blood?
"Of 5649 such patients admitted to the STC in the calendar year 2000, 514
received a blood product, and 490 of those patients received red blood cells
(RBCs) [4]. ................. The total number of units of blood components given was 5219 units of red cells, 5226 units of plasma, 2892 units of platelets and 64units of cryoprecipitate............................................The survival rate for these patients was
97%." If I am guessing based on these numbers then approximately 1,000 JW's could have been saved?
And let's remember we limited this to just severe Trauma cases. All total I wouldn't be surprised if we have lost many many thousands over the past 68 years (dating back to 1945).
While 250,000 unsupported blood related deaths is difficult to prove this whole belief started in 1945 an era when medicine was just coming out of the dark ages. Many life saving operations were too dangerous to perform without blood until the late 1980's . My own open heart surgery reguired a fair amount of blood in 1987.
After reading this thread, I would like to say a little thing. On the web there are pages that say the number 250 000... This is one: http://watchtowerlawsuit.com/. That does not mean that 250 000 is the correct number, but it means that other people have claimed that too.
This article ( http://www.krev.info/library/pocetumrti.pdf ) suggest that 900 JW's dies from refusing blood as medical treatment every year. Every year! Now, if you know your "cult history" you will remember that Jim Jones got 914 followers killed in 1978. 300 of them was children.
Personally I think that this is way more important than the discussion going on here over "who said what and when". If there is 900 JW dying every year from this it means that Jehovah's Witnesses are the worst murder/suicide cult in the history of man. They are responsible for almost the same amount of unnecessary deaths every year as Peoples Temple was in 1978. Even if the number is only 50% of that, it would still make them a suicide cult worse than any other cult.
There are a lot of factors involved - how prevalent blood transfusions are at different stages of history, how many JWs there are then, how many of those become ill where a transfusion would be effective and how many of those take a stand on blood etc...
We'll never know but right now I'm willing to agree to any number, literally, any number on either side of 250,000 ... just not 250,000 itself now on principal.
Good point TTATT things get really disgusting when you look at it that way.
I wonder if a main steam media outlet would take up this peculiar acknowledgment of 10 of thousands of people voluntarily committing suicide,
stressing the totals every year or the grand total of JWS over the past 65 years.
When you start talking tens of thousands, you could invariably pique the publics interest.
I think the media would be willing to report on the yearly numbers. It is insane. And when you think of the fact that one drop of breast milk contains 1 million white blood cells, the whole idea of witnesses not allowed to have blood transfusion, and not the white blood cells, it is totally meaningless.
And since it looks to me that this disussionboard are obsessed with pointing fingers east and west, I will include a link to where the number 1 million in a drop comes from :-)
http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/feeding-eating/breastfeeding/why-breast-is-best/how-human-milk-protects-babies-illness
