DOC said- I think a complete reversal of the blood doctrine would cause heavy fallout. Both WITHIN and OUTSIDE of the Organization. From within because it has affect SO many members and their loved ones. It's touted as a special way in which Jehovah has protected His people (from AIDS, etc). All the doctrine of it being "bad medicine" etc would have to be retracted.
Well, the fact is that blood transfusions are NOT without complications, even today, and even aside from the obvious errors (eg cross-matching errors, giving someone the wrong blood type which can prove fatal), people face a low-risk of complications from transfusions.
Granted, the advantages FAR outweigh the risks, esp if you're facing anemia/anoxia from massive blood loss, but many providers have really backed off the knee-jerk decision to transfuse, for many good reasons (cost being only one factor: a unit of blood costs about $1,000, IIRC). In other words, the JWs were not completely incorrect on the health risks, since many needless transfusions that resulted in complications were likely given in the past.
Of course, the safety concerns were NOT why JWs refused: it was simply a matter of following God's orders. So any health benefits were post-hoc rationalization, AKA the frosting on the cake from what they described as obeying Divine orders.
DOC said- From outside because it is the one of the few issues that generates media attention regarding JWs. A complete reversal would make headlines in the news.
That's why we're likely going to see what we are seeing: a gradual evolution of the policy away from verboten to allowing 'fractions', and then it likely will eventually be declared as a 'conscience matter'.
I feel sorry for the last JW to die from refusal just before 'new light' is announced (say, at the AGM in 2030? Anyone want to start a pool for a date?), but of course, their JW family will be comforted being told they died faithful to Jehovah, and the family will be reunited in the resurrection; they'll likely be happy with that.
Adam