Would blood mgmt improvements have been made without firm stand of JW's

berrygerry

http://o.canada.com/news/national/blood-transfusions

Thoughts?

I read somewhere that a religion in India also forbids blood and others that can't take blood for other reasons, so yes I believe so. Doctor's have known for sometime that blood transfusions have problems.

Mum

How many children had to die in the process? I do not admire the WT's "stand" regardless of the benefit to some, while others had to die!

steve2

It's a shame that so very many have had to die in the process. Besides, the vast majority of blood transfusions are not problematic. We also need to keep in mind that practically all medical procedures have risks and that, over time, these are addressed.

Giordano

Self serving nonsense. Blood was the only way to keep people on the operating table long enough to complete the surgery. It's not perfect........ it wasn't ever considered perfect, it was the best tool to keep someone alive. It still is when it comes to childbirth issues, trauma and chronic anemia.

The JW's & WTBTS contributed nothing. Vietnam and our last dumb wars made it necessary to treat combat soldiers with something quicker, better? then BT.

I applaud the way to better health management........ but the JW's are guilty of needlessly killing their own. Their biblical principle is BS and self serving cleat trap.

Show me where Jesus said you had to avoid eating blood which is not what a transfusion is.

villagegirl

What ? Firm Stand ? The Watchtower vacillated and zig-zagged and

redesigned this doctrine several times, and now they allow "blood fractions"

which is what most blood transfusions already where. ? This doctrine was

blatant disregard for the lives of children, hemophiliacs and accident victims

and anyone who underwent surgery, or refused to, because blood was involved.

The changes in blood handling and screening is not due to Jehovah's Witnesses,

(who tend to think they effect the world by everything they do or don't do )

We have the male homosexual community and the AIDS epidemic to thank

for the improvement in blood screening and delivery, not witnesses.

OUTLAW

.

..............The WBT$ Did A Great Job..

If Dead JW Kids Are A Measure Of Success..

....................

..................................................... ...OUTLAW

rebel8

Where are the sources in that article proving dubs were "onto something"? I've never heard any sort of actual evidence that dubs "do better after nonblood surgery". Some people have claimed that, including that wacko at that noblood site, and when I looked up the references they did not contain evidence.

Let's remember, dubs encouraged blood transfusions in their literature until around the 1940s. Then suddenly the cult leaders craved a novel way to set their members apart, make them exclusive.

And this they found in blood. NOT because of any medical "knowledge". Because of New Light in their religious doctrine. They weren't "onto" anything. Their religious teaching happened to have a few unintended side effects, good and deadly.

Even in the 1970s when Hepatitis was being transmitted to millions, or in the 1980s when HIV was doing the same thing, did the dubs ever say you shouldn't take blood because of those things. They only claimed it after the fact, after science identified those viruses.

Over the centuries, they made a bunch of BS claims exaggerating the risks of blood and lying about the benefits.

mmkay. You can read more in a publication by Kerry Louderback-Wood, Jehovah's Witnesses and Blood: The Tort of Misrepresentation. (I think I got the title right.)

Vietnam and our last dumb wars made it necessary to treat combat soldiers with something quicker, better? then BT.

Good point. This is me. The last few nonblood products that went on the market to treat bleeds were developed due to military needs. If jehooplas were really catalysts for this sort of thing, why only nonblood surgery and not nonblood products to treat bleeding?

nonjwspouse

The WT created a ready and willing population of test subjects for the blood alternative industry. Of course faster imporvements are made in the technology, when you have willing human test subjects, many of them died as a result. Children included.

Preaching to people that saving lives with blood is wrong, is to be bloodguilty for the numerous deaths due to lack of life saing transfusions in my opinion.

The WT is bloodguilty for the deaths caused by the "offence" and enforced rule on organ transplants.

I would like to know who exactly held that patent on the cell saver machine that was develped in a most convenient time, very close to when the WT declared "no blood".