Is their residual blood inside a kidney that us suitable for transplant? Im sure they have to make sure that the blood type matches the recipient. So in effect the recipient is getting a small amount of blood with a kidney transplant, so the blood restriction is basically being rejected by accepting a small amount of blood inside the kidney.
I may have found a clue to Watchtower's sudden reversal on organ transplants
by ILoveTTATT2 25 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
OrphanCrow
ILoveTTATT, you will notice that the WT also left out this finding of the same study:
Although the outcomes after renal transplantation in Jehovah's Witnesses were similar to those of the control group, the Jehovah's Witnesses had an increased susceptibility to rejection episodes. The cumulative percentage of incidence of primary rejection episodes was 77 per cent at three months in the Jehovah's Witnesses versus 44 per cent at 21 months in the matched control group. The consequence of early allograft dysfunction from rejection was particularly detrimental to Jehovah's Witnesses who developed severe anemia (hemoglobin (Hgb)* 4.5 g per cent)-two early deaths occurred in the subgroup with this combination of problems.
-
ILoveTTATT2
Correct, OC.
I also noticed that the witnesses had such a high level of rejection because the vast majority of them rejected ALG, which was the anti-rejection drug.
ALG is globulin... and all those "blood fractions" were allowed... but only after 2000...
They never, ever cease to amaze me. But in a wrong way.
-
TD
ALG is globulin... and all those "blood fractions" were allowed... but only after 2000..
That's not true at all.
Plasma fractions were first allowed in 1958. I know first hand of a JW child who received actual transfusions of IgG in the late 60's
In the year 2000, the scope of acceptable preparations/procedures was broadened to include fractions of any "major" component. This opened the door to hemoglobin based blood substitutes and platelet fractions.
-
Diogenesister
Yeah OC I noticed the Swines left out the rejection risk being greater and especially dangerou for anemic jws.
When did they start allowing cell salvage???
This makes their blood ban even more insane if they are still sticking to the OT rule that blood outside the veins should be " poured out " on the ground.
-
ILoveTTATT2
Well, the report says that most of the witnesses rejected ALG... globulin... because they considered it to be a blood product. So either it was banned outright or we had some really stupid JW's who rejected stuff that was already allowed...
-
Finkelstein
Why would a loving and just god (Jehovah) want his faithful devoted followers to die anyways ?
Thousands have died because of this wrongly devised doctrine by the WTS.
-
OrphanCrow
ILoveTTATT: Well, the report says that most of the witnesses rejected ALG... globulin... because they considered it to be a blood product. So either it was banned outright or we had some really stupid JW's who rejected stuff that was already allowed...
Fractions were "allowed" in WT literature as early as 1978. (the study we have been discussing started in 1979)
Watchtower June 15, 1978, Questions from readers:
What, however, about accepting serum injections to fight against disease, such as are employed for diphtheria, tetanus, viral hepatitis, rabies, hemophilia and Rh incompatibility? This seems to fall into a ‘gray area.’ Some Christians believe that accepting a small amount of a blood derivative for such a purpose would not be a manifestation of disrespect for God’s law; their conscience would permit such. (Compare Luke 6:1-5.) Others, though, feel conscientiously obliged to refuse serums because these contain blood, though only a tiny amount. Hence, we have taken the position that this question must be resolved by each individual on a personal basis. We urge each one to strive to have a clear conscience and to be responsive to God’s guidance found in His Word.—Ps. 119:105.
In 1981, Gene Smalley and the WT doctor, Dr. Dixon, published an article that was presented to the medical community (and has been quoted ad nauseum ever since...) that also claimed that acceptance of blood "fractions" was a personal decision:
...Witnesses' religious understanding does not absolutely prohibit the use of components such as albumin, immune globulins, and hemophiliac preparations; each Witness must decide individually if he can accept these.
Dio:
When did they start allowing cell salvage???When Haemonetics developed the first salvage machine in the mid-70s. Of course, the org claimed that it was only okay if "the blood wasn't stored". How this is even possible is beyond me - storage is always involved - the patient's blood isn't returned to their body right away - of course there is a storage period. It can't be avoided. However, Smalley/Dixon said this to the medical community in 1981:
Techniques for intraoperative collection or hemodilution that involve blood storage are objectionable to them. However, many Witnesses permit the use of dialysis and heart-lung equipment (non-blood-prime) as well as intraoperative salvage where the extracorporeal circulation is uninterrupted; the physician should consult with the individual patient as to what his conscience dictates.
-
TD
or we had some really stupid JW's who rejected stuff that was already allowed...
^^^ This ^^^
“Are we to consider the injection of serums such as diphtheria antitoxin and blood fractions such as gamma globulin into the blood stream, for the purpose of building up resistance to disease by means of antibodies, the same as the drinking of blood or the taking of blood or blood plasma by means of transfusions? – N.P., United States.
No, it does not seem necessary that we put the two in the same category, although we have done so in times past. While God did not intend for man to contaminate his blood stream by vaccines, serums or blood fractions, doing so does not seem to be included in God’s expressed will forbidding blood as food. It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not.”
– The Watchtower 09/15/1958 p. 575 (emphasis mine)
-
OrphanCrow
The WT flipflopped on the use of blood components in 1961 when they published the pamphlet "Blood, Medicine and the Law of God". (Incidentally, 1961 was right about the time that Denton Cooley started doing cardiac surgery on JW patients using a heart and lung machine - a cell saver)
From the 1961 blood law book:
In view of the constant developments in the field of medical research, new treatments involving the use of blood and its component parts are constantly coming to the fore. But regardless of the method used to infuse it into the body and regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood substance that is involved, God's law remains the same. If it is - blood and it is being used to nourish or to sustain life the divine law clearly applies.
and
Although Jehovah's witnesses will not eat blood as a food, nor in medical use consent to any kind of blood transfusion or, in place of it, an infusion of any blood fraction or blood substance, this does not rule out all medical treatment.
I think it was also in 1961 that taking a blood transfusion became a disfellowshipping offense (???).
1961 was a defining year in the blood phobia doctrine. The WT tightened up their rules on blood. Previously "allowed" fractions and serums became taboo.