Why Was WT OK with Blood Transfusions for over 65 Years Before Banning?

by Sea Breeze 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Sea Breeze
    Sea Breeze

    Blood Transfusion History

    1665 The first recorded successful blood transfusion occurs in England: Physician Richard Lower keeps dogs alive by transfusion of blood from other dogs.

    1818 James Blundell performs the first successful blood transfusion of human blood to treat postpartum hemorrhage.

    1840 The first whole blood transfusion to treat hemophilia is successfully completed.

    1900 Karl Landsteiner discovers the first three human blood groups, A, B and O.

    1902 Landsteiner’s colleagues, Alfred Decastello and Adriano Sturli, add a fourth blood type, AB.

    1907 Blood typing and cross matching between donors and patients is attempted to improve the safety of transfusions. The universality of the O blood group is identified.

    1914 Adolf Hustin discovers that sodium citrate can anticoagulate blood for transfusion, allowing it to be stored and later transfused safely to patients on the battlefield.

    1932 The first blood bank is established at Leningrad hospital.

    1939-1940 The Rh blood group is discovered and recognized as the cause behind most transfusion reactions.

    1940 The US government establishes a nationwide blood collection program.

    So from the beginning of the Watchtower being printed in 1879, they were ok with blood transfusions until 1945. What caused this? Do you think there wasn't enough sickness and death from the discouragement of vaccines and they neded more martyrs to feed their sense of self-righteousness?

  • Beth Sarim
    Beth Sarim

    Proves the entire nonsensical foundation of such a doctrine.

    Just made up.

    The 1st ever ''transfusion" wasn't attempted until sometime in the 19th century.

    On the Sabbath,, in Bible times a person could break the Sabbath to save an animal..

    Why? The more importance for human life. The Borganization always claims they value life. Then why do they hold to such a damaging,,deadly blood policy?

    Proves such a fallacy of a ridiculous,,nefarious blood policy.

  • Sea Breeze
  • FragrantAddendum
    FragrantAddendum

    sanderson says his dad was an accountant

    (maybe fractions too fancy math for wt hlc boys?)

    so blind they can't even count to zero

    "do the math"

    (mark said he didn't do the math...no duh!🤭😂)

    https://youtu.be/SKTvdFR8SxM

  • NotFormer
    NotFormer

    I've had JWs tell me that transfusions didn't happen up until the time the WT banned them. IOW, the technology was banned the year it became a thing. I pointed out that it had been available at least since before WWI. And that the ban hadn't started until 1945*.

    *Conveniently, after Rutherford's death.

  • FragrantAddendum
  • Rattigan350
    Rattigan350

    It's because they are pharisees in that they want to find Laws that they can attribute to God and apply to themselves as being better than everyone else because they obey these laws.

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    The more they could portray themselves as more “Biblical” and holy (whilst really just being contrarian), the easier it was to poach disgruntled ex-Protestants and -Catholics who’d grown tired of the “liberalizing” (really, just adapting with the times) of their original churches.

    It actually reminds me a little of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”.

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot
    NotFormer - “…Conveniently, after Rutherford's death.”

    Was chemotherapy a thing back then?

    ’Cause Rutherford had cancer, and that treatment involves transfusions, if I’m not mistaken.

    🤔

  • FragrantAddendum
    FragrantAddendum
    The more they could portray themselves as more “Biblical” and holy (whilst really just being contrarian), the easier it was to poach disgruntled ex-Protestants and -Catholics who’d grown tired of the “liberalizing”

    ayuh

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit