Posts by OrphanCrow

29

Bad Blood - when safe blood turns into bad blood - The patients' body reaction

by TheWonderofYou in

despite that the sensational title „bad blood“ was selected to „scare?“ the public.

„bad blood - volte-face in intensive care medicine" by ulricke gehring, 2014. available in english .

its about the fight against public unawareness and resistance.

OrphanCrow

...Farmer Shander

The man's name is Shannon Farmer

That is quite the promotion for PBM. Funny that conventional medical treatments don't need that hard of a sell.

39

Can Someone Explain To Me, Are The Org In Debt Or Rich?

by pale.emperor in

hi guys.. im aware of the orgs blatant hints to donate, donate, donate to the org, the sacking of bethel staff, selling of buildings, reducing mags and books, emphasis on digital rather than physical books etc which is obviously a money saver - but are the wt org in money difficulty?

because elsewhere on here and on youtube there's stories of the watchtower being mega rich, one even called it "a billion dollar organization".

and if there is any money in there, who's benefiting off it?

OrphanCrow

I just spent a bit of time reviewing the charity tax laws in Canada.

The Watchtower Society in Canada files tax as a charity and as such is governed by those laws. The GB may be the "guardians of doctrine" but when it comes to money, the CRA are the "guardians of $".

To ensure that a charity really does what a charity is supposed to do - collect money and spend that money on charitable activities - the CRA has what is called a "disbursement quota". The optimum disbursement quota is 20/80. In other words - 20 percent of incoming money can be spent on administration and expenses and 80% is to be directed towards charitable activities.

In Canada, the money spent on charitable activities can involve the transfer of donated money to a "qualified donee". The Canadian branch's qualified donee is the Watch Tower Bible and Tract in NY (or is it the Pennsylvania one? hard to keep track of all the corporate names).

If a charity wants to spend money on capital purchases or put money into buildings (Kingdom Halls) they have to receive written permission from the CRA.

I think that, in Canada at least, the charity tax laws, especially the disbursement quota, is what is driving the WT's demand for donations. And, the money being drained into expansion projects increases the amount they are required to put towards that 80% figure of charitable activities. Building projects don't necessarily qualify.

I hate tax law. It makes my brain hurt.

*to add - the question - "are you under any parent organization?"...or something like that...was answered "No". Huh. So the Canadian Branch apparently doesn't have a parent organization. They claim to be independent of the top WT corp. Not sure how that works. And all the directors claimed to be "arm's length" from all the other directors. Hmmmm.

48

"Basics of Blood Management" by Dr. Petra Seeber and Dr. Aryeh Shander - Inaccuracies and Myth

by OrphanCrow in

patient blood management arose out of bloodless medicine and alternatives to blood transfusions.

pbm has been accepted as the standard of care in australia and has been implemented into the health care systems of other countries such as canada.

a prominent promoter of pbm has been aryeh shander from englewood hospital in new jersey.

OrphanCrow

What disappoints (and alarms) me about this Blood Management and Patient Blood Management is that it clearly states, in the textbook that Aryeh Shander, the PBM guru, has authored, that the principles that BM rests upon, comes from Holy Scripture.

I don't understand how something so clearly religious in nature could be adopted by the World Health Organization, an arm of the United Nations, as "the golden standard of care". For the world.

Why is a medical practice that is driven by religious beliefs being considered the best for everybody in the world?

48

"Basics of Blood Management" by Dr. Petra Seeber and Dr. Aryeh Shander - Inaccuracies and Myth

by OrphanCrow in

patient blood management arose out of bloodless medicine and alternatives to blood transfusions.

pbm has been accepted as the standard of care in australia and has been implemented into the health care systems of other countries such as canada.

a prominent promoter of pbm has been aryeh shander from englewood hospital in new jersey.

OrphanCrow

vidiot: Seems to me that from what you've been reporting, the mine's starting to run dry.
Or am I understanding it wrong?

Well. That depends.

BM and PBM is being adopted in various parts of the world. It has become a global enterprise with tentacles that reach into Asia, South America, Australia, Canada, the US....the list goes on and on. Not to mention the bloodless tourism industry to India - not sure how that is doing.

There has been setbacks. Various failures in the world of artificial blood. But there is a new one on the horizon that will be very interesting to watch - the new artificial blood made from stem cells. I am curious to see if the WT comes up with a spin on that one.

The biotech investment world is volatile. There is that side of it.

There is another crack showing in the PBM world. The Netherlands has been trying to de-implement PBM strategies for their orthopedic surgery for the past few years. After several years of having PBM strategies used in ortho surgery, a study was done and it was determined that there was little to no advantage to using those methods. The only strategy that appeared to have a benefit was far too costly to use. And, they found that PBM did not reduce the need for blood transfusions.*

However, if you look to countries like Austria (where Hofmann hangs out) there is a big push to put PBM into place.

So, I don't know. Time will tell...I am watching. There will always be another research project that can utilize a particular risk group. The no blood cult mentality has permeated almost every aspect of medical care around the world. The bloodless cult has long tentacles.

*there is a Dutch study online that evaluates the benefits/disadvantages of PBM in ortho surgery

39

Can Someone Explain To Me, Are The Org In Debt Or Rich?

by pale.emperor in

hi guys.. im aware of the orgs blatant hints to donate, donate, donate to the org, the sacking of bethel staff, selling of buildings, reducing mags and books, emphasis on digital rather than physical books etc which is obviously a money saver - but are the wt org in money difficulty?

because elsewhere on here and on youtube there's stories of the watchtower being mega rich, one even called it "a billion dollar organization".

and if there is any money in there, who's benefiting off it?

OrphanCrow

The org has created a money sucking monster.

Yes, they have $$$$$$$$$$ and property assets. Lots of it.

But, they must have donations coming in. And the more money they have, the more donations they need.

Retaining charity tax status dictates that the org has to have a certain percentage of their income coming in from donations. The donations, in effect, protect the money and assets they already have. Without donations, the org would lose its tax free status.

62

the new understanding

by heathen in

hi guys , i know i was never a favorite here and haven't posted in awhile ... question .

what do you think of the new understanding of , " this generation " they seem to go in circles on this one big time , once 1914 generation was almost gone they said they didn't know what it meant and now in the new publication the generation includes the second generation after 1914 .... i agree they don't know what they are talking about and this is just another control move .

any comments ?.

OrphanCrow

Finkelstein: So whats really left for them to do to save face and that self assumed image ? , they twist up a new doctrine of understanding to uphold the old wrongful doctrines.

Yeah, but they really missed the boat on this one.

Rather than coming up with the ridiculous notion of 'overlapping' generations, all they had to do was say that the Bible was talking about a 'perfect' generation. That way, they could make that generation be as long as they wanted, or as short as they wanted...it could go on for any length if it was 'perfect'. They could adjust the 'perfect' length of time whenever they want. You know, the same way that a 'perfect' god can be anything they say it is.

48

"Basics of Blood Management" by Dr. Petra Seeber and Dr. Aryeh Shander - Inaccuracies and Myth

by OrphanCrow in

patient blood management arose out of bloodless medicine and alternatives to blood transfusions.

pbm has been accepted as the standard of care in australia and has been implemented into the health care systems of other countries such as canada.

a prominent promoter of pbm has been aryeh shander from englewood hospital in new jersey.

OrphanCrow

Wonderof you....I read the study.

It has little scientific value. It is rather meaningless.

All it really said is - we operated on 16 JWs using PBM methods and 2 of them needed blood transfusions or they would have likely died. Which the patients agreed to. They got blood transfusions.

I don't get what the thrust of the study was meant for other than to say...hey, look! 14 JWs didn't need blood after these procedures.

So what? Personally, I have had seven surgical procedures and have only had a blood transfusion once. Surviving surgery without blood isn't a miracle...it happens more often than not when using conventional methods.

I don't think that this study is all that valuable. Lots of patients go through surgery using conventional methods and they don't require blood transfusions. And, they don't require their blood being drained out, stored, re-infused and diluted. Or, their blood being salvaged and run through a processor and then re-infused.

This study is simply a promotional piece for PBM with little scientific value. The only thing it really demonstrates is that PBM doesn't reduce the need for blood transfusions - two of the patients would have died without blood.

583

What is the purpose of life?

by slimboyfat in

while reading the magazines the other day it occurred to me that jws never really had a very good answer to that question.

because it was aimed at young people and it said something along the lines, "if you believe in god you have a purpose, but if you don't believe in god your life has no purpose or meaning".

i think that is a faulty analysis of the situation.

OrphanCrow

The Problems With Belief by Jim Walker

This paper attempts to show that, indeed, one need not own beliefs of any kind to establish scientific facts, observe and enjoy nature, or live a productive, moral, and useful life.

A long read. But a good one.

48

"Basics of Blood Management" by Dr. Petra Seeber and Dr. Aryeh Shander - Inaccuracies and Myth

by OrphanCrow in

patient blood management arose out of bloodless medicine and alternatives to blood transfusions.

pbm has been accepted as the standard of care in australia and has been implemented into the health care systems of other countries such as canada.

a prominent promoter of pbm has been aryeh shander from englewood hospital in new jersey.

OrphanCrow

Thanx Wonder...

Just a quick comment about this quote in the Polish article:

He (who?) also did a statistical review of 1,026 operations (REVIEW not REPORT is this relevant?) and determined that the risk of surgery in patients of the Jehovah's Witness group was not substantially higher than for others [6, 13]

"Who" refers to Dr. Cooley in this context. The reference is to the Dixon/Smalley article and does not cite the Colley 'review' itself:

6. Dixon JL, Smalley MG. Jehovah's Witnesses the surgical/ethical challenge. JAMA. 1981;246:2471–2.

The next quote in the Polish article also cites the Dixon/Smalley article:

Similarly, DeBakey communicated that in the vast majority of situations involving Witnesses, the risk of operation without the use of blood transfusions was no greater than in those patients on whom he used blood transfusions [6].

This is what theDixon/Smalley article actually said:

Similarly, Michael E. DeBakey, MD,
communicated "that in the great
majority of situations [involving Wit
nesses] the risk of operation without
the use of blood transfusions is no
greater than in those patients on
whom we use blood transfusions"
(personal communication, March
1981).

So here we have evidence that this 'evidence based' article really doesn't have evidence at all - all it has is the word of two WT men who claim that the reviews/reports said what they say the report/reviews said. That is all. Hearsay evidence.

Constructed 'evidence'. Not backed up by evidence simply because the evidence isn't accessible. We have no way whatsoever of testing those claims. We have no way of knowing what those report/reviews left out.

What is really weird about all this is that these citations have been accepted by peer reviewed journals. Nobody has challenged the Dixon/Smalley claims. Nobody has demanded proper citation and reference to original reports/reviews themselves.

I want to see those 2 reports. I want to read them for myself. I want to know the context of the conclusions and what the reports actually said. I want to see the statistical analysis. Scientific investigation demands that. Without those reports being produced, the interpretations of the WT men do not stand the rigors of scientific investigation.

Wonderofyou, I will have to spend some time reading the entire article...and chasing down the citations. Thank you for posting it.

48

"Basics of Blood Management" by Dr. Petra Seeber and Dr. Aryeh Shander - Inaccuracies and Myth

by OrphanCrow in

patient blood management arose out of bloodless medicine and alternatives to blood transfusions.

pbm has been accepted as the standard of care in australia and has been implemented into the health care systems of other countries such as canada.

a prominent promoter of pbm has been aryeh shander from englewood hospital in new jersey.

OrphanCrow

Sherdless, yes, Shannon Farmer and Axel Hofmann (both JWs who are affiliated with the HLC) were instrumental in establishing PBM as the standard of care in Australia.

A Canadian blood bank educator had a response to that article:

Australia's National Blood Authority (NBA), a well respected government organization that does much valuable work, appointed Shannon Farmer, a Jehovah's Witness, as the key consumer representative on a government panel developing new transfusion guidelines for Australia's hospitals. Nil inappropriate about that except Mr. Farmer didn't declare
- Formally, or otherwise it seems, that he was a Jehovah's Witness.
- His consultancy work since 2007 to an Austrian business involved in commercial tendering for patient blood management projects around the world.
- Receiving fees for consulting and lecturing from multinational pharmaceutical companies,e.g., J and J.
When informed, the NBA said it would review the details. Whether or not possible conflicting interests are of "sufficient conflict" is a moot point.
Fact is they were not declared and at the time of his appointment Farmer was described as "consumer" and "independent consumer advocate". An NBA spokesperson is quoted as saying, "The NBA believes any potential conflict of interest, real or perceived, should be declared."
So far as I can tell Shannon Farmer is not a physician nor a PhD researcher, yet:
- He's an Adjunct Research Fellow, School of Surgery, at the University of Western Australia, where he's listed as an author on multi-authored papers about blood.
- LinkedIn shows he's an Adjunct Senior Research Fellow Centre for Population Health Research, Curtin University.
- He's lectured extensively on bloodless surgery and blood conservation.
- He's apparently an expert on transfusion medicine.
Yet it's hard to discover which degrees he has, where he went to school, or any of the normal qualifications of someone who's an author, lecturer, and expert on TM, with university appointments.
And none of the above profiles even hint that he's consulted for years to Austria's 'Medicine and Economics' business involved in commercial patient blood management projects globally.
How can you not know that someone you appoint to panels developing national blood transfusion guidelines is a member of a religion that forbids transfusion and earns big bucks implementing blood management programs internationally? How can you say, when information comes to light, 'These aren't sufficient conflicts'?
Isn't this equivalent to someone being appointed to a government panel on the future of private laboratories in Alberta (Canada, UK, you name it)
- Who is a member of a political party whose policies are pro-private medicine (pro-private everything)?
- Who consults for (perhaps partially owns) a private laboratory consortium bidding for government contracts?
Sorry, the non-physician Jehovah's Witness as TM expert and global blood management consultant who advises on transfusion guidelines, didn't declare potential conflicts, makes millions off blood management, and was initially listed as a consumer and consumer advocate doesn't meet the sniff test.
Or...he's a fine fellow, does good work, and the NBA thinks it's okay that he didn't declare potential conflicts, despite their policies, because the conflicts are not serious ones?

News about Shannon Farmer has been really quiet since the Australian story broke. But, from what I can tell from the little that is out there online, he is still hanging on the coat tails of Axel Hofmann, who is actively involved in Austria's blood management program.

The Australian journalists who wrote the original article that exposed Farmer and Hoffman received an award for their work:

Cathy Saunders and Martin Saxon won the award for Best Print/Text News Report for their Sunday Times story “Blood & Money”