Posts by OrphanCrow

8

JW babies don't always get blood transfusions

by OrphanCrow in

it is a common misconception that a jw baby who requires a blood transfusion will get one through a court order.

this does not always happen.. the following study demonstrates how a jw baby is vulnerable to being used for experimental procedures.. sn-mesoporphyrin interdiction of severe hyperbilirubinemia in jehovah's witness newborns as an alternative to exchange transfusion.. the condition that these two jw babies had was hyperbilirubinemia (jaundice).

in both cases, the parents refused to give permission for their babies to receive an exchange transfusion after the standard treatment of phototherapy didn't work.

OrphanCrow

Bobcat: I'm glad it turned out well in their case.

Yes, both JW babies survived.

We wouldn't be reading about it if they hadn't - babies who die receiving experimental procedures/drugs usually don't make it into medical journals. We don't know if there were other babies that didn't survive previous to (or after) these two babies' treatment.

And of course we are all glad that the babies lived - that is exactly the basic human emotion that is played on when these cases occur. Not only is an infant being exploited, the parents are exploited. It is not difficult to convince JW parents to let their babies be used as guinea pigs. They are convinced that they are doing the right thing by denying blood for their baby and they will agree to anything that is proposed as an "alternative" treatment. Anything at all.

It is incredibly easy to get parental consent from JW parents for anything but a blood transfusion, even if the risks for the alternative procedure/drug far exceed the risks of a blood transfusion.

Dio: Yes. Even babies. They had probably been waiting for this opportunity.

Absolutely. Treating these JW babies with this drug didn't just pop up out of the blue.

It is a fairly complicated procedure to follow just to access the drug that was used in the above cases. At the time, the drug was being produced by Rochelle, a pharma company. This treatment would be off label. And then, note how quickly an independent company was started to promote the drug, and then how, once the clinical trial was completed on JW babies, the company Infacare was bought up by a much larger company.

I have only scratched the surface on the company, Mallinckrodt, that now owns Infacare, but... and this could be coincidental of course, seeing as Mallinckrodt is pretty large...but, it wasn't too difficult to turn up some JWs that are connected to, or work for, Mallinckrodt. Jus' sayin'...

"compassionate"my ass

Exactly.

That would be like saying that you were being compassionate by throwing out a life preserver to somebody that you had pushed overboard

17

They've given themselves a out for refusing to give you your data if you ask for it

by purrpurr in

from the jw.org global data page.

"upon receipt of your written request, after you provide sufficient evidence of your identity and enough information to permit us to identify your personal data, the applicable data controller will fairly consider granting the request by balancing the interests of the individual in gaining access to data or correcting or deleting data against the legitimate interests of the organization, including whether granting the request would endanger the organization’s right to religious freedom and practice.

we will also notify any third-party recipients of the necessary changes.. please note that your data may not be erased if processing is required by law or if the data may be kept on other legal bases.

OrphanCrow

HalfBanana: what more do they want?
Possibly the information leading to harvesting the estates of members and ex members who die intestate?

A bit more about European church tax

I don't know if 'they' want to or not, but....

In Germany, the Org has the legal right to demand, from the government, the income tax returns of its members (if the org declares itself as collecting its own tax rather than going through the government to levy tax on its members)

If a person declares themselves as a member of the Org, they give up their right to keep their income confidential from the Org

No secrets in Germany - register with the Org as a JW and your income tax returns become accessible to the Org

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Germany#The_right_to_collect_church_tax

17

They've given themselves a out for refusing to give you your data if you ask for it

by purrpurr in

from the jw.org global data page.

"upon receipt of your written request, after you provide sufficient evidence of your identity and enough information to permit us to identify your personal data, the applicable data controller will fairly consider granting the request by balancing the interests of the individual in gaining access to data or correcting or deleting data against the legitimate interests of the organization, including whether granting the request would endanger the organization’s right to religious freedom and practice.

we will also notify any third-party recipients of the necessary changes.. please note that your data may not be erased if processing is required by law or if the data may be kept on other legal bases.

OrphanCrow

HalfBanana: what more do they want?

Well, in some European countries, churches can collect a tax from its membership:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/09/22/in-some-european-countries-church-membership-means-paying-more-taxes/

I think the way it works in some countries is that registered members of churches pay extra tax to the government and that in turn is disbursed to the churches/religions

In parts of Europe, it seems to be advantageous to the org to have registered members - the more registered members they can show, the more government disbursement they are entitled to

17

They've given themselves a out for refusing to give you your data if you ask for it

by purrpurr in

from the jw.org global data page.

"upon receipt of your written request, after you provide sufficient evidence of your identity and enough information to permit us to identify your personal data, the applicable data controller will fairly consider granting the request by balancing the interests of the individual in gaining access to data or correcting or deleting data against the legitimate interests of the organization, including whether granting the request would endanger the organization’s right to religious freedom and practice.

we will also notify any third-party recipients of the necessary changes.. please note that your data may not be erased if processing is required by law or if the data may be kept on other legal bases.

OrphanCrow

Incognito: As there is no bible precedent for keeping records on fellow Christian's, WT cannot really justify doing so as a religious requirement or practice.

Actually, WT has found Biblical justification for record keeping on "fellow Christians" in the past.

In 1941, as a part of the "Children of the King" conventions, 15,000 children (and their parents) were registered. This is how the record keeping was justified on "Biblical" grounds:

There are many thousands of children that have had the privilege of coming to this convention, and parents are lined up by the thousands registering themselves and their children - something that has never occurred in history since the convention called by King Hezekiah in days of old, and recorded for our comfort.

https://archive.org/details/1941ReportOfConventionOfJehovahsWitnesses

17

They've given themselves a out for refusing to give you your data if you ask for it

by purrpurr in

from the jw.org global data page.

"upon receipt of your written request, after you provide sufficient evidence of your identity and enough information to permit us to identify your personal data, the applicable data controller will fairly consider granting the request by balancing the interests of the individual in gaining access to data or correcting or deleting data against the legitimate interests of the organization, including whether granting the request would endanger the organization’s right to religious freedom and practice.

we will also notify any third-party recipients of the necessary changes.. please note that your data may not be erased if processing is required by law or if the data may be kept on other legal bases.

OrphanCrow

For example, the religious organization has an interest in permanently maintaining data regarding an individual’s status as one of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Deleting such information would unduly infringe on the organization’s religious beliefs and practices.

This is disturbing

From what I have read about the new privacy laws around protecting personal data, my understanding is that the individuals' rights come before an organization's rights. I could be wrong about this, but the general thrust surrounding the discourse about these data protection laws was that it gave power to the person

This statement on the org's position clearly places the org's rights over the person's rights

Disturbing (the more I read that last sentence, the more it doesn't make sense)*

Maybe I need to go do some more reading...

* I think I got it. I couldn't figure out what "religious practice" could be threatened by deleting member information. I think they mean "disfellowshipping" as a religious practice. Being that it would be essential to keep records on who was good and who was bad. How can they shun if they don't know who to shun? I guess they are the keepers of the book of life

14

WT rules about forgiving a cheating spouse

by Addison0998 in

does anyone else think it’s weird and controlling the organization says if your mate commits adultry, and then you have sex with them, you are not free to remarry again, since this means you forgave them.

the bible never mentions anything about this.

it’s so weird they have a say about what goes on behind closed doors of two people who are still legally married.

OrphanCrow

Hate?

That is a ridiculous conclusion

8

JW babies don't always get blood transfusions

by OrphanCrow in

it is a common misconception that a jw baby who requires a blood transfusion will get one through a court order.

this does not always happen.. the following study demonstrates how a jw baby is vulnerable to being used for experimental procedures.. sn-mesoporphyrin interdiction of severe hyperbilirubinemia in jehovah's witness newborns as an alternative to exchange transfusion.. the condition that these two jw babies had was hyperbilirubinemia (jaundice).

in both cases, the parents refused to give permission for their babies to receive an exchange transfusion after the standard treatment of phototherapy didn't work.

OrphanCrow

It is a common misconception that a JW baby who requires a blood transfusion will get one through a court order. This does not always happen.

The following study demonstrates how a JW baby is vulnerable to being used for experimental procedures.

Sn-Mesoporphyrin interdiction of severe hyperbilirubinemia in Jehovah's Witness newborns as an alternative to exchange transfusion.

The condition that these two JW babies had was hyperbilirubinemia (jaundice). In both cases, the parents refused to give permission for their babies to receive an exchange transfusion after the standard treatment of phototherapy didn't work. In both cases, the hospitals were prepared to seek court orders to give the babies the transfusions when intervention (presumably from the HLC) facilitated the experimental use of a drug that had been being used as a preventive drug for jaundice or used in conjunction with photo therapy. To use this drug instead of an exchange transfusion was beyond what the drug had been used for up until the time that the HLC arranged for it to be used that way for these two JW babies.

From the abstract:

CASE 1: This patient was a preterm male infant (gestational age: 35 5/7 weeks; birth weight: 2790 g) whose plasma bilirubin concentration (PBC) at 1 hour after birth was 5.0 mg/dL. Despite intensive phototherapy with 3 banks of lights and 1 biliblanket, the PBC increased steadily with no diminution in the rate of increase for 75 hours. In view of the problems of immune hemolysis, and prematurity, and the inability of phototherapy to stop progression of hyperbilirubinemia, a decision to carry out an exchange transfusion was made; the decision was, however, rejected by the Jehovah's Witness parents. Pending legal action to compel use of the procedure, a request to this (Rockefeller) laboratory for SnMP was made; its use was approved by the Food and Drug Administration; and the inhibitor was delivered to the physician-in-charge (D.P.M.) in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. The single dose of SnMP was administered to the infant at 75 hours after birth; the course of hyperbilirubinemia before and after the use of the inhibitor is shown in Fig 1. [figure: see text].
CASE 2: This female term infant (gestational age: 38-39 weeks; birth weight: 4140 g) with immune hemolysis was delivered by cesarean section and because of problems related to meconium aspiration required helicopter transfer to the Special Care Nursery in Abilene, Texas, where 10 hours after birth the first PBC was determined to be 18.0 mg/dL. Double-bank phototherapy plus a biliblanket was initiated; a third bank of lights was later ordered. The PBC fluctuated in the ensuing 2 days between 13.8 to 25.8 mg/dL during which suggestive clinical signs of possible bilirubin encephalopathy became manifest. In view of the clinical circumstances and the continued severe hyperbilirubinemia, permission for a double-exchange transfusion was requested. The parents, who were Jehovah's Witness adherents, refused the procedure. While preparing legal action to compel use of the exchange, a request was made to this (Rockefeller) laboratory for use of SnMP to attempt control of hyperbilirubinemia. With FDA approval, the SnMP was delivered to the attending neonatologist (J. R. M.) in Abilene and administered in a single dose (6 micromol/kg birth weight) at 56 hours after birth when the PBC was 19.5 mg/dL. The course of bilirubinemia before and after SnMP use is shown in Fig 2. [figure: see text].

The above article/study was published in Dec 2001 (the treatment likely occurred in 2000).

InfaCare Pharmaceutical Corporation was founded in 2001.

InfaCare Pharmaceutical Corporation engages in the development and commercialization of pharmaceuticals for the neonatal and pediatric patient population. It offers Stanate, a heme oxygenase inhibitor for the treatment of infantile jaundice or hyperbilirubinemia. The company was founded in 2001 and is based in Trevose, Pennsylvania. As of September 25, 2017, InfaCare Pharmaceutical Corporation operates as a subsidiary of Mallinckrodt Public Limited Company.

Infacare filed for a clinical trial in 2003:

Compassionate Use of Stannsoporfin as an Adjuvant to Phototherapy to Reduce the Need for Exchange Transfusions

Brief Summary:
The purpose of this protocol is to make Stanate (TM) [stannsoporfin, tin-mesoporphyrin] available to infants who meet the following criteria:
the infant has a very high level of bilirubin without an adequate clinical response to phototherapy;
the infant requires an exchange transfusion; and
the family refuses to allow the administration of blood products, particularly on religious grounds, such as within the Jehovah's Witness community.

And that is why JW babies are valuable to the pharmaceutical industry. JW babies become tiny little guinea pigs, their treatment being controlled and arranged for by the WT/org's Hospital Liaison squad.

14

WT rules about forgiving a cheating spouse

by Addison0998 in

does anyone else think it’s weird and controlling the organization says if your mate commits adultry, and then you have sex with them, you are not free to remarry again, since this means you forgave them.

the bible never mentions anything about this.

it’s so weird they have a say about what goes on behind closed doors of two people who are still legally married.

OrphanCrow

You sound like an ~~adolescent~~ predatory male

14

WT rules about forgiving a cheating spouse

by Addison0998 in

does anyone else think it’s weird and controlling the organization says if your mate commits adultry, and then you have sex with them, you are not free to remarry again, since this means you forgave them.

the bible never mentions anything about this.

it’s so weird they have a say about what goes on behind closed doors of two people who are still legally married.

OrphanCrow

Addison, I think you are the weird one

You come on here and start three threads about sex, claiming to be a 20s female, yet you use language I have never heard a recently out JW use. Especially a JW woman. And you claim that "...and then I read the elders manual" even though you were still "in".

I call BS.

JW women who are "in" do not just casually say that they read the elders manual - they can't even touch the damn thing and most JWs, especially a horny 20 year old "girl", don't even know that it exists

I think you are fabricating stories for attention and to satisfy some sort of weird sexual obsession. You have never responded to anybody that has taken the time out to reply to your sexual stories, you just start another one

Pretending to be a young woman talking about sex must give you kicks

29

Loosing your Privleges and Scumbag elders

by Addison0998 in

so 9 months before i started pioneering, i had a hot and heavy moment with this player witness who was just trying to string me along and talked to a lot of different girls.

we made out and he grabbed my goodies a few times you know the regular stuff all teens do at least once.

anyways i never saw him again because when i refused to send him nudes he dropped me.

OrphanCrow

addison: And then I read the elders manual...

Oh.

You had access to the elders manual? While you were "in"? Where did you find that? How did you manage to get your hands on a copy? You are a female and you touched the sacred book?