I read of the study a few months ago (if the same study) and my understanding is that these were for not urgent/emergency surgeries where there was plenty of time before hand to make special preparations such as improving the patients overall health and diet and boosting their systems in various ways before hand. It wasnt a fair comparison, really, since they weren't measuring the patients who had all the same preparations and then either rec'd blood or did not. The condition of a patient before going into surgery is critical. The JWs are choosing more skilled surgeons that feel up to the task. I suspect that were it all compared apples to apples, that those rec'ing blood might well do better. . . In fairness though, I think that study SHOULD be done because I am not set out to prove that blood is some magic panacea in medicine. It should be used judiciously in any case and on a case by case basis, there might well be a good reason to choose not to take blood.
But,, when it comes down to it and there is an unexpected loss of blood (and that does happen in enough surgeries that it must be considered), then blood is usually a better choice than exsanguination!
I would hope that whenever possible, all possible preparations are diligently carried out for all patients who anticipate surgery so that blood isn't necessary. When it is given as a bandaid for unskilled surgery, then you will have more issues. I don't need to be defensive of(or in favor of) blood transfusions for the halibut, I am just defensive of the patients who honestly need a transfusion. Getting a transfusion unnecessarily is no wiser than refusing one unconditionally.
Maybe we should all seek out doctors who are comfortable with doing bloodless surgery while letting them know that in life/death situtations, we will accept the blood. Could finally get something useful out of our knowledge of the WTs teachings. Have our cake and eat it too.
That seems kind of mercenary of me, doesn't it?