It's not that hard to explain from a neutral point of view. Obviously the GB has realized there is no biblical foundation for the blood policy, but after all the fuss they made about it, all the people that have died over it, the lawsuits, the justifications etc. etc. They simply CAN not admit they were wrong on this even though they'd probably want to. I hope that one of the current GB members becomes an "apostate" sometime, I'd love to read about the heated debates that were going on behind closed doors about the blood issue. Now that we're talking about it anyway, there's one small argument in support of the blood doctrine I can't yet answer to my complete statisfaction. God already said to Noah that he wasn't allowed to eat blood, and as you all know that was before the Mosaic Law. So, even though the Mosaic Law is no longer functional, there's still one text that can be used as an excuse to support the blood doctrine....?