"Thousands die after refusing blood" does not equal "Thousands die because they refused blood". My point: Most would have died even if they accepted blood. Who is to guarantee that accepting blood would have saved them? How many of those would have survived if they acepted blood? Can we know? How many die after receiving blood?
Don't let -probably well founded- rejection of JW's and their policies make you blind to the facts.
Ask yourself, why do we have more and more hospitals with bloodless centers? Why Jackson Memorial, one of the 10 best hospitals in U.S. has a huge bloodless center? Why do more that 50 hospitals? Why did Baptist South in Florida go in that direction last year? Or Engelwood Hospital in NJ? Why is this a growing trend? Why more and more doctors are going that way?
I'm not defending anything, but calling to some serenity and objective analysis. Blood is a huge -huge- business. A top doctor at Baptist admitted to me the main reason why they refused to do bloodless elective surgery until recently, was it wasn't financially profitable. If JW's policy on blood is wrong (and it probably is) and extreme, don't go to the other end of the spectrum and state that blood is a miracle healer. It is not.
I think debate is good, and decisions should be personal, not imposed by JW's or anti-JW's. But I agree with who stated earlier that Barbara is not doing a big favor to her movement by holding talks sponsored by Catholic-related organizations. Let's not kid ourselves. When it comes to blood guilt and pedophile cover up, JW's got nothing on Roman Catholic church!