One or another thought occurs to me - and this is probably why I reacted with skepticism when this "thousands die per year" theory was presented:
Most likely thousands of witnesses certainly die per year - simple actuarial statistics can readily prove this. These deaths can of course be from a myriad of causes - ranging from simple old age through accident through childbirth complications.
I know for a fact that my father (an ex-JW) was given blood toward the very last of a long illness of old age. My personal experience here was that it neither saved him nor killed him. The doctor admitted that he simply did not know, and of course he was trying to do everything possible out of concern for the family and also concern for his own ethical standards.
This would certainly have been a "blood issue" had he still been a JW - non JW parts of the family would have raised an uproar, and then the issue is argued over the blood card, elders come to hospital, etc. But here is the deal - Paul Woods most certainly did NOT die from lack of a blood transfusion, and provision of this blood transfusion also most certainly did not extend his life at all; he was comatose at the time.
I submit that a great majority of the witness deaths under the shadow of the blood question are just like this - unfortunate ending of life where a blood transfusion is not going to pull the person through and get them back into a reasonable life.
Here is a second point of logic: The cases where a blood transfusion could plainly and simply SAVE A WITNESS LIFE (like a childbirth or a traumatic blood loss) are practically certain to receive a strong media coverage. Just like the sextuplets in Canada, or (in a similar non-JW ethical case) - like the boy with leukemia whose parents tried to hide him from court ordered treatment. This kind of tragedy will practically always find it's way out into the media if there is the slightest chance of saving the patient...and I personally don't think that thousands of such extreme cases could possibly be happening under public scrutiny.
Child molestation statistics, BTW, are far different from the above as loss of life is not involved, the cases are hidden in secret by the very nature of the crime, and so on. Also along the side points, it is thought by the most reliable figures that while the Malawi persecutions was unfair and terrible, there were only a few persons actually killed...
I still stand by the point that we ex-JWs who hate and abhor this ridiculous blood transfusion doctrine do not need to go to extreme or questionable lengths to prove our point. The doctrine itself condemns the Watchtower Society who thought it up all on its own - no matter what the numbers are. I just hate to hand our JW anti-blood adversaries "talking points" when we really don't have to by using a little more circumspect wording.