Are Blood Transfusions Really Life Saving?

[Deeje]

Sorry, I'll have to break this up into two parts.....

Thanks for your detailed reply, as always.

I am a stickler for detail.....its just who I am. I need details to be able to process things for myself.

Again, why would advances in technology bring about personal growth and overall advances in morality? Why do I think we can't achieve this right now? Perhaps because the two are not related by cause and effect?

I expect that education should lead to adjustments in our understanding of the world and each other. As the world continues to get smaller and more interdependent, we should be able to put our differences aside and put the common good before selfish considerations. We only have one planet and until we realize that we are all one race (the human race) and must collectively take care of the only home we have, nothing will change. Given man's track record in this regard, I don't see anyone making overtures to fix anything...do you?

So here you are saying that the technical advances and advances in communication are causing the problem? Besides, this is just another assertion without backup. It certainly isn't my personal experience. I'm much closer to my children than I was to my parents.

No, I am saying that improvements in communication and technical advances "should" facilitate a more co-operative attitude among the nations....and with each other. Adding a personal experience as proof that this isn't the case, is rather useless because if you are in a rather small minority, this doesn't really give us a proper picture of what's happening in the majority of cases.

In cities particularly, children are communicating with each other but hardly even talking to their parents (who are so busy working to provide the lifestyle that their children expect, that they seldom even see each other.)
We have ads here in Australia where parents are encouraged to invite their children back to the dinner table, just so that some meaningful dialogue can be set up between them. Electronic devices are put in a basket and banned from the table so that actual conversation can take place. What kind of world has to tell families to do that?

What you said was...

Jehovah's Witnesses have proven that all races and nationalities can co-exist in peace and unity, exhibiting genuine love for one another because we all worship the same God and follow the same teachings. (John 13:34, 35) We would like to teach others how to experience that."

If it needs to be proven, doesn't that mean that it cannot be demonstrated elsewhere? If it needs to be taught, doesn't that mean that it isn't being achieved?

We, as a global body of believers have achieved what many others have not. For example, in WW2 when members of Christendom's churches were killing one another because of national differences, JW's refused to participate in the bloodshed. We cannot call ourselves "Christians" if we cannot love our brothers and live in peace with them. (1 John 4:20, 21)

Also, when the civil war broke out in Rawanda, it was tribal differences that came to a head and former neighbors set upon one another with machetes, treating even former friends as hated enemies to be brutally killed. Church members became embroiled in the tribal hatred and even participated in the violence, killing members of their own church because they were from the "wrong" tribe.

Our brothers from the Middle East co-exist in love when their countrymen are hating one another and killing one another. There is no situation where we would ever be tempted to fight among ourselves over political or tribal differences. We follow Christ's example of loving our brothers first and foremost, and even showing love to our enemies.

This is a different thing again. I cannot accept that for people to live in harmony their beliefs and practices must be in lockstep.

It isn't lockstep...its LOVE. Do you know the difference? It isn't blindly following a set of rules, but actually loving the one who made them, and wanting to please him.

Here is the Bible's definition of what love "is" and what it "isn't"
1 Cor 13:4-8:
"Love is patient and kind. Love is not jealous. It does not brag, does not get puffed up, 5 does not behave indecently, does not look for its own interests, does not become provoked. It does not keep account of the injury. 6 It does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth. 7 It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8 Love never fails."
Is this the kind of love that Christendom's churches display? That is the very reason why I left it.(John 13:34, 35)

It would? Where does the parable of the Good Samaritan fit in then?

If you really knew the story, you wouldn't need to ask. The Samaritan stopped to help a fellow human in need. But if the Jews had done what they were supposed to do in loving their neighbor as God had said, the Samaritan would never have had to stop and help the man who fell among the robbers. Two Jewish men passed him by on the opposite side of the road. Since he had been stripped naked, there was no way to tell if he was a Jew, so they just walked on without caring. The hated Samaritan was the hero of the story because he offered to help at his own expense. Our brothers offer help to their own first because that is what is recommended in the scriptures. We are to take care of our own, but if we then observe that others need assistance, we will do so willingly because their own churches do nothing. (Gal 6:10)

Christianity is not about giving the man a fish...it is about teaching him to fish. We help those who want to help themselves.

 

[Deeje]

Then your concept of God falls short of a good parent. Agreed, the Prodigal son story is a good example of love.

Not at all. What kind of a parent is Jehovah? Is he an overindulgent parent? One who turns a blind eye to wrongdoing or rebellion?

Deut 21:18-21:
“If a man has a son who is stubborn and rebellious and he does not obey his father or his mother, and they have tried to correct him but he refuses to listen to them, 19 his father and his mother should take hold of him and bring him out to the elders at the gate of his city 20 and say to the elders of his city, ‘This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious, and he refuses to obey us. He is a glutton and a drunkard.’ 21 Then all the men of his city must stone him to death. So you must remove what is bad from your midst, and all Israel will hear and become afraid."

What if parents had such a command today? The rebellious one had to be brought before the elders by his own parents and they knew what the punishment would be.Tough love, wouldn't you say? And a strong deterrent for others thinking about doing the same.

For Christians, the punishment for unrepentant wrongdoing is only excommunication.....a much softer option than stoning someone to death.

Do you think the father would have driven the son out of his home and refused to speak to him if they had a disagreement over religion?

Are you implying that JW's drive their children out of their homes and refuse to speak to them because they have a disagreement over religion? Seriously?
It would take a very serious problem indeed for a parent to take an action like that. A son or daughter who lives at home would have to be following a very immoral lifestyle in order to be evicted from home. I have a 17 year old grandson who has chosen, for the present, to try out life in the world. He has a non JW girlfriend (both are still at school) and he still lives at home. His parents have house rules and he happily abides by them. We wish he had made other choices but we still love him to bits. I think you have been listening to too many one sided sob stories. We allow our children to decide for themselves whether our religion is for them. We do not excommunicate them for making a choice we disagree with.

But if they have dedicated their lives to God in baptism and they then choose to go out into the world, they have broken a very serious vow and this will not be tolerated. Yet the child can still live under the parent's roof as long as they abide by the house rules. We don't kick our children out, but we won't tolerate immoral behavior under our roof either. Call us old fashioned, but we believe that God is old fashioned too.

Then God was at least selective with the advice given to us. A few more medicine, diet and exercise tips would have been nice. And since I don't have His mobile number, I'll stick with doctors as the best we have.

You forget who rules the world....and it isn't God. (1 John 5:19) We were originally created perfect, without defects, meaning that we would not have had to contend with aging, sickness or death if sin had not entered into the world. (Rom 5:12)

Israel's laws, if followed, would have been very beneficial in limiting the spread of disease and because there were no GMO's, the food supply would have largely been free of foreign genes and contaminants like pesticides, artificial fertilizers and herbicides. We have all the tips we need today on getting and staying healthy, but most people's lifestyles will not accommodate them.

Again, all assertion.

No...truth. How many "breakthroughs" in medicine are heralded on the news, only to be told that they are 10 years away, and when the 10 years roll around, who remembers the promise? Where is the wonder medicine? In this day and age, there should be no one dying of cancer and heart disease, yet these are the number one causes of death in developed countries.

Yes, of course clinical trials are needed, you would be the first to condemn the medical and pharmaceutical professions if patients suffered from unidentified side effects. Yes, it could be that people died and a drug which could have helped is subsequently released. Just as jws died of renal failure and other conditions when your religion still forbade organ transplants. Only there was no logical or Biblical reason for that.

Earlier transplantation operations were extremely dangerous and very costly. Not everyone had access to them and not everyone was convinced that they were a good idea. Some still don't.

JW's and others still die from renal failure in spite of transplants. Some die on a waiting list. We do not hold this life as the most important one. Those with no hope beyond this life will grasp at anything to stay alive. I personally find little joy in this world with all its trouble and injustice; I would gladly go to sleep knowing I would wake up in a better place. There are worse things than dying you know.

It would be abused by some people to make recreational drugs for sale, while others would simply hop over your back fence and help themselves.

I know a that lot of people smoke dope in my town....doctors and professional people too....I also know that supply is NOT a problem and never has been. It is never a problem getting one's hands on cannabis. The only thing that would change is that it wouldn't be illegal or so costly....but cost has never prevented people from drinking or smoking, has it?

Please google 'cannabis and psychotic disorders'. And yes, people commit suicide from psychotic disorders.

I am not and never have condoned the recreational use of cannabis. Those with a propensity towards mental illness can have those traits exacerbated by the abuse of the non-medicinal product. Medicinal cannabis has low THC's which is what creates the "high". Medical marijuana does not give people a "high".

A good researcher never stops learning. In fact, if you are so certain of your subject, you should have no problem reading and rebutting the references that were offered.

I have been researching this subject for years. A good researchers also knows when bias is demonstrated by those who have a vested interest in ill health. What would happen to the whole 'ill health industry' and its dependent bodies if everyone got cured and led a healthy lifestyle?
How many people would be out of a job? The whole economy would collapse!

It doesn't matter what they are called, the result is that what is true today may not be true tomorrow.

The thing is...what is true today is still true tomorrow, but we just know more about it. That is why its called the truth. It cannot change but elements can be brought to light that modify our understanding of things. Thank heaven....or else we would all be stuck in a rut where there are no adjustments in our thinking about anything and things could never become better understood. Who wants to be stuck there? Not me.

 

[Deeje]

Hi Deeje. To work in a medical/hospital lab, you need at least an associate's degree in clinical lab science after which you must pass an accreditation test. The most common is the ASCP certification. This is to become an MLT (medical lab technician).

The next step up is at least a bachelor degree in CLS (or related biology, pre-Med courses), with the medical technologist (clinical lab scientist) certification.

Some states have further accreditation requirements as well.

Blood bank is a very technical area of the lab, so generally only your most experienced techs will work in that department. MLTs should not work in blood bank unless directly supervised by an MT.


I would assume they are about as familiar with them as they are with risks in other non-routine medical interventions.

If there is time, the doctor/nurse should be educating the person, in order to obtain consent, and especially because we need the patient's feedback ASAP if they start feeling things that would raise red flags.

But if it's an emergency situation, the risks of a transfusion are generally less than the risks of dying outright from the blood loss.

Thank you for your reply. If you watched the video in the OP, can I have your comments on that please.

 

[Deeje]

I work in a hospital. I see it done nearly every day.

I have a friend who works in a hospital...she is a cleaner.

In view of the video in the OP, could you ascertain whether these transfusion you have witnesses come under the 88% that were deemed as unnecessary or questionable by the numerous studies that were undertaken?

My brother had surgery not to long ago due to an accident. He required six transfusions. Without those he would have bled to death. I see routienly where people come in to get blood and see a physical difference in how much better they feel. I know doctors that order transfusions. The medicine is sound. There are risks. There is a second consent form that need be signed in order to get it and thy must be watched carefully to make sure it isn't rwjected. But the benefits outweigh the risks

Again, I have to ask, in view of the information presented in the OP, how do you know that benefits outweighed the risks? If members of the medical profession who are themselves specialists in this field are coming out and contradicting the long held views about blood transfusions, how do you know that the doctors who hold to the "old school" ways are not completely out of step with what the studies are revealing about the efficacy of this procedure?

 

[psychoslice]

All this thing about blood belonging to the man in the sky, was all to do mainly with the days they sacrificed poor animals, and of course god being greedy wanted all the blood. This has nothing to do with blood transfusion, way from it, but these people who believe in not having blood transfusion, have no idea, they are stuck in the backward past, and don't even realize it.

 

[Deeje]

All this thing about blood belonging to the man in the sky, was all to do mainly with the days they sacrificed poor animals, and of course god being greedy wanted all the blood. This has nothing to do with blood transfusion, way from it, but these people who believe in not having blood transfusion, have no idea, they are stuck in the backward past, and don't even realize it.

If you watched the video, we can clearly see who is stuck in the past.....so somebody doesn't realize it.

 

[psychoslice]

If you watched the video, we can clearly see who is stuck in the past.....so somebody doesn't realize it.

Its disgusting how people of today can be so ignorant, when the truth is right in front of them, blood transfusions help thousands of people every day, get with the times.

 

[Deeje]

Its disgusting how people of today can be so ignorant, when the truth is right in front of them, blood transfusions help thousands of people every day, get with the times.

Actually what is disgusting is people's ignorance. If you didn't watch the video in the OP, why are you even bothering to comment?

 

[psychoslice]

Actually what is disgusting is people's ignorance. If you didn't watch the video in the OP, why are you even bothering to comment?

I have no interest in propaganda.

 

[Deeje]

I have no interest in propaganda.

It appears that you have no interest in the truth either.

The video in the OP is from doctors who are specialists in this field of medicine. It is they who are saying that blood is not good medicine and the studies they have done are proving it. Its not propaganda...it is doctors now updating their knowledge from their own records.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Obey and live...disobey and die. These are conditions attached to life from the time of man's creation. If God loved us unconditionally, then he would not care what we did or believed...he cares a great deal.

First off, as you have rightly claimed, those are conditions of "life". How do you get they are conditions of God loving everyone unconditionally?

Are you implying that JW's drive their children out of their homes and refuse to speak to them because they have a disagreement over religion? Seriously?
It would take a very serious problem indeed for a parent to take an action like that. A son or daughter who lives at home would have to be following a very immoral lifestyle in order to be evicted from home. I have a 17 year old grandson who has chosen, for the present, to try out life in the world. He has a non JW girlfriend (both are still at school) and he still lives at home. His parents have house rules and he happily abides by them. We wish he had made other choices but we still love him to bits. I think you have been listening to too many one sided sob stories. We allow our children to decide for themselves whether our religion is for them. We do not excommunicate them for making a choice we disagree with.

Are you attempting to portray your sinful, imperfect, conditional love as greater than God's? Are you boastfully putting yourself above the One Who sent His only Son to die for your sins and for your grandsons sins? You still love your grandson to bits, even tho he doesn't serve Jehovah and who is "part" of this world. Are you saying that "you" love unconditionally, but "God" doesn't?

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Jesus and the apostles leave us in no doubt as to what we should do with a "rotten apple". It is not permitted to stay and spoil the whole barrel.

1 Cor 5:13-19:
"In my letter I wrote you to stop keeping company with sexually immoral people, 10 not meaning entirely with the sexually immoral people of this world or the greedy people or extortioners or idolaters. Otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world. 11 But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Do you not judge those inside, 13 while God judges those outside? “Remove the wicked person from among yourselves.”

Scenario: Brother Smith has been a dedicated member of his kingdom hall for 35 years and served Jehovah faithfully. He is well loved and loves his brothers and sisters very much. Brother Smith and his life long friend, brother Jones have served in field service together for 15 years. One day, brother Smith disassociates himself because he has learned that the teaching of only 144,000 have any heavenly hope was unfounded. A few months later, brother Smith and brother Jones were seen having lunch in the local diner, and brother Jones was brought before a JC. Brother Jones gets DF for eating lunch with brother Smith because he is now labeled an apostate. From the verses you provided for justification of DFing, what was the reason for brother Jones' DFing?

Sexual immorality
Greed
Idolator
Reviler
Drunkard
Extortioner

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I have a friend who works in a hospital...she is a cleaner.

In view of the video in the OP, could you ascertain whether these transfusion you have witnesses come under the 88% that were deemed as unnecessary or questionable by the numerous studies that were undertaken?



Again, I have to ask, in view of the information presented in the OP, how do you know that benefits outweighed the risks? If members of the medical profession who are themselves specialists in this field are coming out and contradicting the long held views about blood transfusions, how do you know that the doctors who hold to the "old school" ways are not completely out of step with what the studies are revealing about the efficacy of this procedure?

Be ause it is the view of the vast majority and in face unanimously among medical authorities that they are extremely viable and nigh irreplaceable as a functional treatment. How did they determine that such a high number is in necessary? We have tons of cases where people didn't get blood and died. The rejection rate is extremely low and even that low number dwarfs the number of cases that deal with infections being passed.

My brother lost more than half his total blood during that surgery. There is no doubt he would have died. Add that to the fact you have about the same chance as being struck by lightning than get a disease from blood that makes it pretty safe to say benefits outweigh the risks imho

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It appears that you have no interest in the truth either.

The video in the OP is from doctors who are specialists in this field of medicine. It is they who are saying that blood is not good medicine and the studies they have done are proving it. Its not propaganda...it is doctors now updating their knowledge from their own records.

Then why is this not being talked about outside of this fringe following? Unfortunately the laymab articles of medicine are often bunk. I don't believe any medical news or opinion until it is verified by the respective scientific community I which it is involved.

 

[psychoslice]

It appears that you have no interest in the truth either.

The video in the OP is from doctors who are specialists in this field of medicine. It is they who are saying that blood is not good medicine and the studies they have done are proving it. Its not propaganda...it is doctors now updating their knowledge from their own records.

There are many doctors weho will tell you just about anything you want them to, there was even doctors who continually said smoking wasn't dangerous.

 

[4consideration]

Hey Guys, as a part of my society and culture course for my HSC in Australia, I am required to construct a personal research project. I am looking into the notion of saving people or not through the use of modern medicine at the request of their religious beliefs. It would be great if you could take the time to complete this survey!

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Vc...t6X_WmUbA/viewform?c=0&w=1&usp=mail_form_link

Thanks,
Stephanie

Just want to make sure you are aware it is very likely all these repetitious posts you are pasting are likely to be considered spamming here.

 

[4consideration]

I'm so sorry, I didn't realise it had been posted twice

No, that's not what I meant. You are pasting the same post in different threads, which also is off-topic in most of them.

For more info, here's the forum rules. Rule 4 is what I'm talking about: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/rf-rules.170244/

 

[blue taylor]

Our values


We recognize the important role that blood and blood products play in the treatment and clinical management of Australian patients and are committed to:

meeting patient needs for the provision of a safe, secure, adequate and affordable supply of blood and blood products

working collaboratively with stakeholders to develop, monitor and improve national networks and systems for improved clinical awareness and practices in the use of blood and blood products

developing the professional and technical competence of our staff

delivering our mission in an efficient, professional, inclusive, responsive and innovative

https://www.blood.gov.au/about-nba#Our1

As I said. You have lost this one.

 

[Deeje]

Why would we disfellowship someone for disassociating themselves from our ranks? That depends on the attitude of the one departing.
No one is disfellowshipped for disagreeing. They are disfellowshipped for attempting to create divisions in the congregation over their disagreements, trying to subvert the faith of others. God takes a dim view of that. (Prov 6:16-19)
If someone is expelled from the congregation, then it means that they have been judged as unrepentant, so we are told not to associate with them.

1 Cor 5:9-13: ESV
"But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who calls himself a Christian who is sexually immoral, or greedy, or an idolater, or verbally abusive, or a drunkard, or a swindler. Do not even eat with such a person. 12 For what do I have to do with judging those outside? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 But God will judge those outside. Remove the evil person from among you.”

These things are disfellowshipping offenses but so is that mentioned by the apostle John....
2 John 8-11:
"Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."

Those who wish to leave the teachings that we as a united global body believe, they can leave, but we will not keep company with them....nor would we want to "receive him into our homes or given him a greeting"...."not even to eat with such a one".

The elders are appointed to judge those "inside" the congregation and they are responsible before God to keep undesirable elements out. Those who wish to "sow contentions among brothers" are not the sort of people we want to keep company with. (Prov 6:16-19) If we do want to keep company with such a person, then there is something wrong with your comprehension of the scriptures, and our loyalty to Jehovah.

 

[Deeje]

Our values


We recognize the important role that blood and blood products play in the treatment and clinical management of Australian patients and are committed to:

meeting patient needs for the provision of a safe, secure, adequate and affordable supply of blood and blood products

working collaboratively with stakeholders to develop, monitor and improve national networks and systems for improved clinical awareness and practices in the use of blood and blood products

developing the professional and technical competence of our staff

delivering our mission in an efficient, professional, inclusive, responsive and innovative

As I said. You have lost this one.

The only ones who lose are those who don't listen to the evidence and stubbornly refuse to change their methods. As an Australian government site, we don't expect these doctors to agree with our religious position, but because the medical profession have had to treat JW patients, they have seen for themselves what happens when we refuse blood. They found other ways to treat us and found these more beneficial in the health benefits as well as being more cost effective. The evidence is there in the video showing what happens to when a person is given 3 units of whole blood, compared to receiving a saline volume expander. The blood impeded delivery of the remaining red cells whilst the saline facilitated it.

I am not asking you to believe me.....but believe them.