Are Blood Transfusions Really Life Saving?

[Deeje]

So then why is Australia going this alone? There is no "big blood" conspiracy. It doesn't last long enough to make it profitable to store.

One thing the OP hasn't presented is an alternative. What are we supposed to do? Bleed out and die NOW versus taking a chance and potentially having things go wrong later due to said blood transfusion which I have seen 0 solid cases of?

What rock have you guys been hiding under?

http://noblood.org/forum/threads/3088-List-of-Hospitals-that-provides-bloodless-surgeries

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323494504578340962879110432

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine

And here is a fact;

Even if receiving blood is dangerous, it is still less dangerous than bleeding out. It's about keeping you alive long enough. We can keep you alive long enough on less-than-perfect blood for your body to remake all its own.

There are alternatives and many of my own brothers have survived medical emergencies without blood. Replacing blood volume is more important that replacing whole blood. Stopping the bleeding is what saves people's lives. Trauma centers need to be up to date on the latest techniques, or they are actually putting patient's lives at risk. There are ways to avoid blood and recover without future complications.

 

[Faronator]

What rock have you guys been hiding under?

http://noblood.org/forum/threads/3088-List-of-Hospitals-that-provides-bloodless-surgeries

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323494504578340962879110432

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine



There are alternatives and many of my own brothers have survived medical emergencies without blood. Replacing blood volume is more important that replacing whole blood. Stopping the bleeding is what saves people's lives. Trauma centers need to be up to date on the latest techniques, or they are actually putting patient's lives at risk. There are ways to avoid blood and recover without future complications.

Then maybe you need a job in a university getting everyone up to date with their medical practice...

Shame on you modern medicine.

 

[DawudTalut]

Peace be on all.
All aspects needed to be seen in this matter of transfusion, here are some related rsources:
Who Needs a Blood Transfusion? @
https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/health-topics/topics/bt/whoneeds

Allogeneic blood transfusions: benefit, risks and clinical indications in countries with a low or high human development index @
http://bmb.oxfordjournals.org/content/70/1/15.full

Blood Transfusion Substitutes @
http://www.news-medical.net/health/Blood-Transfusion-Substitutes.aspx

 

[Ingledsva]

For decades now Jehovah's Witnesses have copped a fair amount of criticism for their refusal to accept blood transfusions for religious reasons. For those who believe that blood transfusions are the life saving procedure that they are claimed to be, please watch this video so that the facts can be brought to the public's attention. This is information provided by the Australian Government, not by Jehovah's Witnesses.

https://www.blood.gov.au/media

Well I can tell you that this last July 1st, - I almost died. That is why I wasn't on here for a couple of months.

I lost over half my blood, - and they were amazed I was still alive.

I had to have blood transfusions to stabilize me before they could even medevac me, as they were afraid I would die on the flight.

I don't know how many blood transfusions I had in total over the next few days, but is was over fifteen bags of blood.

I was down south for three months, and am now, obviously alive, and home in Alaska recovering.

Without blood I would not have even survived the medevac flight.

*

 

[Skwim]

It's interesting that JW folk conform to Bible passages they interpret as prohibiting blood transfusions, which I assume are at least the following.

Genesis 9:3-4 (KJV)
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. 4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

Leviticus 17:10 (KJV)
10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

Acts 15:19-20 (KJV)
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

Acts 15:29 (KJV)
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.

​

However, I wonder if the they also adhere to the following Biblical prohibitions.

Braided hair, gold jewelry, pearls.
1 Timothy 2:9 (KJV)
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;

Pork chops and bacon
Leviticus 11:7-8 (KJV)
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. 8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

Remarriage
Mark 10:11–12
“Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Women talking in church
1 Corinthians 14:34(KJV)
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

Linen/wool suits
Leviticus 19:19 (KJV)
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

Lobster, shrimp, oysters, clams, scallops
Leviticus11:9-10 (KJV)
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. 10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

Certain hair styles
Leviticus 19:27 (KJV)
27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.​

Any JW care to comment?


.

 

[Deeje]

Well I can tell you that this last July 1st, - I almost died. That is why I wasn't on here for a couple of months.

I lost over half my blood, - and they were amazed I was still alive.

I had to have blood transfusions to stabilize me before they could even medevac me, as they were afraid I would die on the flight.

I don't know how many blood transfusions I had in total over the next few days, but is was over fifteen bags of blood.

I was down south for three months, and am now, obviously alive, and home recovering.

Without blood I would not have even survived the medevac flight.

*

I am sorry to hear that you had that had happen to you, but you see, you had nothing to compare that experience to. You are going by what was told to you by those who believed what they had been taught in med school. Specialist Doctors no longer hold those teachings to be true. They want things changed. According to their stats, only 12% of transfusion were considered even necessary.

Would you like me to relate the experience of two close friends, one of whom had an ectopic pregnancy and hemorrhaged so badly that she was the same color as the bed sheets. She was told point blank that she would die without blood. No ifs, no buts....She had the surgery and still refused blood, the medical staff pressured her and even her family members for a whole day.....so they just hooked her up to saline drips and gave her EPO, sure that she would die....but she survived and made a quick recovery...she had another child a couple of years later.

Another friend was in an auto accident and ruptured her spleen, losing over half her blood. She too was told she would die without a transfusion. She was transported to a major hospital where they removed her spleen, operating at the point where they thought she could not survive without a blood. She too had saline and EPO and lived to tell the story.

The truth is, you will not hear stats of people who die as a direct result of having a blood transfusion. There are serious risks and complications that can affect a person years later. You will only hear convoluted stories in the media of JW's who refused blood and who died...when the truth is, that regardless of whether blood was used or not, they would still have died anyway. Blood does not guarantee you life, in fact if you watch the first video, it shows you what a blood transfusion does to your body's ability to deliver red cells to your tissues and vital organs. Doctors are now realizing that it is NOT the life saving procedure it was once thought to be.

These are NOT JW links.

http://noblood.org/forum/threads/3088-List-of-Hospitals-that-provides-bloodless-surgeries

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323494504578340962879110432

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine

 

[Faronator]

I am sorry to hear that you had that had happen to you, but you see, you had nothing to compare that experience to. You are going by what was told to you by those who believed what they had been taught in med school. Specialist Doctors no longer hold those teachings to be true. They want things changed. According to their stats, only 12% of transfusion were considered even necessary.

Would you like me to relate the experience of two close friends, one of whom had an ectopic pregnancy and hemorrhaged so badly that she was the same color as the bed sheets. She was told point blank that she would die without blood. No ifs, no buts....She had the surgery and still refused blood, the medical staff pressured her and even her family members for a whole day.....so they just hooked her up to saline drips and gave her EPO, sure that she would die....but she survived and made a quick recovery...she had another child a couple of years later.

Another friend was in an auto accident and ruptured her spleen, losing over half her blood. She too was told she would die without a transfusion. She was transported to a major hospital where they removed her spleen, operating at the point where they thought she could not survive without a blood. She too had saline and EPO and lived to tell the story.

The truth is, you will not hear stats of people who die as a direct result of having a blood transfusion. There are serious risks and complications that can affect a person years later. You will only hear convoluted stories in the media of JW's who refused blood and who died...when the truth is, that regardless of whether blood was used or not, they would still have died anyway. Blood does not guarantee you life, in fact if you watch the first video, it shows you what a blood transfusion does to your body's ability to deliver red cells to your tissues and vital organs. Doctors are now realizing that it is NOT the life saving procedure it was once thought to be.

These are NOT JW links.

http://noblood.org/forum/threads/3088-List-of-Hospitals-that-provides-bloodless-surgeries

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323494504578340962879110432

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine

I think she is going by first hand experience and not an Australian government site or what someone on a forum says. Nothing beats experience: not someone telling them they are misinformed, not an article, etc.

 

[Deeje]

It's interesting that JW folk conform to Bible passages they interpret as prohibiting blood transfusions, which I assume are at least the following.

Genesis 9:3-4 (KJV)
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. 4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

Leviticus 17:10 (KJV)
10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

Acts 15:19-20 (KJV)
19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

Acts 15:29 (KJV)
That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.​

I would have preferred the use of a more modern translation as this archaic stuff has whiskers on it.

Let's try them in plain English....(ESV)

Gen 9:3, 4:
"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood."

Lev 17:10
“If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people."

Acts 15:28, 29:
"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

So you will notice that the first command was given to Noah upon coming out of the ark, so it pre-dates the Mosaic Law, which repeated it, and then it was repeated again to Christians. So this is why we believe that it is a very important command from God. From Noah's day to the present it is still in force.
"Abstain" means what?

​

However, I wonder if the they also adhere to the following Biblical prohibitions.

Braided hair, gold jewelry, pearls.
1 Timothy 2:9 (KJV)
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;​

ESV:
"likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire"

A modern translation sheds light on the subject matter. It is recommending respectable, modest attire, not showy displays of wealth. Think of the times in which it was written.

Pork chops and bacon

Leviticus 11:7-8 (KJV)
7 And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. 8 Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

This was dietary requirement for Jews, not Gentiles.

Remarriage

Mark 10:11–12
“Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from her husband committeth adultery.”

Matt 19:9:
"And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

There are two things that scripturally dissolve a marriage...adultery and death. If one has not gained a scriptural divorce, then their remarriage is not recognized by God and hence, they are seen as adulterers. JW's conform to this requirement....but I don't believe that the churches do.

Women talking in church

1 Corinthians 14:34(KJV)
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

This is because the role of teachers and instructors in the congregation are assigned to males. In God's headship arrangement, males take the lead. (1 Cor 11:3)
Women were not to disrupt the proceedings with idle chatter or to challenge the overseers in their role, but were to consult their husbands at home regarding spiritual matters.
Women featured very prominently in the preaching work however and were teachers of their own children. In fact the capable wife of Prov 31:10-31 is a legend.

Linen/wool suits

Leviticus 19:19 (KJV)
19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

There is no explanation given for this requirement, but Jews were recognized for their distinctive mode of dress. Again this does not apply to Gentiles.

Lobster, shrimp, oysters, clams, scallops

Leviticus11:9-10 (KJV)
9 These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. 10 And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:

Not a requirement for Gentiles either.

Certain hair styles

Leviticus 19:27 (KJV)
27 Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard.

Gentiles were not bound by Jewish law except the necessary "requirements" stated in Acts 15:28, 29. Both Jews and Gentiles were to observe these things. If a Jew wanted to retain his beard, there was no prohibition, but like circumcision, it was not forced on Gentile Christians.​

Any JW care to comment?

 

[Deeje]

I think she is going by first hand experience and not an Australian government site or what someone on a forum says. Nothing beats experience: not someone telling them they are misinformed, not an article, etc.

Good grief...watch the first video and see who it is from. NOT JW's...OK? You just can't tell some people. If you don't want to believe it...fine....but don't dismiss it just because of who posted it. Take your blinkers off.

 

[Faronator]

Good grief...watch the first video and see who it is from. NOT JW's...OK? You just can't tell some people. If you don't want to believe it...fine....but don't dismiss it just because of who posted it. Take your blinkers off.

How about some credible sources of those that have had blood transfusions and been negatively impacted by it?

See if you can find one negative to every 10 positives. I'll wait...

 

[Deeje]

How about some credible sources of those that have had blood transfusions and been negatively impacted by it?

See if you can find one negative to every 10 positives. I'll wait...

You are clearly ignoring the facts I have presented to you. Why?

I don't know what the situation is like in other countries, but when you fill in a hospital admission form here in Australia, they ask if you have EVER had a blood transfusion.
Do you know why they would ask that question?

Do you also know what the outcome would have been for those who did have blood compared to those who did not in the same circumstances?
Hospital records proved that non-blood alternatives reduce hospital stays and produced quicker recovery rates with less complications after surgery...why do you think they are pushing bloodless medicine? Why would doctors be recommending bloodless procedures if they didn't have the data to support their position?

 

[Ingledsva]

I am sorry to hear that you had that had happen to you, but you see, you had nothing to compare that experience to. You are going by what was told to you by those who believed what they had been taught in med school. Specialist Doctors no longer hold those teachings to be true. They want things changed. According to their stats, only 12% of transfusion were considered even necessary.

Would you like me to relate the experience of two close friends, one of whom had an ectopic pregnancy and hemorrhaged so badly that she was the same color as the bed sheets. She was told point blank that she would die without blood. No ifs, no buts....She had the surgery and still refused blood, the medical staff pressured her and even her family members for a whole day.....so they just hooked her up to saline drips and gave her EPO, sure that she would die....but she survived and made a quick recovery...she had another child a couple of years later.

Another friend was in an auto accident and ruptured her spleen, losing over half her blood. She too was told she would die without a transfusion. She was transported to a major hospital where they removed her spleen, operating at the point where they thought she could not survive without a blood. She too had saline and EPO and lived to tell the story.

The truth is, you will not hear stats of people who die as a direct result of having a blood transfusion. There are serious risks and complications that can affect a person years later. You will only hear convoluted stories in the media of JW's who refused blood and who died...when the truth is, that regardless of whether blood was used or not, they would still have died anyway. Blood does not guarantee you life, in fact if you watch the first video, it shows you what a blood transfusion does to your body's ability to deliver red cells to your tissues and vital organs. Doctors are now realizing that it is NOT the life saving procedure it was once thought to be.

These are NOT JW links.

http://noblood.org/forum/threads/3088-List-of-Hospitals-that-provides-bloodless-surgeries

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323494504578340962879110432

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/how-jehovahs-witnesses-are-changing-medicine

I did watch the video, and it didn't prove what is being said.

In fact all it showed, was what my doctor told me. That other people's blood does not work as well in your body as your own blood. Thus a recovery time is needed for your own blood to replace the other.

Also, you don't seem to understand what happens when too much blood is lost. Remember I lost OVER 50 percent of my blood, and they were surprised I was still alive.

"The final classification of hemorrhaging, Class 4, occurs when a person loses over 40 percent of their blood volume. A hemorrhage so severe requires immediate and major resuscitative help, or else the strain on the body’s circulatory system will be too great to survive. The heart will no longer be able to maintain blood pressure and circulation, Alton said, so organs will fail and the patient will slip into a comatose state preceding death.

This condition is called hypovolemic shock, and the prognosis depends on many factors, including the amount of blood lost, the rate at which a patient is losing it, and the illness or injury underlying the blood loss." http://www.medicaldaily.com/breaking-point-how-much-blood-can-human-body-lose-350792

*

 

[Faronator]

You are clearly ignoring the facts I have presented to you. Why?

I don't know what the situation is like in other countries, but when you fill in a hospital admission form here in Australia, they ask if you have EVER had a blood transfusion.
Do you know why they would ask that question?

Do you also know what the outcome would have been for those who did have blood compared to those who did not in the same circumstances?
Hospital records proved that non-blood alternatives reduce hospital stays and produced quicker recovery rates with less complications after surgery...why do you think they are pushing bloodless medicine? Why would doctors be recommending bloodless procedures if they didn't have the data to support their position?

The same reason people push creationism or reincarnation or any number of things. The same reason parents claim vaccines cause autism or that excessive bed wetting is a sure fire sign that your child is destined to be a serial killer. Share your alternatives with someone the next time they lose excess blood. Better yet, give it a shot yourself and let us know how it goes. Now, I'll wait for your next post on how wound licking is good for gashes or bleeding works wonders on infection

 

[SomeRandom]

My father had Cancer and would have died 10 times over had it not been for blood transfusions. Low white blood cell count if I recall correctly. And he did have many types of treatments, but the blood transfusions were the most efficient and indeed life saving on numerous occurrences.

 

[Ingledsva]

My father had Cancer and would have died 10 times over had it not been for blood transfusions. Low white blood cell count if I recall correctly. And he did have many types of treatments, but the blood transfusions were the most efficient and indeed life saving on numerous occurrences.

Yep, same with my mom. We brought her in many times for blood transfusions. Kept her going for years.

*

 

[kerndog]

For decades now Jehovah's Witnesses have copped a fair amount of criticism for their refusal to accept blood transfusions for religious reasons. For those who believe that blood transfusions are the life saving procedure that they are claimed to be, please watch this video so that the facts can be brought to the public's attention. This is information provided by the Australian Government, not by Jehovah's Witnesses.

https://www.blood.gov.au/media

Thankyou very much Deeje, Its just what the creator has known from the get go !

 

[Deeje]

I did watch the video, and it didn't prove what is being said.

In fact all it showed, was what my doctor told me. That other people's blood does not work as well in your body as your own blood. Thus a recovery time is needed for your own blood to replace the other.

Also, you don't seem to understand what happens when too much blood is lost. Remember I lost OVER 50 percent of my blood, and they were surprised I was still alive.

"The final classification of hemorrhaging, Class 4, occurs when a person loses over 40 percent of their blood volume. A hemorrhage so severe requires immediate and major resuscitative help, or else the strain on the body’s circulatory system will be too great to survive. The heart will no longer be able to maintain blood pressure and circulation, Alton said, so organs will fail and the patient will slip into a comatose state preceding death.

This condition is called hypovolemic shock, and the prognosis depends on many factors, including the amount of blood lost, the rate at which a patient is losing it, and the illness or injury underlying the blood loss." http://www.medicaldaily.com/breaking-point-how-much-blood-can-human-body-lose-350792

*

Yes I understand that, but what you do not seem to realize is that plasma volume expanders (Ringer’s lactate solution, dextran, hydroxyethyl starch, and others) are used to maintain blood volume thus preventing prevent hypovolemic shock and allowing the transportation of existing red cells to vital parts of the body, whilst it is making new red cells in the bone marrow. These expanders were used on my friends and they recovered very quickly with no post operative complications. Remember that they were told that they would die too.....but they didn't.
Genetically engineered proteins can stimulate the production of red blood cells e.g. EPO (erythropoietin)
Other medications greatly reduce blood loss during surgery (aprotinin, antifibrinolytics) or help to reduce acute bleeding (desmopressin).

Some fluids now being tested can transport oxygen. Scientists have been working to develop artificial blood for years, taking away the dangers and risks associated with whole blood transfusion.

 

[Brian Schuh]

My mother was in a car wreck in her teenage years. She lost most of her blood, had to be hospitalized for months. Blood saved her life and later I was born, my sister and nephew. That's four lives, not just one.

If blood transfusions don't save lives, my mother is the exception that breaks the rule. One bit of anecdotal evidence can prove a whole theory wrong.

Formerly I said she was left with only one pint if blood, I was mistaken, she was left with about 4 pints. Still almost a guaranteed death. The exception that breaks "proves" the rule. So you know there must be many more saved by blood than just my mother.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

For decades now Jehovah's Witnesses have copped a fair amount of criticism for their refusal to accept blood transfusions for religious reasons. For those who believe that blood transfusions are the life saving procedure that they are claimed to be, please watch this video so that the facts can be brought to the public's attention. This is information provided by the Australian Government, not by Jehovah's Witnesses.

https://www.blood.gov.au/media

Excellent.
Medical decisions can only ever be a matter of personal choice,
as they will always be contentious - until we're all immortal in our bodies anyway.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

I would have preferred the use of a more modern translation as this archaic stuff has whiskers on it.

Let's try them in plain English....(ESV)

Gen 9:3, 4:
"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood."

Lev 17:10
“If any one of the house of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn among them eats any blood, I will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from among his people."

Acts 15:28, 29:
"For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: 29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

So you will notice that the first command was given to Noah upon coming out of the ark, so it pre-dates the Mosaic Law, which repeated it, and then it was repeated again to Christians. So this is why we believe that it is a very important command from God. From Noah's day to the present it is still in force.
"Abstain" means what?

I guess the fact that it is referring to animal blood means nothing? Unless you believe it is speaking of eating human flesh too.