Are Blood Transfusions Really Life Saving?

[oldbadger]

Take Joseph for instance...............! Potiphar's wife tried to get him to have sex with her, and he said: "How could I commit wrong against my master" and sleep with you!

See? Shrewd guy! He most probably didn't fancy her, but ... well.... you know, a woman scorned....!

 

[Olinda]

If you watch the video in the OP, you will see why we were vindicated and why doctors now warn against unnecessary transfusions. We have proven that blood transfusions are unnecessary.

Yes, the video warns against unnecessary blood transfusions.
No, you have not proven that blood transfusions are unnecessary.
No, your religious position is not vindicated.

If a doctor told you to abstain from alcohol, would it be OK to hook yourself up to an alcohol drip?

If a starving person arrived at a medical tent, could you save him with a blood transfusion? Obviously, transfusion is entirely different from ingestion.

The cytoscan results were proof positive that transfused blood does the opposite of what doctors think it does. .

And I've pointed out several times that
1. the cytoscan was of a single patient.
2. there was no indication of pre-existing conditions that could have affected how the transfused blood interacted with the patient.
3. No-one in the video claimed that it was evidence of the harm of blood transfusions, but that it indicated a need for more research.
And this is what you call "proof positive"!
And every time I point this out, you ignore my reply and restate your bogus claims.
I no longer wonder that @Jose Fly , @Sapiens and @gnostic doubt that you are debating honestly.

 

[Jenny Collins]

Yes, the video warns against unnecessary blood transfusions.
No, you have not proven that blood transfusions are unnecessary.
No, your religious position is not vindicated.


If a starving person arrived at a medical tent, could you save him with a blood transfusion? Obviously, transfusion is entirely different from ingestion.

And I've pointed out several times that
1. the cytoscan was of a single patient.
2. there was no indication of pre-existing conditions that could have affected how the transfused blood interacted with the patient.
3. No-one in the video claimed that it was evidence of the harm of blood transfusions, but that it indicated a need for more research.
And this is what you call "proof positive"!
And every time I point this out, you ignore my reply and restate your bogus claims.
I no longer wonder that @Jose Fly , @Sapiens and @gnostic doubt that you are debating honestly.

You are being pedantic! Taking the blood into your body through the veins

Yes, the video warns against unnecessary blood transfusions.
No, you have not proven that blood transfusions are unnecessary.
No, your religious position is not vindicated.


If a starving person arrived at a medical tent, could you save him with a blood transfusion? Obviously, transfusion is entirely different from ingestion.

And I've pointed out several times that
1. the cytoscan was of a single patient.
2. there was no indication of pre-existing conditions that could have affected how the transfused blood interacted with the patient.
3. No-one in the video claimed that it was evidence of the harm of blood transfusions, but that it indicated a need for more research.
And this is what you call "proof positive"!
If you take blood into your body orally or through the veins, it is still taking it into the body! There is some doctor who essentially said what you are now claiming, that taking something into their veins is dissimilar to eating, and it was pointed out how pedantic that was of him, and overly technical! It is still taking it into ones body!

If Sapiens and Jose are not agreeing with Deeje, don't bring them into this! That is cheap to try to support what you say, but bringing up that other people disagree with her about other subjects! I disagree with you and agree with Deeje! Does that mean that Deeje is right, because she has someone that agrees with her! MOST transfusions are harmful, and I have shared links here to John Hopkins and other legitimate sites that prove this!

If you had solid evidence on your own, than use it, don't prop up you argument by saying that Jose and Sapiens "don't like you either"

 

[Jenny Collins]

How blood is processed by the body is not important! The point is that you are supposed to abstain from it, not eat it, or take it into your body any way!

 

[Jenny Collins]

Yes, the video warns against unnecessary blood transfusions.
No, you have not proven that blood transfusions are unnecessary.
No, your religious position is not vindicated.


If a starving person arrived at a medical tent, could you save him with a blood transfusion? Obviously, transfusion is entirely different from ingestion.

And I've pointed out several times that
1. the cytoscan was of a single patient.
2. there was no indication of pre-existing conditions that could have affected how the transfused blood interacted with the patient.
3. No-one in the video claimed that it was evidence of the harm of blood transfusions, but that it indicated a need for more research.
And this is what you call "proof positive"!
And every time I point this out, you ignore my reply and restate your bogus claims.
I no longer wonder that @Jose Fly , @Sapiens and @gnostic doubt that you are debating honestly.

What do agnostic, jose fly and sapiens have to do with this discussion of blood, they are bickering evolution, if they don't like Deeje, that doesn't make what your claims about Deeje on this issue true! Sometimes more than one person gang up on another and it is faulty reasoning to say: "Those other ones don't like you, maybe they are right about you" Hard facts should be enough to win a debate, without appealing to "other people" who "don't like you too"

 

[psychoslice]

I know it is a straight out command! The word can accurately be translated "abstain" In that time there were no transfusions, but now there are! If a doctor said "Don't drink alcohol, would you inject it in your veins"?

But you do eat meant with blood, what's the difference.

 

[gnostic]

What do agnostic, jose fly and sapiens have to do with this discussion of blood, they are bickering evolution, if they don't like Deeje, that doesn't make what your claims about Deeje on this issue true!

I am philosophically "agnostic", yes.

But my handle and avatar is "gnostic".

BUT I can view myself as "gnostic agnostic", meaning a "well-informed or knowledgeable agnostic", a person who understand Christianity, particularly the bible as good as any Christian.

 

[Jenny Collins]

I am philosophically "agnostic", yes.

But my handle and avatar is "gnostic".

BUT I can view myself as "gnostic agnostic", meaning a "well-informed or knowledgeable agnostic", a person who understand Christianity, particularly the bible as good as any Christian.

I don't know who you are, nor do I have anything against you! All I know is that this Olinda who I don't know either, is throwing your name around to bolster a blood argument with another person! Seems Olinda shouldn't get personal and back up her argument with facts, not bring other people into it as backup!

 

[dianaiad]

"My beliefs don't have any effect on your, or your child's health" you say! Neither do my beliefs have any effect on "your or your child's way of life" My stand on transfusions, will never put YOUR child at risk!

Probably not. Tell me, Jenny; if you saw a man beating his three year old in the middle of Walmart, would you just walk by thinking that it's not your kid?

Do you remember that there were children that died in the Bible, and they were resurrected by Elisha (or Elijah?) and Jesus? If on the very rare occasion, a child would die from not getting a transfusion, do you think that they will not come back to life someday?

Yes, of course, but that's utterly beside the point. If THAT is your argument, then why are you folks pacifists? After all, those the soldiers kill will 'come back to life someday,' too, won't they?

Let's face it, children do die in this world, the two prostitutes had babies, one died, the other stole her baby claiming it was hers and Solomon tested them to find out who was being truthful! Remember that? God let's children die, and he also can resurrect them! Even the ones that were resurrected in Christ's day, are now dead! It is inevitable for everyone! But they will get resurrected!

Indeed they will. That does not, however, absolve those who kill them.

Remember Job? All of his kids were allowed by God to die, Satan was the cause though! They will get a resurrection though! God gave life, and eventually we all die, sometimes young, sometimes old! The REAL life is in the future!

Actually, our 'real life' is right here and right now. If not, why does God think it's important enough to put us through it?

Jenny, I'm sure you have great faith in your own beliefs, and that's good. Mormons have great faith in theirs too...and one of the things we are sometimes criticized for is saying, in Fast and Testimony meeting, that we 'know the church is true,' when we don't really KNOW this. We have great belief in it, and we have great faith. Perhaps a better way to say this is "I have such faith that my beliefs are true that if God stood in front of me and my beliefs were proven true, my way of life would not change."

What if you are wrong? I know, you don't think you are, and I have no problems with your putting your OWN life on the line to prove it. I have great problems with those who not only put other people's lives on that line, but who, in doing so, insist that others violate their own principles and beliefs and allow you to do that.

Would you stand by and allow someone to sacrifice their baby to Baal, by throwing him or her in the sacrificial fire?

Or would you attempt to save that baby?

Think about it.

 

[Jenny Collins]

But you do eat meant with blood, what's the difference.

I addressed that issue early on, you just didn't read that! When the Jews were told to not eat blood, they could still eat meat! They drained the blood but there were still traces!

We know that the line has to be drawn somewhere! If a bug flies in my mouth and I swallow it, do I have to be upset because there was blood in his body?

When Jesus' apostle plucked a grain of wheat and ate it, the legalistic pharisees claimed that they were "working" on the Sabbath! Jesus chastised them for it! They didn't go out and plow a field, they popped something into their mouth!

 

[Jenny Collins]

Probably not. Tell me, Jenny; if you saw a man beating his three year old in the middle of Walmart, would you just walk by thinking that it's not your kid?



Yes, of course, but that's utterly beside the point. If THAT is your argument, then why are you folks pacifists? After all, those the soldiers kill will 'come back to life someday,' too, won't they?



Indeed they will. That does not, however, absolve those who kill them.



Actually, our 'real life' is right here and right now. If not, why does God think it's important enough to put us through it?

Jenny, I'm sure you have great faith in your own beliefs, and that's good. Mormons have great faith in theirs too...and one of the things we are sometimes criticized for is saying, in Fast and Testimony meeting, that we 'know the church is true,' when we don't really KNOW this. We have great belief in it, and we have great faith. Perhaps a better way to say this is "I have such faith that my beliefs are true that if God stood in front of me and my beliefs were proven true, my way of life would not change."

What if you are wrong? I know, you don't think you are, and I have no problems with your putting your OWN life on the line to prove it. I have great problems with those who not only put other people's lives on that line, but who, in doing so, insist that others violate their own principles and beliefs and allow you to do that.

Would you stand by and allow someone to sacrifice their baby to Baal, by throwing him or her in the sacrificial fire?

Or would you attempt to save that baby?

Think about it.

The example about a man beating his kid is a poor one! Not a good analogy! The man was intentionally harming the kid, whereas the JW parent is following God's orders and hopefully no harm will come to the child! The court system does not know or enforce God's laws! They decide what is wrong and right for themselves, and it doesn't always reflect God's thinking! If they take the choice away from us, well nothing we can do about it! But it doesn't change what God tells us to do! And what can you do about the issue? You are not the law so cannot stop it! All you can say is "I approve" or "I don't approve" Then I can turn the tables and tell you that I don't think Mormons should fight in wars! I can't stop you, but I don't have to agree with it

 

[dianaiad]

I addressed that issue early on, you just didn't read that! When the Jews were told to not eat blood, they could still eat meat! They drained the blood but there were still traces!

We know that the line has to be drawn somewhere! If a bug flies in my mouth and I swallow it, do I have to be upset because there was blood in his body?

When Jesus' apostle plucked a grain of wheat and ate it, the legalistic pharisees claimed that they were "working" on the Sabbath! Jesus chastised them for it! They didn't go out and plow a field, they popped something into their mouth!

Jenny, I'm sorry, and please put this down to my being a retired English and composition teacher. I can't handle this any more. Would you mind very much cutting out most of your exclamation points? They are not only not grammatical, their overuse destroys their effectiveness.

Now as to the point of your post: you realize that you have just destroyed your own argument against blood transfusions in extreme circumstances, don't you? If Jesus could pluck a grain of wheat on the Sabbath, or get an ox out of the mire, don't you think that in circumstances of literal life and death, God would understand a life saving transfusion, if there were no other way?

 

[Jenny Collins]

Probably not. Tell me, Jenny; if you saw a man beating his three year old in the middle of Walmart, would you just walk by thinking that it's not your kid?



Yes, of course, but that's utterly beside the point. If THAT is your argument, then why are you folks pacifists? After all, those the soldiers kill will 'come back to life someday,' too, won't they?



Indeed they will. That does not, however, absolve those who kill them.



Actually, our 'real life' is right here and right now. If not, why does God think it's important enough to put us through it?

Jenny, I'm sure you have great faith in your own beliefs, and that's good. Mormons have great faith in theirs too...and one of the things we are sometimes criticized for is saying, in Fast and Testimony meeting, that we 'know the church is true,' when we don't really KNOW this. We have great belief in it, and we have great faith. Perhaps a better way to say this is "I have such faith that my beliefs are true that if God stood in front of me and my beliefs were proven true, my way of life would not change."

What if you are wrong? I know, you don't think you are, and I have no problems with your putting your OWN life on the line to prove it. I have great problems with those who not only put other people's lives on that line, but who, in doing so, insist that others violate their own principles and beliefs and allow you to do that.

Would you stand by and allow someone to sacrifice their baby to Baal, by throwing him or her in the sacrificial fire?

Or would you attempt to save that baby?

Think about it.

I did not say that the whole reason that JWs refuse blood for our kids is because "God will bring them back anyway" I gave a long and detailed explanation, and then added that this life is not the only one and that God will bring people back! And about war and what you said that "God will bring them back anyway" war is murder for wrong reasons! Abstinence of blood, would hopefully not result in death, but if it would it is because God gave the order to refrain from taking it! Your beef is with God, not with us!

Would you be like the other Mormon who would die rather than drink coffee? What if someone tried to give coffee to your kid and said they would kill them if they didn't drink it? Just wondering if you think like that other one did?

 

[Jenny Collins]

Jenny, I'm sorry, and please put this down to my being a retired English and composition teacher. I can't handle this any more. Would you mind very much cutting out most of your exclamation points? They are not only not grammatical, their overuse destroys their effectiveness.

Now as to the point of your post: you realize that you have just destroyed your own argument against blood transfusions in extreme circumstances, don't you? If Jesus could pluck a grain of wheat on the Sabbath, or get an ox out of the mire, don't you think that in circumstances of literal life and death, God would understand a life saving transfusion, if there were no other way?

I have to use exclamation points, I have a computer hardware malfunction and the period symbol doesn't work, although sometimes I cut and paste period symbols to use, it is time consuming

 

[Jenny Collins]

Jenny, I'm sorry, and please put this down to my being a retired English and composition teacher. I can't handle this any more. Would you mind very much cutting out most of your exclamation points? They are not only not grammatical, their overuse destroys their effectiveness.

Now as to the point of your post: you realize that you have just destroyed your own argument against blood transfusions in extreme circumstances, don't you? If Jesus could pluck a grain of wheat on the Sabbath, or get an ox out of the mire, don't you think that in circumstances of literal life and death, God would understand a life saving transfusion, if there were no other way?

I have already explained that some decisions have to be maintained if death is a consequence! I will go further with that! Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego would not eat food tainted with blood and could have been killed for it! They appealed to the one in charge and he gave them a test of a week on vegetables to see how well they did!

In an emergency situation, some Israelites "fell to eating" quail that had not been bled, because they were starving! They were destroyed by God for this disobedience

 

[dianaiad]

The example about a man beating his kid is a poor one! Not a good analogy! The man was intentionally harming the kid, whereas the JW parent is following God's orders and hopefully no harm will come to the child! The court system does not know or enforce God's laws! They decide what is wrong and right for themselves, and it doesn't always reflect God's thinking! If they take the choice away from us, well nothing we can do about it! But it doesn't change what God tells us to do! And what can you do about the issue? You are not the law so cannot stop it! All you can say is "I approve" or "I don't approve" Then I can turn the tables and tell you that I don't think Mormons should fight in wars! I can't stop you, but I don't have to agree with it

No, it's a perfectly appropriate analogy. The man in WalMart probably doesn't think he's 'intentionally hurting the child." He's probably harking back to 'spare the rod..." (proverbs 13:24) His religious and parental beliefs will be violated if someone stops him.

So what's the difference there between the doctor who gives a child that lifesaving transfusion, and the guy who stops the beating?

.................and I will remind you, Jenny, that I'm not talking about those times when it's a matter of which treatment will work best, but only about those times when the situation is clear and unequivocal; blood transfusion or death, and the blood transfusion is the only thing that WILL work.

I know, those situations are more rare than anti-Jehovah's Witnesses claim...but they happen more often than YOU want to think they do. It is these situations, rare as they may be, of which I speak.

BTW, you can certainly tell me that you don't think Mormons should fight in wars. I don't think anybody should. if they all paid attention, we'd have a much nicer world. However, nobody does, so, partly n order to protect those who will not fight, we do. My point isn't that you don't have a right to feel as you do. It is that you are expecting others to violate their very heartfelt religious beliefs in order to accommodate yours, by allowing a child to die. I think that's too much to ask.

 

[dianaiad]

I have to use exclamation points, I have a computer hardware malfunction and the period symbol doesn't work, although sometimes I cut and paste period symbols to use, it is time consuming

I understand. Sounds like you need a new keyboard.

 

[dianaiad]

I did not say that the whole reason that JWs refuse blood for our kids is because "God will bring them back anyway" I gave a long and detailed explanation, and then added that this life is not the only one and that God will bring people back! And about war and what you said that "God will bring them back anyway" war is murder for wrong reasons! Abstinence of blood, would hopefully not result in death, but if it would it is because God gave the order to refrain from taking it! Your beef is with God, not with us!

Would you be like the other Mormon who would die rather than drink coffee? What if someone tried to give coffee to your kid and said they would kill them if they didn't drink it? Just wondering if you think like that other one did?

If someone held a gun to my head, I'd drink the coffee, but I wouldn't like it. I think coffee tastes awful. Love the smell, though. I have to honor that 'other Mormon,' though. I'd give the same advice to my child, come to think of it.

You'd have to pick something else that I would rather die than do. Perhaps--allowing a child to die when I could prevent it?

 

[Jenny Collins]

I cut and pasted a period symbol.

No, I absolutely believe my beliefs are correct! And if I got some message from God that said "Go blow up a building" well then I would stop believing in my faith! But so far it is a lot better than anything else out there!

After this, will you go out and try to educate all of the people who give blood to their kids when in non-emergency situations? You haven't cracked us, and it is just as likely that more have died from unnecessary transfusions than JWs dying without necessary transfusions!

Seriously! Could you make them your focus! I am not lying! That is just as dangerous

 

[Jenny Collins]

I cut and pasted a period symbol.

No, I absolutely believe my beliefs are correct. And if I got some message from God that said "Go blow up a building" well then I would stop believing in my faith. But so far it is a lot better than anything else out there

After this, will you go out and try to educate all of the people who give blood to their kids when in non-emergency situations? You haven't cracked us, and it is just as likely that more have died from unnecessary transfusions than JWs dying without necessary transfusions!

Seriously! Could you make them your focus! I am not lying! That is just as dangerous