Are Blood Transfusions Really Life Saving?

[Shadow Wolf]

Replacing blood volume is more important that replacing whole blood.

Blood is absolutely vital and necessary for carrying oxygen to your organs, and carry some of the waste back to the lungs. You can replace the volume, but what you replace it with will not be able to perform the utmost necessary of functions.

Stopping the bleeding is what saves people's lives.

It can. But if too much blood has been lost, the patient must have more blood or their body cannot and will not function properly. You can use saline solution to help fill the volume, but the body needs x-amount (dependent upon variables such as body weight) of blood in order to function and prevent things such as organ damage.

There are ways to avoid blood and recover without future complications.

Not if someone has lost too much blood. That is why people can only give so much blood when they donate, because if they go beyond that there is a very real risk and chance of the effects of blood loss.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Ah, now we see who is stuck in the past because of effective propaganda and who is willing to actually see the truth. Very revealing.

For the benefit of those who are not closed minded on this subject, let me provide the following links....

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/videos/blood-transfusion-alternative-strategies/

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/videos/no-blood-medicine-meets-challenge/

https://www.jw.org/en/publications/videos/blood-transfusion-patient-needs-rights/

Now we see how someone does not quote or reply to me because he/she does not want to be debunked.

You can quote obviously biased bs all you want.

True science has to be done without a bias.

I suppose people who need a blood transplant should just die instead.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

I guess the fact that it is referring to animal blood

It said everything that moves.

Also humans are animals.

 

[Onyx]

My brother had transfusions due to severe Crohn's disease, until the surgeon could deal with the situation rather barbarically. There was little choice given the excessive blood loss involved.

I saw the video as a reminder that the "default" option isn't always the best, and therefore risky procedures should be done with more discretion.

 

[Curious George]

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

I am not sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest. It seems to create an implied non-sequitur.

If you were to say, " technology is developing, such that blood transfusions are going to be replaced with better practices and alternatives, that no longer conflict with JW faith, and now this conflict will become less prevalent.". I don't think you would have gotten the negative replies.

If we can find an alternative to blood transfusion, great. But if blood transfusion increases the chance of survival, and you refuse because of religious beliefs, then you either want to die, or are foolish.

Science increases can do nothing for the former, and only sweep the latter under the rug.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

It said everything that moves.

Also humans are animals.

Are you serious?

Gen 9:3-4 (ESVST) 3 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.

Are you suggesting we can eat humans also?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Are you serious?

Gen 9:3-4 (ESVST) 3 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.

Are you suggesting we can eat humans also?

Obviously the Bible doesn't mean everything that moves shall be food for us, or maybe it does, but that is in direct contradiction with the dietary restrictions found in Leviticus.
And, well, sometimes people eat people. Be it eating a slain enemy of war, some sort of ritual, or even just survival, it's known to happen.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Are you serious?

Gen 9:3-4 (ESVST) 3 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.

Are you suggesting we can eat humans also?

Physically yes.

Morally, we shouldn't, but i do not base my morality on the bible.

If you do base your morality on the bible then apparently is was moral to god at that point in time.

 

[Pudding]

Are you serious?

Gen 9:3-4 (ESVST) 3 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.

Are you suggesting we can eat humans also?

God and Eve are also moving things that lives, Adam, go, eat God and Eve.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Morally, we shouldn't, but i do not base my morality on the bible.

I think it's entirely situational. If I am stranded at sea with a group, and one of them dies, bon appetite. But, that's going off topic.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Physically yes.

Morally, we shouldn't, but i do not base my morality on the bible.

If you do base your morality on the bible then apparently is was moral to god at that point in time.

Really? The next few verses talk about killing humans,

Gen 9:5-6 (ESVST) 5 And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. 6 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image.

Doesn't sound like God meant we could each other!

 

[djhwoodwerks]

God and Eve are also moving things that lives, Adam, go, eat God and Eve.

There was actually no eating of meat until after the flood.

 

[Pudding]

There was actually no eating of meat until after the flood.

No problem.

But God have already give illogical immoral order for Adam that "every moving thing that lives shall be food for him".
God, Satan, angel, and Eve are also moving things that lives, so they should be food for Adam with the exception that Adam can't consume their blood.

 

[djhwoodwerks]

No problem.

But God have already give illogical immoral order for Adam that "every moving thing that lives shall be food for him".
God, Satan, angel, and Eve are also moving things that lives, so they should be food for Adam with the exception that Adam can't consume their blood.

Gen 1:29-30 (ESVST) 29 And God said, " Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. 30 And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food." And it was so.

Adam and Eve were vegetarians.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Doesn't sound like God meant we could each other!

That to me implies killing a person to eat them, not eating them because they are already dead.

 

[Pudding]

God conduct many killings towards humans include babies, condone slavery, immoral raping law, many other immoral laws, now God also encourage cannibal.
When will God finally repent and be good?

 

[Pudding]

Gen 1:29-30 (ESVST) 29 And God said, " Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit. You shall have them for food. 30 And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food." And it was so.

Adam and Eve were vegetarians.

Gen 1:29-30
God say plant is their food.

Gen 9:3-4
God say Adam shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.
So God means Adam shall not eat plant's blood?
Or God means Adam shall not eat animal's blood?

If God say Adam cannot eat animal's blood, but God haven't say cannot eat meat.
So can Adam eat meat?
Can God be less ambiguous?

 

[Pudding]

Adam is vegetarian?
God say Adam shall not eat animal or living moving thing's flesh with its blood.
Can/shall Adam eat animal or living moving thing's flesh without its blood?

 

[Ingledsva]

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.

And they do not work when you have lost half of your blood.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

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

The problem is JWs jumping from what it actually says, - to a different conclusion. Drain blood - to no blood transfusions.

"That none of Israel's neighbors possesses this absolute and universally binding prohibition means that it cannot be a vestige of a primitive taboo, but the result of a deliberate, reasoned enactment. This is clear from the rationale appended to the law: blood is life (Lev. 17:11, 14; Deut. 12:23). Men (the sons of Noah) are conceded the right to eat meat, if they drain off the lifeblood, which belongs to the Creator (Gen. 9:3–4, see *Noachide Laws ). Israel has an additional obligation to drain the blood of sacrificial animals on the authorized altar, "for it is I who have assigned it to you upon the altar to expiate for your lives; for it is the blood, as life, that can expiate" for your lives when you take the animal's life for its flesh (Lev. 17:11; cf. verse 4; see *Atonement ). http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0003_0_03143.html

These verses have absolutely nothing to do with blood being unsafe.

*