Poll - Will you accept blood? (page 7)

Simon

I think you're confusing things with a morgue.

I maybe. I am not sure if he meant that Bloodless surgery is when the person has no blood which is what he said or is it that it leads to the person having no blood. I am not sure. that is why I asked him to clarify that statement.

Simon

Bloodless surgery refers to the non-use of transfused blood as part of the operation.

i.e. you don't want to have a blood transfusion, even for pre-arranged surgical procedures.

So they use different products and in theory are "extra careful" which is usually the spin the WTS puts on it as making it safer by having "better" surgeons.

Richard Oliver

I can see how people think that and that is an honest way to look at it. But there are organizations and hospitals striving to reduce blood transfusions for a number of reasons. In the US there is an organization that is the leader in this.

https://www.sabm.org/

It should be a personal decision, some people who aren't JWs don't want blood transfusions which is their right as well. But all hospitals are striving to reduce blood transfusions not just for patient outcomes but also for economic reasons. I agree with many people here, that it should not be forced upon anyone to refuse a blood transfusion, but it should be a personal decision.

Just like there are some Catholics who believe in abortions while the official policy is that abortions is a mortal sin. It should not be forced upon people to choose one way or the other.

But if you are saying that JWs are the only people that risk people's lives with their interpretation of medical procedures you have to look at other religions too. I am not talking about Christian Scientists. But look at Catholics and Catholic Hospitals, where it is the policy of the hospital not to perform abortions under any circumstances. There have been plenty of instances where a mother has needed an emergency abortion in order to save her life, but the hospital that she is at won't perform the procedure because of their religious beliefs.

Giordano

There are a range of serious illness's that in most cases must have transfused blood to save a life and in other situations to aid recovery.

Here’s a short list of the serious medical problems that call for blood:

Children being treated for Cancer, premature infants, Children having heart surgery.

Serious Anemic issues are treated with blood transfusions to build up iron.

Many types of Cancer.

Organ Transplants typically require 40 units of blood, 30 units of platelets, 25 units of fresh frozen plasma.

Open heart surgery often requires platelet transfusions to survive.

Sickle cell disease can call for four pints of blood per month.

Giving birth if the mother hemorrhages.

Trauma victim’s. Victim’s of vehicle accidents, various types of workplace accidents, fire, criminal assault, falls etc. There are 192,000 deaths from Trauma per year on average in the US. It is the leading cause of death for people age 1 to 44.

dubstepped

What do Catholics have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses endangering their members? You are once again trying to obfuscate the point of the thread by taking over the thread with meaningless arguments over trivialities. This is an ex-Jehovah's Witness site, not an ex-Catholic site. The conversation is about how Jehovah's Witnesses indoctrinating members bleeds over (yeah, I said that) into the view of blood even after one leaves.

By the way Richard Oliver, how do you respond to the original post as an ex-JW yourself. We already know that Fisherman is too afraid to respond. How about you? As an ex-JW, would you take blood? Why don't you speak to the original post instead of derailing the thread by picking apart words. Here's a great chance to stay on topic and contribute to the conversation being had rather than the one you want to have that usually takes attention away from the fact that Jehovah's Witnesses are a dangerous organization to their members, whether that be by protecting pedophiles or preventing proper medical care at times.

sparrowdown

You heard it here first folks from Brother Richard.

"It should be a personal decision."

Of course it should be and that's exactly how I view blood now, the same way I view medication, diet, lifestyle decisions made by me as an individual after I know the relevant info because I am free to research the relevant info and not because the WT and seven wannabe-popes in New York told me that "Jehovah says so."

Richard Oliver

Yes, I did say that I believe it should be a personal decision. And I used the Catholic Hospitals and Abortions so show that sometimes we still don't get choices even if we are not part of a religion. Would I take a blood transfusion? No. I am only and Ex-Witness because I am gay and that is it if I could be gay and a witness then I would be. I do believe in the vast majority of what JWs believe in. But a blood transfusion should be a personal decision.

cofty

I do believe in the vast majority of what JWs believe in.

tragic!

There is literally not one single thing the Watchtower teaches that has a shred of credibility.

Poll - Will you accept blood?

Share this