TD and Scully, I just wanted to salute you for responding in a very polite, nonconfrontational, knowledgeable way. Class act.
NO BENEFITS TO BLOOD TRANSFUSION...?
I AM ONLY A STUDENT NURSE AFTER ALL,
BUT IF I HAVE HAD TRAING ON A BLOOD LESS UNIT, DOES THAT MEAN I AM RECIEVING THE WRONG IMFORMATION?
As far as being a student nurse, don't sell yourself short. Your learning is just beginning, and it should always be part of your professional development.
If you have had training on a bloodless unit, it means that you are receiving the information that the hospital administration wants you to have. Don't be naive to the fact that there are other alternatives. You've placed yourself in a sheltered environment, one that supports your own belief system, and supports patients who choose to have bloodless elective procedures; so it's no big surprise that the information you are getting from them is what it is.
AND AS MY SISTER DIED AT AN EARLY AGE AND MY PARENTS MADE THE DECISION DOES THAT MAKE THEM IN YOUR VIEW BLOOD GUILTY? MY ARGUMENT WAS BASED ON EPO BEING USED FOR A JW. YOUR QUITE RIGHT IT DOES TAKE A LONG TIMEI'm truly sorry that you lost your sister, and no, I do not regard your parents as bloodguilty for following the Watchtower Society's directives. It is the Watchtower Society that requires JWs to "abstain" from blood, and your family sincerely believed they were doing what was in your sister's best interests at the time. Consider the scriptures in Jeremiah 7:31 and 19:5 and 32:35 though, where the prophet tells of the calamity that was going to befall Judah for their adopting the pagan practice of child sacrifice. Was this something Jehovah approved? Of course not, because the verse says it was "a thing that I had not commanded and that had not come up into my heart." Would the death of a child for the sake of a modern doctrine be any less "disgusting" and "detestable" to Jehovah now? Why else would those words be repeated three times, if not to show just how repugnant it is to Jehovah? (BTW, there are only two birthdays mentioned in the Bible, yet that is sufficient for the WTS to ban the observance... something to think about!) If the Watchtower Society was requiring something of JWs that "has not come up into [Jehovah's] heart", that would make them blood guilty, isn't that so?
BUT STILL ITS BETTER TAHN HAVING DIRTY BLOOD. WOULD YOU NOT SAY? EVEN THE WEST NILE VIRUS HAS BENN PASSED ALONG IN BLOOD AND CONTRACTING THAT THROUGH THE ENVROMENT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE OUTSIDE AFRICA. YET HERE WE ARE IN BRITAIN.Whose blood are you calling "dirty"?? I'll have you know that I donated blood this morning, for the 29th time, and it is ignorant, insulting and offensive for you to refer to voluntary blood donors in such a disparaging fashion. Conscientious blood donors will not submit to donation if they believe that their blood should not be used. There is no incentive where I live to donate blood. I take a couple of hours out of my day to do this, and get no compensation for it. Do you really think that a normal non-psychotic individual who knows they have HIV or Hepatitis or West Nile Virus or any other illness would deliberately donate blood that would infect other people, when it is so easy to trace that information back to the donor?
VOLUME CAN MAKE ALL THE DIFFERNCE. IV SEEN IT, MY G FATHER HAS DEFO SEEN IT. YES YOU NEED HB, BUT IF THERE IS A PATIENT WHO WONT TAKE BLOOD VOLUME IS THE FUNDIMENTAL START TO THAT PATIENTS TREATMENT.
I'm not going to argue with you over the relative importance of blood volume, because it is merely part of the overall equation. The bottom line is this: if there are not enough red cells to transport oxygen, you can have volume coming out your backside and it won't make one bit of difference. In the case of elective procedures, it's quite easy to give someone Epoetin and jack up their volume from a normal baseline with some Ringer's Lactate or Normal Saline prior to surgery, and have them no worse for the wear. We are talking apples and oranges though, when it comes to trauma and medical emergencies where massive blood loss is the patient's baseline, and you have a compromised oxygen carrying capacity secondary to hypovolemia.
If you have a cake recipe that calls for a cup of sugar and you only have a few tablespoons to work with, is your cake going to turn out properly, even if you replace the missing sugar with salt? It's a crude example, I know, but hopefully one that gets the point across that sometimes you just cannot substitute red blood cells with volume.
PLEASE TELL ME IF IM WRONG.
It would be very unethical of me to impose my beliefs on someone else with differing beliefs. Try to remember that if ever you encounter a patient who would consent to having a blood transfusion.
My only purpose in addressing your comments is to a) ask you some direct questions that you have thusfar chosen to ignore, and b) offer information to you from a variety of sources that will allow you to arrive at a well-rounded professional opinion on the matter, rather than one that is slanted due to Watchtower Society bias.
In these days I try to obtaine some answears from people in this site:
This site is pro-bloodless terapy.
First I try to obtaine some answears about the view that Watchtower have.
Here is the question and answear:
In next I put some other questions, showing if the information here was true:
The Executive Director Larry Eitel (Jehovah's Witness) delete my questions and send me a private message:
This is to inform you that I have deleted your post. It is the purpose of this forum to discuss healthcare issues relating to blood management and avoidance. If you would like to discuss the position of Jehovah's Witnesses regarding these matters, please contact them directly or visit their official website at www.watchtower.org.
Thank you for you understanding in this matter.
Dear Larry Eitel,
I'm so sorry if me questions were so inconvenient to you.
I simply ask to people in medical care about cientific maters.
I don't ask about what they think about our position. Is not there jobs and I don't ask to know what think about, because I just know.
It sad that you erase my question about this maters, because its essencial to me understand this things.
But it's life. Maybe you have an answear.
Again I am sorry to have deleted your post. Since I know that this is an emotional topic for some, we have a challenge in keeping discussions on healthcare matters.
I can't say that I have the answer to your question. Perhaps you can private message Jan further.
Then I received another message from the first person that responded to my questions:
You are one of Jehovah's Witnesses right?
Yes, I am.
After your answear my questions I was making another questions, but Larry Eitel erase it.
And you? Are you Jehovah's Witness?
Here's the point and this is what a faithful Witness of Jehovah can tell individuals who ask...I have complete faith in Jehovah's visible organization. It has been determined that the major components of blood, RBC, WBC, Platelets and Plasma are to be considered the same as whole blood. For that reason I do not accept these things. If understanding changes in light of new science then the understanding is subject to change. Our organization NEVER claims to be infallible. And so at times adjustments are made. This willingness to adjust builds my faith and respect for Jehovah's Witnesses.
In the first century many Jewish converts to Christianity felt circumcision was necessary to please God. For two decades this was a cause of great controversy and dissension in the Christian Congregation. Eventually those taking the lead met in Jerusalem and determined that circumcision was NOT necessary to please God. The fact that this issue continued for so long did not mean that these were not Jehovah's people. Right?
Jehovah's Witnesses have tried their honest and sincere best to deal with the issue of blood transfusions. They have adjusted their views in the light of scientific discovery. That is why minor fractions of blood have been determined to be a matter of conscience. Faithful Christians are determined to stay close to the Congregation as did faithful Christians in the first century.
I hope this gives you some peace.
Dear brother Jan B. Wade,
I don't ask this things to tell to others. Your answear I know for shure. Its me that need answears.
On what base I can accept this but not that? I am interested in is having scriptural answers to critical aspects of our position. We cannot accept something, just because others say so. We are responsable before God to make our choices, right?
I have questions similar to another Jehovah's Witness, wich letters sent to the Governing Body never receveid a straight answear.
If this is a position based in the Bible, as we belive, then the Bible must show some principle in wich can based this difference in what is blood or not. I can't be based on conscience of some few mens, right?
For exemple, in the past none of the fractions was allowed, even hemoglobin and others that know are permited. We believe that all were blood. After, this was changed and was allowed to receveid fractions like hemoglobin and others.
We know that, for exemple hemoglobin is almost the same that red cell, 97% +- (only without the membrane).
Why this division? How can we receveid produts made from blood, and say that we abstein from blood at all?
The products that we can receveid are made from blood, that must be colected, stored e manufactureted to result in fractions. Can we say that we don't receveid blood, or better: we receveid some type of blood but not all the blood.
Are we respecting the text, so much times enfatized, that all the blood must be put on the ground?
I read the awake magazine that talks about blood and its very interesting.
In some point she tells:
"Jehovah's Witnesses are well known for taking these Bible commands to heart. They reject all transfusions involving whole blood or the four primary components - red cells, plasma, white cells, and platelets, As for the various fractions derived from those components - and products that contain such fractions - the Bible does not comment on these. Therefore, each Witness makes his own personal decision on such matters."
My thought was, 'True, the Bible doesn't comment on fractions derived from the four primary components, but where does the Bible comment on blood's primary components?'
This is the kind of questions that I have.
And in this magazine, if you notice were are comentaries of doctors that say that blood transfusion is a transplant.
Well this a kind weird to us, because the Society always tell us that received blood transfusion was the same that eat blood.
I think they are gradually change this, isn't right?
And note how he responds:
If you were a Jehovah's Witness you would know what a satanic apostate website looks like. How dare you attempt to expose me to something a real Brother would put on the same level as pornography?
Jehovah's Witnesses are not wolves disguised as sheep. They approach people honestly and openly. They are not liars like the father of the lie Satan. I pity you and hope you do a self-examination to realize a future of peace will not allow liars. Please do not contact me again.
Well, he don't answear my questions. I finally respond:
I'm sorry if this disturb you. It wasn't my intencion. I only want you to see what kind of questions some others Jehovah's Witness have, in this case a elder, that like me want to know why we have the positions that we have in relation with fractions. We can't close our eyes and pretend that nothing happens. Many Jehovah's Witness in this moment are making the same questions and they, like me have the right to do so.
We can live or die based in the conclusions and answears!!!!
I'm not a liar. I'm here for some answears. I'm a Jehovah's Witness in good position and I love Jehovah. But I think that the questions that I put are correct.
How can I let put my wife, my son, my self and others brothers in jeopoardy without this answears???
But I think that you brother, like me do not have the answers too.
In this case the words of our Lord Jesus apllies:
"If, then, a blind man guides a blind man, both will fall into a pit.”
I hope that you think in this matter, and if you can help me give me answears I appreciate. But if not, well maybe you want them too... in the future.
With christian love,
As you can see – No answears… again!
Sorry but the text is a litle confusing. I'dont know put better.
Ask yourself: is the symbol of life more important than life? Is your wedding ring more important than your marriage? Of course not.
THE LEADING MEDICAL PROFFESIONALS OF OUR WORLD WOULD BACK JWS 110 PERCENT.
Please cite your sources.
Also please know that a blood transfusion is a transplant, as acknowledged in the article. Transplants used to be grounds for disfellowshipping, but not now. How long till blood is made a 'concious matter'?
To answer the thread question, I recently had to have high dosage chemotherapy, which knocked out my immune system, followed by a stem cell transplant (consisting of my own stem cells taken from my blood around six weeks earlier and stored) and, later, around four blood transfusions. It's early days yet, but I'm alive and glad to be here. Whether I'm considered a benefit I really don't know!
Arent we missing the point here though?
Abstaining from blood is a biblical command isnt it? so according to the WTS it shouldnt matter whether or not there are benefits derived from a transfusion, the fact is the command is a command and must be followed regardless.
I think the societies over play on the non benefits argument is clear evidence of their lack of confidence in their members ability to follow such so called biblical command at face value. More is needed to influence their membership because such rule does not have any practical bearing on our much more complex lives today.
Its clear that the command is both out of date and clearly applied to different circumstances than what we face today and whats more the WTS knows it!
Whether I'm considered a benefit I really don't know!
I think we all know the answer to that one!
BLOOD TESTS CAN MISS H.I.V SCREENING AT ITS EARLY STAGE SO YOU MUST UNDERSTAND HOW DANGEROUS IT IS AND JWS GOD IS OBVIOUSLY ONLY LOOKING OUT FOR YOUR BST INTERESTS
It was impossible for me to view the jws’ God as “looking out for me” when I was nearing death because of following his rules. Letting someone die an avoidable death doesn’t really fall into the category as protecting them.
AND WHEN A PATIENT IS BROUGHT IN2 TRAUMA HB IS NOT THE IMPORTANT THING BUT GETTING THE PRESSURE AND VOLUME OF BLOOD TO A STABLE AMOUNT IS AND SINCE YOUR BLOOD IS MAINLY WATER ANYWAY
Volume matters, yes, but please research the fact that red blood cells are needed to carry essential oxygen to vital organs….meaning sometimes only blood products can save a life.
Keep in mind what db said above. If the WTS honestly believes its Biblical interpretation is correct, there would be no need to justify it by searching for scientific evidence to support it, let alone make it up.
Links for you below. Check the literature citations listed to verify their own literature indeed has false teachings.
Dishonest teachings of the WTS about blood: http://jwinfo.8m.com/blood.htm
WTS contradicts itself many times about blood teachings: http://jwinfo.8m.com/brochures/brochure%20blood%20teachings.doc
WTS has a long history of false teachings about medical issues, even though they have always claimed they are the one and only people who know “the truth” and are inspired of God: