Hemodilution: A new secret change in blood Policy ?

by chasson 23 Replies latest watchtower medical

  • Gill

    It used to be that the blood circulation had to be 'uninterrupted' as in bypass surgery that blood was allowed to temporarily leave the body and be considered an OK treatment by the WTBTS.

    Nowadays, the blood can go 'walkies' down the hall for a few days and be considered as 'continued treatment' for the WTBTS not to forcibly DA a JW.

    I've got one word for WTBTS Blood Policy - FARCSICAL!

    Virtually ALL the Fractions that make up blood can be used individually. But did the Goobering Brothers ever study Maths? What do Fractions make? Add them together and you get a WHOLE as in Whole Blood!

    How freaky can you get?

  • MsMcDucket


    In a technique known as "normovolemic hemodilution," some of your blood is deliberately withdrawn or re-directed, and you receive an equal quantity of intravenous fluids. Thus, your blood is diluted ("hemodilution") but the normal volume is maintained ("normovolemia"). The result is that when you bleed during surgery, your diluted blood contains a lower concentration of red blood cells. At the end of the surgery, the more concentrated blood that was originally withdrawn is returned. When normovolemic hemodilution is performed using a "closed system" (the withdrawn blood continues to circulate and is not actually stored), some Jehovah's Witnesses find this therapy acceptable.

  • slimboyfat


    Very interesting comments recently on bloo! The idea that blood transfusions will be phased out by the medical profession any time soon sounds like wishful thinking to me though.

    I am most startled that you claim knowledge about recent meetings of the governing body. Are those things not meant to be kept secret?

    Can you give any indication of the source for this information:

    HIS sources confirm that quietly abandoning this belief this is the next “refinement” in the policy , subject to a GB vote (the last one narrowly failed to reach 75% acceptance , much to the frustration of HIS).

    A small point, but I believe it is a 66% (two thirds third) majority of serving members required to change a policy/doctrine on the GB. At least that is what Ray Franz says in CofC.


  • Handsome Dan
    Handsome Dan

    Personally I think the government should be going after the WTS for the simple reason they are the encouraging force that is making these people commit the crime of neglect and injury

    Perhaps the government should place a multimillion dollar fine levied at the WTS on reasons of instigation and pressure, it is my opinion that they should be held accountable and not the

    individuals themselves. Isn't this a serious enough situation, after all this is about life or death of people. The goverment states for example the parents must be held accountable

    for the health and welfare of the children under their care. Period ! The law does not say that parents are to be accountable, unless the illness or death was due to an established religious

    belief. ! For example lets say a religion had established itself and during it's evolution it was necessary for a child to be sacrificed to their god as an act of appeasement and they did in

    fact carry this out. Do you think the government would go after this group or do you think they would back away and say oh wait a minute this is an organized religion, no action should take

    place ?

    Just some thoughts .........

Share this