JWs WILL LOVE THIS NEWS!

Dansk

Blood cell transfusions 'up risk'

Most transfusions are not given in life-threatening circumstances

Red blood cell transfusions given to heart surgery patients could increase their risk of heart attack or stroke, research suggests.

The transfusions are designed to improve the delivery of oxygen to the body's tissues.

But researchers found patients who received a transfusion had a three-fold increase in complications linked to lack of oxygen.

The Bristol Heart Institute study is published in the journal Circulation.

This study suggests that such transfusions may cause more problems than they solve alt

Professor Peter Weissberg
British Heart Foundation

The researchers examined data on over 8,500 patients who underwent cardiac surgery over an eight-year period.

They found the risks associated with transfusion occurred regardless of the patients level of haemoglobin - the oxygen-carrying substance in red blood cells.

Lead researcher Dr Gavin Murphy said the problems were probably linked to changes in the red blood cells which took place while they were in storage, and which affected their capacity to carry oxygen.

In addition, toxins can build up in the fluid in which they are stored.

Dr Murphy said there was evidence to suggest that the cells suppress the immune system, but also increase the risk of potentially damaging inflammation.

However, it was very difficult to pinpoint their effect in patients who were usually already extremely sick.

Untested theory

Professor Peter Weissberg is medical director of the British Heart Foundation, which funded the study.

He said: "Red blood cells carry oxygen around the body to supply vital organs.

"Not unreasonably therefore, heart surgeons have assumed that patients who have low red blood cell counts after surgery - as a result of blood loss during or shortly after surgery - would benefit from a 'top up' transfusion of donated red blood cells.

"This study shows the importance of putting such widespread beliefs to the test since it suggests that such transfusions may cause more problems than they solve."

Professor Weissburg said the results would help to make heart surgery safer.

In the UK over half of all heart surgery patients are given blood.

However, only about 3% of these transfusions are given because of life-threatening bleeding.

The remainder are usually given on the basis of a low haemoglobin level, regardless of whether the patient has physical symptoms to suggest they need blood.

The researchers now intend to carry out a larger study to see if changing transfusion guidelines could improve patient outcomes.

For the time being it is suggested that surgeons think twice before giving their patients a transfusion.

More research is needed to find out how red cell transfusions may affect immunity or tissue oxygenation to cause these harmful effects, and to determine how stored donor blood products may be made safer prior to transfusion

Dansk

Here's the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7112975.stm

Ian

Gill

I know what you mean, Ian!

But, there is still no alternative when a patient has severe trauma or severe bleeding and is bleeding to death!

So, they can enjoy that information as much as they like and until they are blue in the face, there are always going to be situations and emergencies that occur where NOTHING ELSE WILL DO!

Blood, like ALL other treatments will always carry risks. But when its a choice between a risk or just dying then the risk must be taken.

We have to remember also, that the reason JWs don't take blood is nothing to do with its risks.

They still believe in practising many other archaic beliefs of thousands of years ago, and they all equally make no sense.

Motive is everything in a debate such as the blood transfusion issue!

Dansk

Hi Gill:

I know what you mean, Ian!

As soon as I read it I thought "Here we go, the JWs will be rubbing their hands and quoting a top doctor about how dangerous blood is and how JW policy against its use is right."

You can actually pick out the sentences from the above article they would use to back up their claims - so now I'm afraid we're going to see yet more people die from refusing transfusions! As usual, they will twist the article to serve their needs.

Ian

Gill

Blood IS a relatively dangerous treatment!

Surgery is a relatively dangerous treatment!

Sometimes you have no choice! You take the treatment or you die!

JWs don't refuse blood transfusions (apparantly) because of the possible dangers but they claim because blood is sacred and represents life. How can this supposedly 'sacred' fluid be also diseased, dirty, dangerous, bad etc?

How can the 'crown' be more important than 'the Queen'?

No doubt at all Ian that you are right that many more JWs will die over this issue! They are clinging to 'eternal life', something that was never theirs to have or be given by a book company all along!

Husband and self were speaking about our relatives a week or so again. If they refuse blood, should they ever need it, we will NOT over ride their decisions. Some people want and need lies to survive and live and we can't take away their imaginary crutches even if it does allow them to fall flat on their faces.

Consequences of being a victim is being victimised and vice versa!

As for the blood transfusion risks with surgery, I believe this was realised quite a while ago. It is excellent that doctors are still researching blood and different treatments and their efficasy. I was also impressed that during surgery only 3% of patients needed blood transfusion because they were bleeding out. That is pretty impressive surgery!!

But one more thought. There is a lady who lives down the road from my son. She had a haemorrage while giving birth to her first child 6 months ago. Her life was saved with 10 pints of blood! This basically means the blood was coming OUT faster than it was going in!! If she was JW she would be dead.

Let the WT society argue that one and tell her she should be dead and her child should be motherless.

What counts is boiling this issue down to the nitty gritty!

As soon as a JW says they'd rather die than have a blood transfusion, (even though they are directed not to say that) you know you are dealing with a crazy cult!

Dansk

((((((Gill)))))),

I agree. I have had four blood transfusions during the last four years. At first, being then only a "recent" exiter from the org I wondered how I'd react conscience-wise! Well, the JWs allow themselves to take fractions from blood and yet nowhere in the Bible (using their excuse) does it say that blood must be poured out but it's ok to save the fractions.

Well, I decided to use all the fractions together - and they came packaged in blood

Ian

Brinjen (of the "guess who's just bought some old WT volumes off ebay" sheep class)

How could you? Sheesh, just the thought of having that stuff in the house makes me feel

Hope you find a good use for it.

Ian

brinjen

How could you? Sheesh, just the thought of having that stuff in the house makes me feel
Hope you find a good use for it.

You know they are authentic by that all to familiar odour....

Oh yeah, I'll find a good use for them, expect to see some interesting threads in the coming weeks...

JWs WILL LOVE THIS NEWS!

Share this