LoL, halcyon...
By the way, I have a correction to make from 2 comments above: I thought the information came from the Reasoning book, but it actually came from "Keep Yourselves In God's Love", pgs 215-218
However, I DID look up the Reasoning Book information on blood and here's what it has to say:
pg. 71
Animal
Blood flesh may be eaten,but not the BloodGen. 9:3, 4: “Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to you. Only flesh with its soul—its blood—you must not eat.”
Any animal used for food should be properly bled. One that is strangled or that dies in a trap or that is found after it has died is not suitable for food. (Acts 15:19, 20; compare Leviticus 17:13-16.) Similarly, any food to which whole blood or even some blood fraction has been added should not be eaten.
pg. 73 Is a transfusion really the same as eating blood?
In a hospital, when a patient cannot eat through his mouth, he is fed intravenously. Now, would a person who never put blood into his mouth but who accepted blood by transfusion really be obeying the command to “keep abstaining from . . . blood”? (Acts 15:29) To use a comparison, consider a man who is told by the doctor that he must abstain from alcohol. Would he be obedient if he quit drinking alcohol but had it put directly into his veins?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I will keep pushing this issue with my jw...this is rediculous.