been out the 'link' for a bit,is it true theyre now allowing it? or is it just if yiour face fits?
new blood rules?
Full blood is still forbidden, they only allow fractions of the blood (you know, like ham, buns, and salad is ok to eat, sandwich is forbidden).
You may have heard of the Bulgary trial, where the government wanted to ban them because of the blood rule, so they said "noone is automatically disfellowshipped if they take blood". But that is just a simple lie to avoid ban. In truth they don't get "automatically DFd", they put a judicial committee first, where they disfellowship. It's not automatic at all...
no what is the bulgary trail? please explain this sounds very interesting!...?
Just to clarify a bit further. If a baptised witness takes a complete blood transfusion, they are actually disfellowshipping themselves.
Remember when a witness gets baptised these days they have to agree to abide by all the distinct doctrines of the society.
So the elders would argue, because you have taken blood knowingly you have gone against your own baptism vow, therefor you are telling the world you no longer want to be known as one of Jehovah's Witnesses.
It kinda makes sense in JW land.
Highdose: my bad, it's Bulgaria. There are many threads on this, for example this: http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/medical/185942/1/Clarification-on-Blood-in-Bulgaria the last post by TD describes the matter in short. Or try the search on "blood Bulgaria" on the site.
On further thinking about it, maybe this whole "fractions allowed" changing was because all the deaths lay heavy on the GB's conscience? I've heard that full blod is very rarely used for transfer, it only happens when the patient has an accident and loses a massive amount of blood. In normal surgery they only use the needed fractions. So by accepting all fractions the mortality rate should drops significantly.
My wife got a DVD about the alternative methods not long ago, and I peeked in. They go on blabbing how the alternative methods are cheaper, the patients recover faster, it doesn't have the dangers of blood, etc. etc. But they say nothing about the most important statistics: mortality rate!
My wife's grandma was in the hospital not long ago, and the blood issue came up, so they asked the doctor casually, that if they give blood, can they guarantee the success? Alas they can't. The JW family feels sattisfied with that answer. Of course they can't! How stupid that question is? The correct question is: what has higher chance of success? (The grandma is fine now, didn't needed blood if you're wondering).
On further thinking about it, maybe this whole "fractions allowed" changing was because all the deaths lay heavy on the GB's conscience?
Conscience? I don't think they truly care about the deaths of their members dying over the "blood issue." I don't believe they lose any sleep over it. They may be only concerned about possible lawsuits over it though. When the vaccination ban changed, there was no apology for the ones that died or got a long-term disability for not taking vaccinations when the GB said no. No apology when organ transplants were banned and then was changed. The GB quickly excuse themselves and switch it to that it was the decision of the individual.
oh so what percentage is ok? 10% , 50% 90%??
they sure are getting weird!
From what I recall, plasma is one of the primary components of blood. As a whole, it is forbidden by the Society. But plasma is 90% water; if you have an IV, you've had 90% of what is forbidden. If you take the other 10% of plasma along with the water, you're goin' down in the Big A. Makes sense to me.
The current policy is that whole blood and its four so-called "Primary components" are forbidden
These four primary components are:
Red blood cells
White blood cells
Everything else is allowed.
It is weird, but it is nothing new. They first started allowing fractions over 50 years ago in 1958. The only difference today is that more fractions are allowed than ever before.