The Blood muddle

by leo999 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  leo999

  I could do with some help to sort out this fraction muddle .We are inactive and of the conscious class , but trying to help others see the 'light' in whatever ways we can .

  A couple of years ago , I asked an elder about the fractions , questioning particularly the 33% hemoglobin allowed in the 06 KM insert . When I was a wee girl growing up , nothing of any part was allowed and we were fanatical to even write manufacturers and question their ingredients !!

  I would like to have a list of allowable fractions according to the societies current light , and also what fractions are NOT allowed . It seems to be that when the water is taken out , there is only the fractions left , so would like to really clarify this , with their info . The whole thing seems to be ludicrous .

  Of course the elder had no reply to my question , just gave me a list of CD rom pages to look up , and it doesnt explain it .

  I do know that the whole thing is crazy , but wish to know to be able to help people wake up and think !!

  Thanks ,

  Leo
• 

  cantleave

  Leo999 jwfact.com will have all you need to know.

  http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/blood-transfusions.php
• 

  Hairyhegoat

  Another good link to show you what the changes have been over the years

  
• 

  TD

  The chart above is incorrect and the statement cited in the September 15, 1961 issue of The Watchtower was corrected two months later.

  I hate this teaching as much as anyone and understand the desire to portray it as negatively as possible. However the acceptance of plasma fractions was virtually unavoidable even in 1961. To claim that JWs in the 1960's could not accept tetanus shots and other post-exposure innoculations or that their children did not get their childhood immunizations is insane.
• 

  wobble

  It may not have been W.T policy, even in the fifties to overtly ban the acceptance of vaccinations etc. but if you had a father like mine, who when he joined the religion in the mid-forties felt they were not neutral enough with regard to WW11 you may have been one of the many Witness children who, in fact, did not get the protection they should have, because their parents read the sub-text.

  Sadly today, some Witnesses refuse treatment that the WT now permits because they believe the old hard line stance to be biblically correct !
• 

  sleepingbeauty

  I will have to check Sept 15th issue then.... anyone got a link to such a copy? - Either way it clearly shows the faithful & discreet Slave had to admit they had provided false information and that they made mistakes !!!

  Regarding you saying it wrong to claim that JW children didnt get their childhood immunizations because of the BORG's say so then you're wrong.. My brother-in-law got hooping cough and was seriously ill. If it wasnt for the BORG he would have been immunised...
• 

  TD

  Please.. The acceptance of plasma proteins was not grounds for judicial action in the 1960's. It's not a big surprise that there were individual JW's at the time that didn't understand this. Look at how many of them are clueless even today!

  At the time, I had a JW family member with a serious medical condition that required what was technically a transfusion. Several letters were exchanged with Brooklyn because of the contradictory statements that were made in 1961 and 1963. The JW organization did not stand by the stronger statements and reiterated what was said in 1958. (i.e. Plasma fractions were allowed.)

  It's also perfectly true that the JW's stated that vaccinations were wrong starting in the 1920's and that this was not officially rescinded until 1952. That was a similar issue, but the nature of the objection was very different. It was claimed that vaccination was a form of bestiality(!)
• 

  TD

  Here is the timeline for any who are interested:

  In September of 1958 vaccines and serums containing plasma proteins (i.e. gamma globulin and albumin) were exempted from the prohibition:

  "While God did not intend for man to contaminate his blood stream by vaccines, serums or blood fractions, doing so does not seem to be included in God's expressed will forbidding blood as food. It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not." (The Watchtower September 15, 1958 p. 575)

  In September of 1961 the prohibition was restated in draconian terms that would have precluded all treatments involving blood:

  "In view of the emphasis put on the use of blood in the medical world, new treatments involving its use are constantly being recommended. But regardless of whether it is whole blood or a blood fraction, whether it is blood taken from one's own body or that taken from someone else, whether it is administered as a transfusion or as an injection, the divine law applies. (The Watchtower September 15, 1961 pp. 558, 559 emphasis mine)

  Two months later, they were questioned about this:

  Since the Bible forbids the eating of blood, how are Christians to view the use of serums and vaccines? Has the Society changed its viewpoint on this?—J. D., U.S.A. (The Watchtower November 1, 1961 p. 670)

  The answer read in part:

  "As to the use of vaccines and other substances that may in some way involve the use of blood in their preparation, it should not be concluded that the Watch Tower Society endorses these and says that the practice is right and proper. However, vaccination is a virtually unavoidable practice in many segments of modern society, and the Christian may find some comfort under the circumstances in the fact that this use is not in actuality a feeding or nourishing process, which was specifically forbidden when God said that man was not to eat blood, but it is a contamination of the human system." (Ibid - emphasis mine)

  So you can see that they were not willing to stand by the statement made earlier in September of the same year. Apparently one of the writers was simply an ignoramus. (Or at least more of one than his peers.)
• 

  3dogs1husband

  HI TD, there is soooo much about this religion that lingers on and on. I am 30 some thing and I have never met a group of people as un vacccinated as JW's. I had none untill well into my 20's.....and yes the reasoning was muddled. Somewhere between, blood, and how can posion be good for you? There is soo much that stays in the minds of some of the older ones that effect our lives soooo much latter. I also think it has to do with different regions, and the power players there....and their mind set.

  As Ever...I may not be free but my mind is.....
• 

  bnybyt

  Whole blood is allowed to be put back into the body if it's only in small quantities that have been treated with radioactive markers.

  So that when you get a nuke CT scan they can trace the blood flow. The WT says "some brothers" may not object in their consciences to such treatments.

  So if whole blood is ok to be put back into the body after having been taken out and sent to the lab for nuking then reintroducing it into the body... How can it be different than whole blood transfusions?

  Sounds to me like the Passing Governing body had been growing older and in need of medical treatments that needed such therapies and so the rules were changed. Now that the GB is not so much made up of folks in their 80s and 90s there is likely little empathy for those who might need blood treatments, until that is in a couple or more decades the current GB feels the need for such therapies themselves.