Platlets...can WTBTS policy be defended?

by joel 47 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  ZazuWitts

  All of the above comments are appreciated and so thought provoking...
  which leads me to ask:

  Logical, you do realize that IF you were a baptized JW, your views regarding the blood issue, would be considered as "going against the organization" and possible grounds for disfellowshipping. Doesn't make sense, does it, because you are right, IF the WTBTS is going to INTERPRET scripture as banning blood, then it should be a TOTAL ban.

  I, however, am glad that they have flip-flopped on this one - because I have personally known a couple of individuals whose lives were saved because they were allowed 'Society approved components' - both were involved in horrible car crashes and had lost much blood.
• 

  joel

  Thanx Simon...
  for bein' one more who reminds us of texual context...and then bein' a voice of reason after that is takin' into account...
  I'm confident that this view will win out...even among the members of the GB!

  Pax,
  joel
• 

  Xandit

  Just got a chance to read a couple of questions addressed to me. I'll have to dig the details out of my notes but I essentially remember that the point I mentioned was made by a Doctor giving a lecture at a medical conference in some major eastern city, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, something like that. He was the director of a transfusionless medical program in Portland, Oregon I believe. He was speaking specifically about surgical patients. I've got the names somewhere if I can just find them. The information was not in the Watchtower and I did confirm from another source that I heard what I thought I heard. Sorry I didn't get back on this sooner.

  Edited by - Xandit on 16 January 2001 23:22:25
• 

  Sassenach

  Thank you Xandit, I appreciate the extra details. Frankly, I would resist having a transfusion unless no other option was available. I think the move is towards non-blood medical treatments and with many of the techniques now available, I'm not surprised that mortality and morbidity statistics in controlled and closely monitored operative procedure would be similar.

  That being said, many witnesses have died as a result of the stance against blood and I agree with joel. Children dying, because denied platelet transfusions when other particles of blood are allowed, is indefensible. It's criminal, in my opinion.

  I certainly do appreciate the information. There's no denying that blood transfusions are invasive and potentially harmful. Yet, they are also potentially life saving.

  Sass

  Edited by - Sassenach on 17 January 2001 8:45:35
• 

  joel

  Well..after all that been said by us here and by the WTBTS...can anyone say that people have not died needlessly because they were confussed...and so could not make an informed decission according to their own conscience...I mean...just read what some poor honest-hearted JW has to decipher...

  WT 6/15/200
  Just as blood plasma can be a source of various fractions, the other primary components (red cells, white cells, platelets) can be processed to isolate smaller parts. For example, white blood cells may be a source of interferons and interleukins, used to treat some viral infections and cancers. Platelets can be processed to extract a wound healing factor. And other medicines are coming along that involved (at least initially)
  extracts from blood components. Such therapies are not transfusions of those primary components; they usually involve parts or fractions thereof.
  Should Christians accept these fractions in medical treatment? We cannot say. The Bible does not give details, so a Christian must make his own conscientious decision before God.
  Some would refuse anything derived from blood (even fractions intended to provide temporary passive immunity). That is how they understand God's command to 'abstain from blood.' They reason that his law to Israel
  required that blood removed from a creature be 'poured out on the ground.' (Deuteronomy 12: 22-24) Why is that relevant? Well, to prepare gamma globulin, blood-based clotting factors, and so on, requires that blood be collected and processed. Hence, some Christians reject such products, just as they reject transfusions of whole blood or of its four primary
  components. Their sincere, conscientious stand should be respected.
  Other Christians decide differently. They too refuse transfusions of whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or plasma. Yet, they might allow a physician to treat them with a fraction extracted from the primary
  components. Even here there may be differences. One Christian may accept a gamma globulin injection, but he may or may not agree to an injection containing something extracted from red or white cells. Overall, though, what might lead some Christians to conclude that they could accept blood fractions?
  SUGGESTED QUESTIONS FOR THE DOCTOR
  If you face surgery or a treatment that might involve a blood product, ask:
  Do all the medical personnel involved know that, as one of Jehovah's Witnesses, I direct that no blood transfusions (whole blood, red cells, white cells, platelets, or blood plasma) be given to me under any
  circumstances?
  If any medicine to be prescribed may be made from blood plasma, red or white cells, or platelets, ask:
  Has the medicine been made from one of the four primary blood components? If so, would you explain its makeup?

  Huh!!?...can ya or can't ya!??

  Pax,
  joel
• 

  amicus

  I grappled with many words to describe the disgust I felt when reading this obtuse and murky explanation of such a critical issue. I abandon quantity for the succinct, crude and appropriate, "A##holes!".

  Edited by - amicus on 20 January 2001 5:32:4
• 

  Grunt

  What bothers me about this, is that so many lives were lost before the current "understandings" were reached, that so many are being lost before the future understandings will be reached and that meanwhile children and their families are tortured by the decision and then many innocents die. It reminds me of the alternative service issue. Innocent young Jehovah's Witness boys sent to prisons where they were frequently raped and abused. Now they don't have to go. It all makes me sick for the innocents who suffer and angry at the hypocrites who set themselves up to strain at the gnats and swallow camels while the people suffer or even die. From the Birthday understanding that has caused so much useless grief to children, to the false dates and advice not to worry about the future which cost so many their security and the happiness of careers and prosperity, to the alternative service issues that have cost so many boys their self-image and happiness, to the blood issues that have cost so many their lives, to the rejection of Christ as mediator and the partaking of the Emblems which have really denied the rank and file their very Christianity, when have these people been right about anything??? Judge the tree by its fruit. I would also like to know about the cow's blood thing. Is that true? Was that in a publication??? How was it made known if not? I have a hard time believing they would approve using cow's blood in any way shape or form. If they have this might be something that would actually affect my father's attitude, though it might not.
• 

  joel

  Wow Grunt..good points...

  I particularly thought you made one profound statement, that I totally agree with...when you said...
  "...to the rejection of Christ as mediator and the partaking of the Emblems which have really denied the rank and file their very Christianity."

  How ironically true...and sad!

  Pax,
  joel