250,000 Jehovah's Witnesses have died refusing blood

by nicolaou 739 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  Simon

  Compared to other presentations of death statistics this one by Beliaev et al is important because it offers a means of establishing a number of deaths (due to blood refusal) and the population against which to compare it. When we read similar sets of data published, for instance, in the USA it’s practically impossible to extrapolate overall mortality because 4 hospitals in the USA represents a drop in the bucket against the overall USA population. In New Zealand that’s not the case. In New Zealand 4 hospitals in a given demographic region tells us a lot about mortality against the population prorated for that same region.

  That doesn't make sense. If you have the number of JWs being treated and their mortality rate then what does it matter which hopital they are in and where? You are extrapolating things out just the same.

  The fact that this would give you wildly different numbers (maybe not the ones you're wanting?) should make you pause and think.
• 

  Simon

  Marvin: If JWs were more or less successful in recruting new members in NZ - would that change their mortality rate under your methodology? If they had recruited 10k or 15k instead ... what would your numbers be? Would they change dramatically?

  I would say that it would and that this makes your method void. Why would someone else having a bible study change *my* likelihood of dying from one particular medical issue? Does that sound like a reasonable proposition?
• 

  ILoveTTATT

  This argument is very similar to the argument, "How many people have died in Iraq because of the invasion?"

  see

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_Iraq_War_casualties

  There are various methodologies, some will give more accurate results than others, but I would like to point out:

  "The Lancet surveys are controversial because their mortality figures are higher than most other reports, including those of the Iraqi Health Ministry and the United Nations, as well as other household surveys such as the Iraq Living Conditions Survey and the Iraq Family Health Survey."4

  and,

  "The Lancet surveys have triggered criticism and disbelief from some journalists, governments, theIraq Body Count project, some epidemiologists and statisticians and others, but have also been supported by some journalists, governments, epidemiologists and statisticians. [7]"

  So if someone were to make a Wikipedia article on ex-JW's and their calculations of how many deaths have occurred because of the blood doctrine, it would probably look something like this.

  Has someone else tried ANOTHER methodology? Another set of data? Scouring through medical databases of various countries at various points in time, and comparing to JW data? Extrapolation is very risky, especially if done with a very limited set of data.

  AFAIK, there are very few situations where one can be very, highly confident that the rejection of blood WAS the ultimate cause of death. For example, AFAIK, cancer killing your body's RBC production, making you have severe anemia that cannot be treated with the blood alternatives. Chances of dying go from "extremely high" because of rejecting the blood transfusions, to "low" because of accepting the treatment. It can still be argued that the cancer killed the patient, but I have seen studies that show that the cause of death is more atributable to the rejection of the blood transfusion, since the patients that accepted the blood could eventually produce RBC's on their own, and were cancer-free, whereas the ones who rejected the blood could have been cancer-free, but their anemia killed them.

  (please correct me if wrong in the above paragraph)...

  just my 2 cents...

  ILTTATT
• 

  Finkelstein

  Either way folks the no blood doctrine by the WTS. was and still is a larger than life human social tragedy.

  I think there hasn't been enough open media attention to the fact that there has been thousands of people who have

  voluntarily given up their lives over a few men who postulate that they are god's chosen ones among all earth's human population.

  Its really a case of few corrupt mentally delusional men who have assumed they have a special position in humanity, that a god

  of their own beliefs as chosen them to be the spiritual seers for all mankind.

  In reality how did this happen ? they created this themselves for themselves and that is the cause to this unfortunate dilemma.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  -

  “19 out of 103 people over a 10 year period is insignificant.”

  Simon,

  That says a lot about how you view mortality statistics.

  In the world of medical science 19 preventable deaths out of 103 patients is huge.

  Moreover, regardless of how anyone characterizes the number, whatever is the number so long as it is a reliable figure then it’s something from which to extrapolate from. Dr. Beliaev et al’s numbers are very reliable. The then number of JWs living in New Zealand is very reliable. Based on these reliable numbers we can make conservative and liberal extrapolations. For reasons given in this discussion that have not been challenged in the least, my extrapolation of 50,000 deaths over 1961-2011 is conservative.

  Marvin Shilmer
• 

  Simon

  Personally that still sounds way too high. It would imply around 1% of all JW deaths are due to refusing blood. That does not seem credible to me.

  Yes, that would be at the level of every congregation having someone die because of refusing blood. I simply don't believe that is the case.

  Deaths from refusal of blood are always going to be a fraction of the JWs with serious medical condition or emergency. How many of those are there going to be? You need a certain number in order to get to your 50,000 figure (we've given up on the 250,000 already right?). Statistics for those are easier to come by and more accurate because they are available for the general population so free of the random variations of a very small sample.

  This is what I posted earlier - work backwards from that and apply reasonable logic and you cannot get to such huge numbers without a huge leap somewhere along the line.
• 

  Simon

  That says a lot about how you view mortality statistics.

  We're talking about STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE and you know it.

  1.9 people per year in a developed country based on a survey with no clear methodology (perhaps some 'interpretation' by a group wanting a particular outcome) is NOT a convincing number.

  I actually think that a few people are a tragedy as I've already stated several times and we don't need bogus numbers like YOUR 50,000 for it to be a bad thing.

  Maybe it says more about you?
• 

  70wksfyrs

  That doesn't make sense. If you have the number of JWs being treated and their mortality rate then what does it matter which hopital they are in and where? You are extrapolating things out just the same.

  The fact that this would give you wildly different numbers (maybe not the ones you're wanting?) should make you pause and think.

  Absolutly true Simon, I totally agree. Too many variables, and it all becomes meaningless. In my opinion, some die if they do have a transfusion and some don't, all circumstances are unique, so we can't extrapolate anything. Who care's about hospitals or mortality rates
• 

  nicolaou

  For those who ARE bothered about fixing the problem, you will be pleased to know Julia has responded to my efforts to reach her and has now deleted her tweet.

  ....

  I can't help but feel a tad bemused that the fact that I've helped fixed the problem posed by this thread is now just a side issue to my apparent failings.

  John, even I did not ask Julia to delete her tweet, I asked her to supply evidence to back it up. Getting her to delete the tweet is not fixing ANY 'problem', it's just revisionism and it's not helpful. The point of reference for this entire - and worthwhile - discussion has now been erased because you took it upon yourself to censor what others should read.

  Her tweet was inaccurate and misleading but it should NOT have been deleted - it should have been addressed and that's what I was doing.

  Nic'
• 

  latinthunder

  FYI: The only person I 'represent' is myself. I run the forum, everyone's opinions are there own. This is not a cult where everyone needs to agree. Sharing different opinions is what makes the forum what it is. The day we need spokespeople and agreement over everything is the day to turn it off IMO. If I wanted that world I could go back to a Kingdom Hall.

  What about the opinion that the Watchtower bloodban has caused the wrongful death of 250,000 people from 1961-2013? You don't seem to allow that one.

  The issue is that the Watchtower is able to cloak their actions from the public eye. The problem is that there is no transparency (same with government and all religion). The inevitable result from this lack of transparency will be misinformation. Julia's figure is an inevitable result which means it's not any big deal. The BIG deal is the cause of that result which is

  WATCHTOWER LIES

  It's shameful that our population seems to need pictures of piles of corpses to call something mass murder. When the Watchtower can just "hide in statistics." You are wrongfully focusing on poor Julia and totally removing your focus from the underlying cause. This is unscientific and just plain nasty.

  The thrust of the argument should focus on how the Watchtower causes their own misinformation by cloaking themselves from the public eye. Because of this we all have to become Sherlock Holmes to get to the truth of the matter. It's an extremely difficult process that invovles a great deal of human error.