Watchtower Top Doctor on Blood

by Marvin Shilmer 7 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  Today I added a new article to my blog. The information is a little dated. Material cited was published in 1973. But I don't find any good sources online for this information so I published it myself.

  The doctor involved (now deceased) was Dr. J Lowell Dixon. He was Medical Director for Watchtower for years. This is the first instance known to me where Dr. Dixon went on the record with a published article presenting theological premises supposely in support of Watchtower's infamous blood doctrine. His premises are false at every turn. None of this is earth-shaking news. But Dixon's article deserves attention for sake of those who might Google it (or Dixon) and need reference material.

  The article is titled Watchtower Top Doctor on Blood and is available at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2014/12/watchtower-top-doctor-on-blood.html
• 

  Oubliette

  Thanks Marvin!
• 

  AndDontCallMeShirley

  It is interesting that Dr. Dixon did not mention the fact that Jews were allowed to eat the unbled meat of an animal they found already dead, and they could sell unbled meat to foreigners. All perfectly acceptable under the Law.

  As you alluded to in your article, Marvin, no life is taken when blood is obtained for a blood transfusion- it is donated- the donator is not killed for his blood. WT also does not talk about that point, as it is devastating to their case.

  .

  Isn't it fascinating how the NT itself says Christians are no longer under the Law, yet WT continually puts JWs back under the Law whenever it is convenient for hammering JWs with yet another WT policy that has no basis in scripture or common sense?

  Thanks Marvin.
• 

  Marvin Shilmer

  There is another JW medical doctor who has published articles more recently in support of Watchtower's blood doctrine. He did this in year 2007 and again in year 2011. His name is Harvey Jon Schiller.

  His work is telling in that he offers no shred of biblical support. But his work is telling for something else too.

  Of Dr. Schiller's work:

  Watchtower doctor being honest? at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2012/03/watchtower-doctor-being-honest.html

  Watchtower Doctor on Blood at: http://marvinshilmer.blogspot.com/2012/03/watchtower-doctor-on-blood.html
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Martin - the WTS publication that Dr Dixon's article appeared in - are you working with the one that was directed towards adult patients, or is it the one that is for pediatrics? Both were published in 1973.

  I have a copy of the pediatrics edition and will be posting the Kevorkian article once I have better access to the internet.
• 

  Iown Mylife

  We knew Dixon, he came with his wife to our congregation in Georgia (when they moved here). He gave me a big rude lecture about how trashy Prevention Magazine was, and only deluded stupid people would have it in their house. He was a peach. NOT. I also got in trouble because I wasn't treating him like he was important. I didn't know who the hell he was, and was not giving him superstar celebrity honor, or kissing his posterior enough.

  Marina
• 

  OrphanCrow

  Dr. Dixon.

  Now I see why there is no good online source for this article. It isn't online. It appears in one of the Watchtower Society's early promotional publications for their no blood position. It appears in this book here:

  

  Published in 1973, and placed in research hospital libraries. The Watchtower Society was extremely pro-active in influencing and directing medical practice towards their select group of members long before the HLC was established. This pseudo journal volume (595 pages of aticles and medical studies) exists as evidence of the WTS maintaining an extensive medical library of their own for many years. Each article in it has been carefully presented with check marks, beside each phrase in the articles, that have a hint of something that may be construed to support their noblood stance. Many of the articles are underlined in places before they were published, and each article carries an added notation designating where it comes from within the WTS library. The WTS invested much time and effort into the categorizing and analysis of all the articles published in this 'volume'.

  Based upon what appears in this 'volume' (and the volume directed towards adults - the one I have posted is the pediatrics version) it is apparent that the WTS has invested far more into their quasi-medical research than they have into Biblical research.
• 

  Crazyguy

  Its interesting to note that one of the reasons mentioned in the early part of the last decade for allowing blood fractions is that whatever blood that might pass through the placental barrier would be ok. They of course still don't allow white blood cells yet everytime a mother nurses their child millions of these cells are eaten by the child.