A Brief History of the Transfusion Medicine Taboo
February 4, 1931
Although vaccination had been condemned as a fraudulent practice as early as 1921, here it is prohibited specifically on scriptural grounds:
"Vaccination is a direct violation of the Everlasting Covenant that God made with Noah after the flood.....much looseness of our day along sexual lines may be traceable to the easy and continual violation of the divine commands to keep human and animal blood apart from each other. With cells of foreign blood racing through his veins a man is not normal, not himself, but lacks the poise and balance which makes for self control."
"All reasonable minds must conclude that it was not the eating of the blood that God objected to, but it was the bringing the blood of the beast in contact with the blood of man" (G31 2/4 p. 293,294)
April 24, 1935
The 1931 position on vaccinations is reiterated:
"As vaccination is a direct injection of animal matter in the blood stream vaccination is a direct violation of the law of Jehovah God." (G35 4/24 p. 465)
December 22, 1943
The reasoning on vaccinations is revised. Vaccinations are now condemned on the basis that they violate the divine prohibition against eating blood.
"Under present methods of immunization, for instance, meningitis germs are injected into a horse. It is these anti-bodies in serums made from the animal's blood which immunize persons against meningitis. Other serums are obtained similarly. The divine prohibition as to eating or partaking of blood does not appear to trouble the "scientists." " (G43 12/22 p. 23)
July 1, 1945
Blood transfusions are identified as a being "related" to eating blood. Although the reference is somewhat oblique, JW literature today claims this was the first official statement of position against transfusion medicine. (W45 pp. 198-201)
December 15, 1952
The earlier position on vaccinations is officially reversed:
ยท Is vaccination a violation of God's law forbidding the taking of blood into the system??G. C., North Carolina.
"The matter of vaccination is one for the individual that has to face it to decide for himself. Each individual has to take the consequences for whatever position and action he takes toward a case of compulsory vaccination, doing so according to his own conscience and his appreciation of what is for good health and the interests of advancing God's work.....After consideration of the matter, it does not appear to us to be in violation of the everlasting covenant made with Noah, as set down in Genesis 9:4, nor contrary to God's related commandment at Leviticus 17:10-14 (W52 p. 764)
January 8, 1954
Gamma globulin is specifically forbidden:
"We are told that it takes one and a third pints of whole blood to get enough of the blood protein or "fraction" known as gamma globulin for one injection. And since from the foregoing it must be admitted that such use of human blood is highly questionable, what justification can there be for the use of gamma globulin? Further, those interested in the Scriptural aspect will note that its being made of whole blood places it in the same category as blood transfusions as far as Jehovah's prohibition of taking blood into the system is concerned." (G54 1/8 p. 24)
September 8, 1956
Serum albumin is specifically forbidden:
"While this physician argues for the use of certain blood fractions, particularly albumin, such also come under the Scriptural ban. In fact, these fractions are being used not only by physicians but also by food processors, and so it would be well to note the labels on such products to see if they contain any blood substances or fractions. When in doubt, it would be best to do without." (G56 9/8 p. 20)
September 15, 1958
A slight easing of the original position: Serums, such as the diphtheria antitoxin and fractions such as gamma globulin are now allowed as conscience permits on the basis that these 'do not nourish the body'.
"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." (W58 p. 575)
October 15, 1959
Blood apart from the body must be poured out in accordance with the Mosaic Law. Autologous transfusions are thereby prohibited. (W59 p. 640)
January 15, 1961
The 'misuse' of blood becomes a disfellowshiping offense. (W61 pp. 63,64)
September 15 1961
The 1958 reversal is reversed. The Society states the issue in terms that preclude any and all medical uses of blood including the use of plasma proteins in serums and antitoxins:
"The two world wars and the Korean war gave doctors ample opportunity to experiment with the therapeutic use of blood, and now the process has been developed to the point that doctors use not only whole blood and blood plasma, which is the nearly colorless liquid in which the blood cells are carried, but also red cells apart from the plasma, and the various plasma proteins as they feel the need. Is God?s law violated by such medical use of blood? Is it wrong to sustain life by infusions of blood or plasma or red cells or the various blood fractions? Yes!" "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. God has not given man blood to use as he might use other substances; he requires respect for the sanctity of blood." (W61 pp. 558, 559 emphasis added)
November 1, 1961
The Society is questioned on the reversal of the 1958 position. Referring back to the 1958 Watchtower, they again exclude vaccinations from the prohibition. However, the stance regarding gamma globulin and other plasma proteins (serums) is now very unclear.
"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." (W61 p. 670)
February 15, 1963
The strong wording of the September 15, 1961 Watchtower is again restated. The Society again explains their position in terms that would rule out any and all uses of blood including the use of plasma proteins in serums and antitoxins. It is unclear whether this is the result of a difference of opinion in the writing department or whether one writer was simply ignorant about plasma proteins and their uses:
"He need only ask the doctor: "From what was the plasma taken?" "How are the red cells obtained?" "Where did you get this substance?" If the answer is "Blood," he knows what course to take, for it is not just whole blood but anything that is derived from blood and used to sustain life or strengthen one that comes under this principle." (W63 p. 124)
November 15, 1964
The use of serums is again excluded from the prohibition on the same basic rationale as the 1958 explanation:
"The Society does not endorse any of the modern medical uses of blood, such as the uses of blood in connection with inoculations. Inoculation is, however, a virtually unavoidable circumstance in some segments of society, and so we leave it up to the conscience of the individual to determine whether to submit to inoculation with a serum containing blood fractions for the purpose of building up antibodies to fight against disease. If a person did this, he may derive comfort under the circumstances from the fact that he is not directly eating blood, which is expressly forbidden in God?s Word. It is not used for food or to replace lost blood." (W64 11/15 p. 682)
August 22, 1965
The 1964 position is reiterated:
"The fact that serums are prepared from blood makes them undesirable to Christians because of the Biblical law against the use of blood. However, since they do not involve the use of blood as a food to nourish the body, which the Bible directly forbids, their use is a matter that must be decided by each person according to his conscience." (G65 8/22 p. 18)
June 1, 1974
The 1964 position on serums is reiterated and further softened:
"We believe that here the conscience of each Christian must decide. Some may feel that accepting such a serum does not constitute an act of disrespect for the sacredness of life and of God as the life Source, that it does not constitute a flouting of God's expressed will concerning the use of blood to feed the body." (W74 p.351)
April 8, 1972
Hemodilution is specifically condemned:
"Men of science are constantly developing new methods for performing surgical operations. The Journal of the American Medical Association, dated November 15, 1971, described a procedure for open-heart surgery that employs "severe hemodilution." Early in the operation a large quantity of blood is drawn off into a plastic blood bag. Though the bag is left connected to the patient by a tube, the removed and stored blood is no longer circulating in the patient?s system. It is replaced with a plasma volume expander, which dilutes the blood remaining in the veins and which gradually dissipates during the operative procedure. Near the conclusion of the operation the blood storage bag is elevated, and the stored blood is reinfused into the patient??..These techniques are noteworthy to Christians, since they run counter to God?s Word. The Bible shows that blood is not to be taken out of a body, stored and then later reused. (G72 4/8 pp. 29,30)
February 22, 1975
The use of the clotting factors is still prohibited (G75 2/22 p. 30)
June 15, 1978
The position on serums is softened even further: The use of the clotting factors, RhoGAM, and other serums is now in the 'gray area' (W78 6/15 p. 31)
June 22, 1982
The original 1958 rationale for the allowance of some blood components is replaced. Blood components are now classified as either 'major' or 'minor.' (G82 6/22 pp. 25-27) This creates the following divisions:
ALLOWED: Albumin, Immune globulins, serums, Factors VIII and IV and RhoGAM.FORBIDDEN: Red Cells, White Cells, Plasma, and Platelets.
Intraoperative collection and hemodilution are "objectionable."
March 22, 1983
Hemodilution is now mentioned favorably:
"It is with this in mind, and not just to honor the requests of Jehovah's Witnesses, that Denton Cooley [of Houston, Texas] has performed open-heart operations now for over seven years, limiting transfusions wherever possible by substituting hemodilution, diluting the patient's blood with a glucose and heparin solution. If this method has given excellent results since then . . . one wonders why it has not been extended to present-day surgery." (G83 3/22 p.16)
May 15, 1984
Bone marrow transplants are now a matter of conscience. (W84 5/15 p. 31)
March 1, 1989
The earlier positions on cell scavenging and hemodilution are reversed. These two forms of autologous transfusion are now permitted. (W89 3/1 pp. 30,31)
June 1, 1990
The 1982 rationale for the allowance of some blood components is replaced. Blood components are now divided on the basis of transference across the placental barrier. The same divisions remain. (W90 6/1 pp. 30,31)
June 15, 2000
The 1990 rationale for the allowance of some blood components is replaced. Blood components are now classified as either "primary" or "secondary." This creates the following divisions: (W00 6/15 pp. 29-31)
ALLOWED: Anything derived from a "primary" component including hemoglobin solutionsFORBIDDEN: Intact Red cells, Intact White cells, Intact Platelets and Whole plasma.
