JWs and blood transfusions

taken from http://www.medicinenet.com/blood_transfusion/article.htm#blood_transfusion_facts

Blood transfusion facts

Blood transfusions can be a life saving measure.
Volunteer donor blood usually is readily available, and when properly tested has a low incidence of adverse events.
Contracting infections from a blood transfusion is very low (varies with the infectious agent from 1 in 350,000 to 1 in 1 million), but can occur.
Transfusion of your own blood (autologous) is the safest method but requires planning ahead and not all patients are eligible. It is usually only an option for elective surgery.
Directed donor blood allows the patient to receive blood from known donors.
Blood conserving techniques are an important aspect of limiting transfusion requirements.
Blood banks are responsible for collecting, testing and storing blood.
People with Type O blood are considered universal donors as it is safe to transfuse to nearly everyone.
Most of the time a transfusion is not a "whole blood" transfusion, but rather certain blood products, with red blood cells being the most common.

Manny

How about this JW's is this ok ? recycling your own blood ? say like during surgery ?

Intra-operative autologous transfusion: recycling your blood during surgery. Blood lost during surgery is filtered, and put back into your body during surgery. This can be done in emergency and elective surgeries. It has the advantage of eliminating or minimizing the need for someone else's blood during surgery. Large amounts of blood can be recycled. This process cannot be used if cancer or infection is present.

Manny

Or this ?

Autologous blood (using your own blood)

Pre-operative donation: donating your own blood before surgery. The blood bank draws your blood and stores it until you need it during or after surgery. This option is only for non-emergency (elective) surgery. It has the advantage of eliminating or minimizing the need for someone else's blood during and after surgery. The disadvantage is that it requires advanced planning which may delay surgery. Some medical conditions may prevent the pre-operative donation of blood products.

Manny

And just to be fair

What are the risks and complications of a blood transfusion?

Comment on this
Share Your Story
Most blood transfusions go very smoothly. However, mild problems and, very rarely, serious problems can occur.

Allergic Reactions

Some people have allergic reactions to the blood given during transfusions. This can happen even when the blood given is the right blood type.

Allergic reactions can be mild or severe. Symptoms can include:

Anxiety
Chest and/or back pain
Trouble breathing
Fever, chills, flushing, and clammy skin
A quick pulse or low blood pressure
Nausea (feeling sick to the stomach)
A nurse or doctor will stop the transfusion at the first signs of an allergic reaction. The health care team determines how mild or severe the reaction is, what treatments are needed, and whether the transfusion can safely be restarted.

Viruses and Infectious Diseases

Some infectious agents, such as HIV, can survive in blood and infect the person receiving the blood transfusion. To keep blood safe, blood banks carefully screen donated blood.

The risk of catching a virus from a blood transfusion is very low.

HIV. Your risk of getting HIV from a blood transfusion is lower than your risk of getting killed by lightning. Only about 1 in 2 million donations might carry HIV and transmit HIV if given to a patient.
Hepatitis B and C. The risk of having a donation that carries hepatitis B is about 1 in 205,000. The risk for hepatitis C is 1 in 2 million. If you receive blood during a transfusion that contains hepatitis, you'll likely develop the virus.
Variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (vCJD). This disease is the human version of Mad Cow Disease. It's a very rare, yet fatal brain disorder. There is a possible risk of getting vCJD from a blood transfusion, although the risk is very low. Because of this, people who may have been exposed to vCJD aren't eligible blood donors.
Fever

You may get a sudden fever during or within a day of your blood transfusion. This is usually your body's normal response to white blood cells in the donated blood. Over-the-counter fever medicine usually will treat the fever.

Some blood banks remove white blood cells from whole blood or different parts of the blood. This makes it less likely that you will have a reaction after the transfusion.

Iron Overload

Getting many blood transfusions can cause too much iron to build up in your blood (iron overload). People who have a blood disorder like thalassemia, which requires multiple transfusions, are at risk for iron overload. Iron overload can damage your liver, heart, and other parts of your body.

If you have iron overload (hemochromatosis), you may need iron chelation (ke-LAY-shun) therapy. For this therapy, medicine is given through an injection or as a pill to remove the extra iron from your body.

Lung Injury

Although it's unlikely, blood transfusions can damage your lungs, making it hard to breathe. This usually occurs within about 6 hours of the procedure.

Most patients recover. However, 5% to 25% of patients who develop lung injuries die from the injuries. These people usually were very ill before the transfusion.

Doctors aren't completely sure why blood transfusions damage the lungs. Antibodies (proteins) that are more likely to be found in the plasma of women who have been pregnant may disrupt the normal way that lung cells work. Because of this risk, hospitals are starting to use men's and women's plasma differently.

Acute Immune Hemolytic Reaction

Acute immune hemolytic reaction is very serious, but also very rare. It occurs if the blood type you get during a transfusion doesn't match or work with your blood type. Your body attacks the new red blood cells, which then produce substances that harm your kidneys.

The symptoms include chills, fever, nausea, pain in the chest or back, and dark urine. The doctor will stop the transfusion at the first sign of this reaction.

Delayed Hemolytic Reaction

This is a much slower version of acute immune hemolytic reaction. Your body destroys red blood cells so slowly that the problem can go unnoticed until your red blood cell level is very low.

Both acute and delayed hemolytic reactions are most common in patients who have had a previous transfusion.

Graft-Versus-Host Disease

Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a condition in which white blood cells in the new blood attack your tissues. GVHD usually is fatal. People who have weakened immune systems are the most likely to get GVHD.

Symptoms start within a month of the blood transfusion. They include fever, rash, and diarrhea. To protect against GVHD, people who have weakened immune systems should receive blood that has been treated so the white blood cells can't cause GVHD.

Manny

Ok so I'll be honest I don't want a blood transfusion unless I absolutely need one but I do not believe in my heart of hearts that it's a sin to receive one if it is needed .....There are other medical procedures that have higher risk


Manny

http://www.dawnbible.com/1954/5407cl-2.htm

I believe this group is an offshoot of the JWs but they make a well reasoned argument using scripture why transfusion is different from eating blood and why God commanded man not to eat blood but to drain it from the animals and how the prohibition is dealing with animals ....nothing to do with humans receiving blood transfusions which is life saving

Manny

Originally posted by menace71
There are other medical procedures that have higher risk

Originally posted by FMF
The whole thing about the "risks" of blood transfusions is a red herring that robbie and galveston75 are using to deflect from the fact that they are unable to show that a prohibition on blood transfusions is Biblical. All they have is stuff about eating animal blood, pagan rites and sacrifices etc.

Originally posted by menace71
Agreed .....I read about a story where a child bled for 6 hours and could have been saved but the parents refused on religious grounds ( they the medical people tried to make the child a temporary ward of the court to save the child ) and the child died ....kinda pissed me off a bit it was needless for the child to die

Taken from http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/bloodlaw.htm




THE REAL TRUTH - JWS DO ALLOW BLOOD!

The Watchtower of Feb. 15, 1963 (p. 124) told JWs that they could not receive anything derived from blood in medical treatment:

It is not just blood, but anything that is derived from blood and used to sustain life or strengthen one that comes under this principle.

Yet, six years earlier they had made exceptions in the case where blood serums might be injected in the form of inoculation. The Watchtower of 1958, page 575 said,

The injection of antibodies into the blood in a vehicle of blood serum or the use of blood fractions to create such antibodies is not the same as taking blood, either by mouth or by transfusion, as a nutrient to build up the body's vital forces. While God did not intend for any man to contaminate his blood stream by vaccines, serums or blood fractions, doing so does not seem to be included in God's express will forbidding blood as food. It would therefore be a matter of individual judgment whether one accepted such types of medication or not.

Several inconsistencies must be pointed out in this statement. First of all, their later statement of 1963 contradicts it, yet both positions are still considered as valid at present. Secondly, they argue that the Bible always connects the prohibition on blood with its use as a FOOD, and since vaccinations are not a food, it really doesn't apply the same way. Now they are making BLOOD AS A NUTRIENT the issue, rather than BLOOD AS SACRED. If they really believe that blood is still to be considered the same way as in Gen. 9:4 and Deut. 12:23,24, they would not use blood for anything, but would always pour it out on the ground. In fact, they actually use this very principle in arguing against autotransfusions! The Watchtower of 1959 stated,

According to the method of handling blood prescribed by the Bible, blood when taken from a body was to be poured out on the ground as water and covered over with dust. (Lev. 17:13,14; Deut. 12:16,23,24; 15:23; 1 Chron. 11:18,19) This is because life is in the blood and such shed blood is held sacred before Jehovah God. The covenant regarding the sanctity of blood stated after the Flood is still binding today, and it covers both animal and human blood, whether one's own or anothers'. Consequently, the removal of one's blood, storing it and later putting it back into the same person would be a violation of the Scriptural principles that govern the handling of blood.Gen. 9:46. (p. 640)

So in one case, they say you can use parts of blood as long as it's not used for "food," yet elsewhere they say autotransfusions are wrong because blood should always be poured out on the ground!

This is only the tip of the iceberg of inconsistency. As late as 1975, JWs who were hemophiliacs were not allowed to use blood particles in therapy, including blood plasma and derivatives containing blood factors (Awake!, 2/22/75, p.30). Not long thereafter, they changed their mind, but failed to put it into print for another three years, when the June 15, 1978 WT (p. 30) revoked its earlier ban, allowing certain blood particles to be used. Only those hemophiliacs who telephoned WT headquarters between 1975 and 1978 found out they had changed their stand on this issue; others who failed to "phone home" were left to follow the old mandate until 1978.

ORGAN TRANSPLANTS

In the Nov. 15 WT of 1967 organ transplants were banned for JWs, whereas they had previously allowed such as late as 1961. They used this in reinforcing their stand on blood, saying that blood is also an organ transplant (see quote below for 1977). Then in 1980 they changed their stance, allowing organ transplants as a matter of individual conscience! Strangely, no mention was made of blood no longer being an organ, so one must assume they are contradicting themselves on this point, as they still refuse blood transfusions. In 1984, they allow for a bone-marrow transplant - the very source of blood! Still, taking a blood transfusion would merit disfellowshipping from the organization.

Just seeing the inconsistency in the JW position on blood transfusion here


Manny

you people are really wasting your time. you can't make him change his mind with facts. he is a cult member. he is immune.


i never meant this thread to be a "blood transfusions will save your life in some cases" debate. we had A LOT of those already, and just like evolution/noah's ark/age of earth/whatever talks, it always leads to fundamentalists getting smacked over the head with facts and ignoring them.

truth is independent of what the robbie and his jws think.



i just meant this to be a reminder that in many places, the authorities can, will and should take your child away if you refuse to allow a life saving transfusion and that refusal constitutes abuse, and if the child should die, it constitutes murder.

i just wanted to let jws who do not let their dying children have life saving blood transfusions know that i consider them unfit parents.

Originally posted by menace71
And just to be fair

What are the risks and complications of a blood transfusion?

Comment on this
Share Your Story
Most blood transfusions go very smoothly. However, mild problems and, very rarely, serious problems can occur.

Allergic Reactions

Some people have allergic reactions to the blood given during transfusions. This can happen even whe ...[text shortened]... s should receive blood that has been treated so the white blood cells can't cause GVHD.

Manny

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you people are really wasting your time. you can't make him change his mind with facts. he is a cult member. he is immune.

Originally posted by FMF
The same could be said for 95% of the discourse on this forum or perhaps any RHP forum. I am interested in behaviour. I am interested in the effect of doctrine on intellectual and emotional demeanour. These conversations are interesting. Religionists are interesting to talk to regardless of whether minds are changed.

it was entertaining when he stopped for a second to praise abraham for nearly killing his son.


by entertaining i mean scary.