21 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieso in fewer words, adults may be as suicidal as they want but a parent may not make a decision that endageres the welfare of their child. gotcha
As you can see Zhalansi it is a highly emotive subject and the requests for opinions tended to be on purely hypothetical basis, what if your child, what if your wife etc etc, this again seems no different. Make no mistake about it, in the case of a minor, whether a parent wishes to accept a blood transfusion or not is practically irrelevant, for al ...[text shortened]... elf determination and will accept almost any other type of treatment, including blood fractions.
21 Sep 10
2 edits
Originally posted by Zahlanzisuicidal and wanton parental negligence, hardly! more sensationalist tabloid journalism!
so in fewer words, adults may be as suicidal as they want but a parent may not make a decision that endageres the welfare of their child. gotcha
Here are some quotes from medical professionals that you will not find on the front page of your local tabloid
The reference work Dailey’s Notes on Blood: “Some physicians maintain that allogeneic blood [blood from another human] is a dangerous drug and that its use would be banned if it were evaluated by the same standards as other drugs.”
Late in 2004, Professor Bruce Spiess said the following about transfusing a primary blood component into patients undergoing heart surgery: “There are few if any [medical] articles that support transfusion actually improving patient outcome.” In fact, he writes that many such transfusions “may do more harm than good in virtually every instance except trauma,” increasing “the risk of pneumonia, infections, heart attacks and strokes.”
Dr. Gabriel Pedraza recently reminded his colleagues in Chile that “transfusion is a poorly defined practice,” one that makes it “difficult to . . . apply universally accepted guidelines.”
Brian McClelland, director of Edinburgh and Scotland Blood Transfusion Service, asks doctors to “remember that a transfusion is a transplant and therefore not a trivial decision.” He suggests that doctors ponder the question, “If this was myself or my child, would I agree to the transfusion?”
thank you Zahlanzi you insight into the matter is truly extraordinary.
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobiefunny how you keep finding them. now blood transfusions are bad? and there is a conspiracy to keep this from going public?
suicidal and wanton parental negligence, hardly! more sensationalist tabloid journalism!
Here are some quotes from medical professionals that you will not find on the front page of your local tabloid
The reference work Dailey’s Notes on Blood: “Some physicians maintain that allogeneic blood [blood from another human] is a dangerous drug and ...[text shortened]... e to the transfusion?”
thank you Zahlanzi you insight into the matter is truly extraordinary.
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by LemonJelloIt is all human life, the protest against the belief about blood transfusions has
🙄 I'm sorry to tell you that none of your inferences about my value set actually follow from the post to which you were responding.
You had asked, I thought, about what reasons a person might have for thinking the two cases (an abortion on one hand; the refusal of a needed blood tranfusion to a child on the other) to have different permissibility s ...[text shortened]... t many people take to be relevant to the subject of moral personhood and moral considerability.
been because of the possible lack of care toward human life, yet this sliding
scale of value being applied to justify or over look what we allow in mass is by far
much worse. I don't see the same people complaining about that as I do blood
transfusions and I have seen a couple of them justify the taking of life when it
comes to the unborn.
Why would there be a different permissibility status if the value of life were above
all else? Either we care about it, or we have lines where we don't, if you can justify
a line where we don't in one case, why complain about someone who has another
line else where?
Kelly
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by LemonJello🙄 I'm sorry to tell you that none of your inferences about my value set actually follow from the post to which you were responding.
🙄 I'm sorry to tell you that none of your inferences about my value set actually follow from the post to which you were responding.
You had asked, I thought, about what reasons a person might have for thinking the two cases (an abortion on one hand; the refusal of a needed blood tranfusion to a child on the other) to have different permissibility s ...[text shortened]... t many people take to be relevant to the subject of moral personhood and moral considerability.
You are right, I'm sorry!
Kelly
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieall the poor victims of this conspiracy theory, having to go through the ordeal of receiving a blood transfusion when there were countless other safer procedures to replace lost blood. the horror.
well well, you come to a realisation, how refreshing! progress indeed.
on a more serious note, i can admit everyone is entitled to their own opinion. i can admit some people don't believe evolution is true because hey, they don't understand it and it is pretty complicated.
however, i say that anyone who thinks blood transfusions are unnecessary are retarded. or insane.
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by Zahlanziand i say unless you know what you are talking about and have researched the subject it is relatively easy to remain in a delusional state! i am glad therefore we agree on something.
all the poor victims of this conspiracy theory, having to go through the ordeal of receiving a blood transfusion when there were countless other safer procedures to replace lost blood. the horror.
on a more serious note, i can admit everyone is entitled to their own opinion. i can admit some people don't believe evolution is true because hey, they don' ...[text shortened]... ever, i say that anyone who thinks blood transfusions are unnecessary are retarded. or insane.
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by KellyJay
Create another thread to discuss the new topic.
Kelly
I see you value one over the other, but both are human life at different stages, one you are okay with the other not.
I'd be interested to hear how you reconcile this statement with your positions on abortion and capital punishment.
21 Sep 10
6 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThese guys need to get out of the dark ages and learn that most civilized countries now have many other options they have at their disposal to use instead of blood....and they need to get off this emotional high your on and get educated for yourself and your families....
and i say unless you know what you are talking about and have researched the subject it is relatively easy to remain in a delusional state! i am glad therefore we agree on something.
http://www.medifasthealth.org/blog/2010/03/04/little-known-dangers-of-blood-
transfusions/
http://www.livestrong.com/article/136305-what-are-dangers-blood-transfusion/
http://www.newser.com/story/9097/blood-transfusion-danger-identified.html
http://www.righthealth.com/topic/Danger_Of_Blood_Transfusions/Reference
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_will_Jehovah's_Witnesses_not_receive_blood_transfusions
21 Sep 10
3 edits
Originally posted by galveston75i know it very similar to a situation that happened to the friend in a local village, his wife was haemorrhaging after birth and they said she must have transfusion or she would die. Her blood count was quite low, however we ourselves suggested an alternative treatment called hypotensive anesthesia in which the patients blood pressure is vastly reduced reducing the flow of blood so that congealing can take place naturally. The medication was literally bought over the counter at local chemist and administered orally. Guess what, our dear sister got well and is as vibrant as ever. It highlights the dilemma that we are facing, in that its not so much that alternatives are not available, its that people are unaware of them, including some medical professionals. The sentiments of the forum echo this situation.
These guys need to get out of the dark ages and learn that most civilized countries now have many other options they have at their disposal to use instead of blood....and they need to get off this emotional high your on and get educated for yourself and your families....
http://www.medifasthealth.org/blog/2010/03/04/little-known-dangers-of-blood-
tra ...[text shortened]... erence
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_will_Jehovah's_Witnesses_not_receive_blood_transfusions
21 Sep 10
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you get a bloody nose and tilt your head back to help stuanch the flow, and in the process accidently swallow your own blood, does that require repentance?
i know it very similar to a situation that happened to the friend in a local village, his wife was haemorrhaging after birth and they said she must have transfusion or she would die. Her blood count was quite low, however we ourselves suggested an alternative treatment called hypotensive anesthesia in which the patients blood pressure is vastly redu ...[text shortened]... of them, including some medical professionals. The sentiments of the forum echo this situation.
along the same lines, if you have a bleeding ulcer and the blood is passed through the intestines instead of vomited, is that a sin?
if the blood is vomited, do you have to save it? (it is part of your soul right?
enquiring minds want to know
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by galveston75"Most Holy" is a Cerebus reference. I am an atheist. There are people I would die for, and I would die before committing certain types of moral wrongs. It is not that you have strong commitments that strikes me as insane, but rather the content of those commitments. It is reasonable and good for us to have such commitments. But it is an affront to reason and virtue to be prepared to throw away your life, or the life of another, because you believe that blood is magic and your sky-father says it has metaphysical cooties. Those beliefs are stupid, full stop.
What does the Most Holy mean on your icon? Does it have special meaning? Does it give you some special permission to sound so non Christian? If you are a Christian would you not die for your faith and what you believe in?
21 Sep 10
Originally posted by bbarrOK..Whatever.
"Most Holy" is a Cerebus reference. I am an atheist. There are people I would die for, and I would die before committing certain types of moral wrongs. It is not that you have strong commitments that strikes me as insane, but rather the content of those commitments. It is reasonable and good for us to have such commitments. But it is an affront to ...[text shortened]... ic and your sky-father says it has metaphysical cooties. Those beliefs are stupid, full stop.