Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Non JW professionals who are engaged in health care offer a more objective opinion:
“As a group of patients,” Nunes says, “Jehovah’s Witnesses are very well informed ... The way they have been able to organize and educate their community, and then to work with the medical community to make sure they know how to care for them, is really very impressive.”
“It really is a model for how a patient population with unique needs can really get serious about helping medical professionals meet them,” he adds. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...usions/395054/
Well, you had to bring it up. If you hadn't, I would have held my tongue. However, there are approximately 900 Jehovah's Witnesses that die every year because they needed a blood transfusion and refused it. Contrast that with about 60 people who die each year due to adverse reactions to transfusions. We're not talking about avoiding unnecessary procedures here. We're talking about simple life and death choices. Most people choose to live, while some of us take a twisted interpretation of aBible verse and choose to allow hundreds of people to die every year. Once again, were not talking about avoidable procedures. We're talking about people choosing to allow their loved ones to die.
Well, you had to bring it up. If you hadn't, I would have held my tongue. However, there are approximately 900 Jehovah's Witnesses that die every year because they needed a blood transfusion and refused it. Contrast that with about 60 people who die each year due to adverse reactions to transfusions. We're not talking about avoiding unnecessary procedures here. We're talking about simple life and death choices. Most people choose to live, while some of us take a twisted interpretation of aBible verse and choose to allow hundreds of people to die every year. Once again, were not talking about avoidable procedures. We're talking about people choosing to allow their loved ones to die.
Why do you embrace superstitious ignorance when it comes to medical science?
What does Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 7:27; Leviticus 17:11-14; Acts 15:20; Acts 15:29 and Acts 21:25 have to do with what is secular________________ www.jw.org
There are non-blood management sections in area hospitals.
Technology has made cell-saver management of blood possible for use in surgery.
In a slight angry tone, one doctor said to me, " You people, keep surgeons from being sloppy ! "
Well, you had to bring it up. If you hadn't, I would have held my tongue. However, there are approximately 900 Jehovah's Witnesses that die every year because they needed a blood transfusion and refused it. Contrast that with about 60 people who die each year due to adverse reactions to transfusions. We're not talking about avoiding unnecessary procedures here. We're talking about simple life and death choices. Most people choose to live, while some of us take a twisted interpretation of aBible verse and choose to allow hundreds of people to die every year. Once again, were not talking about avoidable procedures. We're talking about people choosing to allow their loved ones to die.
This is indefensible.
Interesting statistic! I'd always wondered about that.
Why do you embrace superstitious ignorance when it comes to medical science?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me
Non JW professionals who are engaged in health care offer a more objective opinion:
“As a group of patients,” Nunes says, “Jehovah’s Witnesses are very well informed ... The way they have been able to organize and educate their community, and then to work with the medical community to make sure they know how to care for them, is really very impressive.”
“It really is a model for how a patient population with unique needs can really get serious about helping medical professionals meet them,” he adds. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...usions/395054/
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
Well, you had to bring it up. If you hadn't, I would have held my tongue. However, there are approximately 900 Jehovah's Witnesses that die every year because they needed a blood transfusion and refused it. Contrast that with about 60 people who die each year due to adverse reactions to transfusions. We're not talking about avoiding unnecessary procedures here. We're talking about simple life and death choices. Most people choose to live, while some of us take a twisted interpretation of aBible verse and choose to allow hundreds of people to die every year. Once again, were not talking about avoidable procedures. We're talking about people choosing to allow their loved ones to die.
This is indefensible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
Interesting statistic! I'd always wondered about that.
Here's another interesting statistic that you may wonder about.
"Some blood-management experts say that the practice may also help reduce the number of medically unnecessary transfusions. In a 2011 study in the journal Transfusion Medicine Reviews, researchers analyzed nearly 500 previously published case studies of “typical inpatient medical, surgical, or trauma scenarios” in which blood transfusions were used. Around 59 percent of those transfusions were “inappropriate,” the researchers determined, while around 12 percent of transfusions were deemed medically necessary (the authors were unsure about the remaining 29 percent). “If we cannot demonstrate any benefit of [a] transfusion,” says Aryeh Shander, the study’s lead author and the executive medical director at the Institute for Patient Blood Management and Bloodless Medicine and Surgery in Englewood, New Jersey, “all we’re offering patients is risk.”-https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/06/blood-management-bloodless-medicine-transfusions/395054/
Here's another interesting statistic that you may wonder about.
"Some blood-management experts say that the practice may also help reduce the number of medically unnecessary transfusions. In a 2011 study in the journal Transfusion Medicine Reviews, researchers analyzed nearly 500 previously published case studies of “typical inpatient medical, surgical, or trauma scenarios” in which blood transfusions were used. Around 59 percent of those transfusions were “inappropriate,” the researchers determined, while around 12 percent of transfusions were deemed medically necessary (the authors were unsure about the remaining 29 percent). “If we cannot demonstrate any benefit of [a] transfusion,” says Aryeh Shander, the study’s lead author and the executive medical director at the Institute for Patient Blood Management and Bloodless Medicine and Surgery in Englewood, New Jersey, “all we’re offering patients is risk.”-https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/06/blood-management-bloodless-medicine-transfusions/395054/
You must have missed the part where I said I was NOT talking about avoidable transfusions. I'm strictly talking about the ones where they tell you get the blood if you want to stay alive (or if you want your child to stay alive). There are at least 3 members reading this forum right now that would be dead if they had not gotten transfusions. How do you think your post makes them feel?
Non JW professionals who are engaged in health care offer a more objective opinion:
“As a group of patients,” Nunes says, “Jehovah’s Witnesses are very well informed ... The way they have been able to organize and educate their community, and then to work with the medical community to make sure they know how to care for them, is really very impressive.”
“It really is a model for how a patient population with unique needs can really get serious about helping medical professionals meet them,” he adds. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...usions/395054/
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
Well, you had to bring it up. If you hadn't, I would have held my tongue. However, there are approximately 900 Jehovah's Witnesses that die every year because they needed a blood transfusion and refused it. Contrast that with about 60 people who die each year due to adverse reactions to transfusions. We're not talking about avoiding unnecessary procedures here. We're talking about simple life and death choices. Most people choose to live, while some of us take a twisted interpretation of aBible verse and choose to allow hundreds of people to die every year. Once again, were not talking about avoidable procedures. We're talking about people choosing to allow their loved ones to die.
This is indefensible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TroutDude
Why do you embrace superstitious ignorance when it comes to medical science?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew 4:4
What does Genesis 9:4; Leviticus 7:27; Leviticus 17:11-14; Acts 15:20; Acts 15:29 and Acts 21:25 have to do with what is secular________________ www.jw.org
There are non-blood management sections in area hospitals.
Technology has made cell-saver management of blood possible for use in surgery.
In a slight angry tone, one doctor said to me, " You people, keep surgeons from being sloppy ! "
Since articles in the lay press and medical journals both have concluded that there are advantages, for example, in avoiding blood what is the purpose then in labeling JWs approach to medicine as "superstitious ignorance?"
Researches themselves examine the use of blood transfusions including trauma cases and indicate the majority of use is "inappropriate" and can't determine if it's appropriate in nearly 1 in 3. You can read about that in the referenced article. So, it's more complicated to determine that a person died because they refused blood particularly in cases involving trauma. It really depends on the nature of the trauma, the underlying health of the individual, the availability of good medical care. These and other confounding factors. People die despite the use of blood.
You bring up an excellent point though Matthew 4:4. Ultimately, we have the secular and then we have what the Bible teaches. Some people don't view the Bible in the same way and that is their choice. Others like myself see things differently and we want to be true to our conscience.
You must have missed the part where I said I was NOT talking about avoidable transfusions. I'm strictly talking about the ones where they tell you get the blood if you want to stay alive (or if you want your child to stay alive). There are at least 3 members reading this forum right now that would be dead if they had not gotten transfusions. How do you think your post makes them feel?
It's not my place to tell others who believe differently what to do. Each of us has a conscience. This thread is about knowing our beliefs. It's not about imposing our beliefs on others. But, if posters are going to come out and mischaracterize our beliefs what then?
Hi, the law given to us through Moses forbid blood taken into the body sir At Acts 15:29 the first-century governing body said simply to abstain from blood. We all make the choice to be obedient or not. I choose to obey.
To us this life is not the real life, that is to come to those who are obedient to God's laws.
I truly believe your figures are off, but I really do not know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
