The most DISTURBING news about the BLOOD DOCTRINE, ever

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

Eoin Joyce;

I fully understand what you are saying, and it is a well reasoned observation .. but I do not agree with your extrapolation in this case, about blood.

It's like the Brother whose wife abandoned him many years ago ... he gets a divorce .... and eventually re-marries ... and is disfellowshipped ... and the ONLY way he can return is to recant his wife, which he CANNOT, and will not do.

The 13 blood fractions is an over-simplification ... but the PRINCIPLE behind it is not.

.

 

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

he gets a divorce

unscripturally based?

[JW Insider]

11 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

14 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I'd say the problem for Brother Smalley was exactly what JTR is showing in the cartoon above 

Thought provoking though the cartoon is, it misleads in that no one takes all of the blood fractions at one time.

I still feel it is pointless and damaging to speculate on Bro Smalley's supposed view.

True. I shouldn't have used the word "exactly." I meant that if I had to guess, knowing about his particular history with the doctrine, that it could well have been the fraction problem that is is ridiculously parodied in JTR's cartoon.

I understand the idea that it could be "pointless and damaging." Yet, if someone we have deemed to be an expert  has evidence that can result in an adjustment to our teaching, then do we lose interest in his expertise because it makes us uncomfortable?

I see why we might argue for that position because of the direction he might have taken. What if our expert on vaccinations for so many years (C J Woodworth) while editing the Golden Age magazine, learned that he had been wrong about vaccinations all those years, but then he learned that no one wanted the new information --until a quarter century later-- because we had become too invested in the earlier anti-vaccination teaching?

A brother once recorded two hour-long interviews with Grace DeCecca about her husband's imprisonment in 1918, and she revealed at least half-a-dozen points that she evidently hadn't told anyone before about her husband Giovanni and others, or at least they never became known very widely. These weren't points that would result in a doctrinal change, of course, but they became of great interest to Brother Wischuck and others who collected that sort of historical information.

Anyway, I can't help but think this could be important, but I admit that I am already disposed to revisiting the doctrine. I also tend to perk up when the subject of correcting errors pops up. But that's also just a bad habit of anyone who has ever been put to work as a researcher or proofreader.

[Evacuated]

1 hour ago, JW Insider said:

Yet, if someone we have deemed to be an expert  has evidence that can result in an adjustment to our teaching, then do we lose interest in his expertise because it makes us uncomfortable?

Certainly not, but it is their expert opinion we want surely? Not someone else's half remembered; half made-up; half distorted memory of what they might think. (There's a lot of "halfs" there! I might have invented a trinity!)  

[JW Insider]

1 hour ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Not someone else's half remembered; half made-up; half distorted memory of what they might think.

True. I put this out there hoping that someone might know for sure or that someone who is holding back might be nudged. That might not be fair to the parties involved. Yet, I still think it was the right thing to do based on the seriousness of the reasoning I heard so far.

I will not mention the speculation again, unless I learn something that is more specific and useful to a serious discussion. I think I'll stick with getting more complete info on the questions I had in the first place.

5 hours ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The 13 blood fractions is an over-simplification ... but the PRINCIPLE behind it is not.

It's not so far off. As I'm sure you already know, the four so-called "major" fractions are forbidden. One of those "major" fractions is PLASMA. And JWs can accept 100% of PLASMA on the same day, during the same procedure.

The 2006 km worksheet says "Unacceptable to Christians: PLASMA" But then it says that clotting factors are "Your personal decision."

*** km 11/06 p. 5 How Do I View Blood Fractions and Medical Procedures Involving My Own Blood? ***
                 There are various
                 proteins that help blood
                 to clot in order to stop            __ I accept
                 bleeding. Some are given         blood-derived
                 to patients who tend to              clotting factors
                 bleed easily. They are                 or
                 also used in medical             __ I refuse
                 glues to seal wounds                blood-derived
                 and to stop bleeding                  clotting factors
                 after surgery. One
                 combination of clotting
                 factors is known as
                 cryoprecipitate.

 

Among the so-called "minor" fractions listed as acceptable on the chart under plasma are some that are up to 4% of plasma (albumin), up to 3% (immunoglobulins) and clotting factors up to about 1% (cryoprecipitate):

But one was purposely left off the list, even though the HLC has been told to let doctors know, and to let JW patients know it can be accepted if an emergency arises. It wasn't listed because it would have shown that one of the "minor" fractions was 99% of plasma (cryosupernatant).

How would it have looked if the chart had included it? It would have shown that we don't take Plasma, but that we can decide to take a "minor" fraction of 99% plasma, and 1% plasma.

But these aren't just any two "minor fractions." In fact, they are WHOLE PLASMA, where it's simply frozen in such a way that it can be easily split into two parts: 1% cryoprecipate and 99% cryosupernatant. If a patient doesn't respond as anticipated to one of the two choices, the doctor can simply utilize the other one which will have somewhat different properties based on the proportion of included factors. But each contains everything the other contains, only in different proportions. All together, they make up exactly the original 100% of the plasma.

Knowing this, you might think that many JWs will refuse, yet I believe that the available reports on this so far show that over 95% of JWs will and have accepted the 99% plasma solution just as easily as they will accept the 1% plasma solution.

You might also think it's dishonest to leave the 99% plasma solution off the list, if we really accept it as a minor fraction. I see that this is what most JWs believe about it whenever the subject has come up on-line. And that's why most JWs who have defended the KM worksheet don't really believe it's permitted. In fact, 3 or 4 well known JW defenders have all argued at length that it can't really be true that the 99% solution is considered acceptable. Note here, for instance: http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/jehovahs-witness/T8NCFHJ9OQE9B9TIR

But then a site by a respected JW who evidently knew the facts actually included reasons for accepting the 99% percent solution, even though this had never been published outside of direct communications between the HLC and physicians:

http://defendingjehovahswitnesses.blogspot.com/2013/10/blood-fractions-do-jehovahs-witnesses.html

• In the case of some larger fractions such as Cryosupernatant or Cryoprecipitate where the process does not necessarily completely destroy blood and may allow reconstitution other facts such as above are considered. Since God has allowed proteins such as found in Cryo to be transferred from the blood stream of mother to the fetus some individual JWs view this as an indication that Cryo is not included in the prohibition of blood.

I suppose that we couldn't list it openly because it could easily "stumble" someone who wondered why Plasma was a "major fraction" and therefore unacceptable, and yet 99% of Plasma was acceptable as a "minor" fraction. But then I got an answer from a respected source who tells me that this is exactly what we have been telling doctors for many years. Doctors have consistently reported for many years now that JW elders have "allowed" it, that it is now being referred to as a minor fraction, and that patients should rightly be informed. Not only that but Witnesses who have been arguing against it for many years are now embarrassed to note that the jw.org site has also now recently included it here: 

https://www.jw.org/en/medical-library/conditions-blood-transfusion-alternatives/hemaautoPlasmaColloidAlbumCryo/

Treatment of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura with the cryosupernatant fraction of plasma: a case report and review of the literature.

Ellis J, Theodossiou C, Schwarzenberger P.

Source‎: Am J Med Sci 1999;318(3):190-3.

Indexed‎: PubMed 10487410

 

[SuziQ1513]

Hi JW Insider,

Interesting point you have brought up regarding the blood issue and Bro Smalley.   I can see why he's "out of sorts" being in a position to defend a public policy which is quite different from a personal one.   Personally, I choose not to accept the fractions, but I'm 69 yo.   I have a copy of a news article from some years back (somewhere in my "stuff") regarding a lawsuit brought against the Society by a daughter of one of our sisters who died from apparent lack of blood.  The daughter (not a JW) maintained her mother didn't know her "options".   I have had a sense that this lawsuit changed the Branch's "education" on the blood issue.  Can you imagine having to defend the 2000 yo doctrine in a modern court with hostile attorneys chipping away with their worldly logic?   The fraction education could be the "agreed upon" correction defined by the courts to keep the Branch financially upright.  I worked for State government so I know how it works to a certain degree.  Fed would come in to examine how their funds are being spent, find violations and part of the reconciliation to avoid large fines  was to demonstrate to the Feds how the problem would be resolved with "education" on a certain policy.   Sometimes we're behind a rock and a hard place.  Satan likes that technique to pressure people to forego our strict belief system, not white to black but more into the grey area.   I look at the people donating blood and that's enough to turn me against the idea, then in a pint of blood you have many many donors.  I wonder about DNA from all those donors and how that plays into the issue.  What if they find even more info about our "human makeup" in the future.   There are lots of issues to be resolved,  Jesus has been given the responsibility to care for the congregation of Jehovah, so I let him know my concerns and then leave it to him to sort it out.   It's so very obvious we are coming to the end of human rule,  let's keep our focus on the Kingly government that will set matters straight.   Remember Aaron who started to doubt because Moses delayed on the mountain.  There was a refining process by Jehovah to let the Israelites and the mixed company get hungry, thirsty and wondering what happened to Moses (i.e. their leadership).   I wish you well and send my sisterly love,  S

[JW Insider]

16 minutes ago, SuziQ1513 said:

There was a refining process by Jehovah to let the Israelites and the mixed company get hungry, thirsty and wondering what happened to Moses (i.e. their leadership).

Thanks. I catch your drift.

Christian love back at you, too.

Thanks.

 

[Evacuated]

2 hours ago, JW Insider said:

99% of Plasma was acceptable as a "minor" fraction.

This is a fascinating topic and one I have never considered. I'm glad you raised it, although it's hardly a new subject. Without exhaustive searching, I can see lively (despite repetitive) discussion going back to 2009 in public forums (inc. B Anderson input on the proportions debate), also medical discussion on treating Jehovah's Witnesses with these components earlier still.

BUT....I dont fully catch your drift. Some ambiguity here. Do you mean that cyrosupernatant is acceptably termed a "minor" fraction? or that as a "minor" fraction it is therefore acceptable as a therapy? or both?

Also, by "minor" do you mean minor in significance to the overal function of blood? or "minor" in respect of it's position in the heirachy of blood components? or "minor" in that it's use is of little consequence to Jehovah's Witnesses in deliberating choice in respect of non-blood medical management?

And a composition question: Plasma appears to be 92-95% water. Cryoprecipitate is 1% (reasonably solid by definition). So, Cryosupernatant would appear to be mostly ...water, despite it's high proportion as a component? So leaving aside the water, what is it's % composition of plasma? about 4-5%? (Just trying to get a perspective).

[JW Insider]

17 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

I'm glad you raised it, although it's hardly a new subject. Without exhaustive searching, I can see lively (despite repetitive) discussion going back to 2009 in public forums (inc. B Anderson input on the proportions debate), also medical discussion on treating Jehovah's Witnesses with these components earlier still.

I have never read anything by Barbara Anderson on the topic, and I saw in a Google Search that AJWRB came up but I have not read anything there yet either. I have no problem reading it, but when I see something like this come up, I prefer to start out on my own, with more neutral information, before muddying the waters with presentations from parties I expect to be more biased.

Also, yes, I see I have come to this discussion a bit late. I have discussed the blood issue at length over on jw-archive a couple years ago, but I have only wanted to discuss it from a Biblical, doctrinal perspective. Until now, I have purposely avoided the "science" and technical side of transfusions and fractions. I have done this because I have my own bias that the Bible is already clear enough, and therefore all this discussion of medical knowledge and fractions is irrelevant:

(Matthew 23:23, 24) 23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because you give the tenth of the mint and the dill and the cumin, but you have disregarded the weightier matters of the Law, namely, justice and mercy and faithfulness. These things it was necessary to do, yet not to disregard the other things. 24 Blind guides, who strain out the gnat but gulp down the camel!

So I am still not the one to discuss the medical side of this issue. For now I'll just try to answer the specific questions about my meaning.

17 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Some ambiguity here. Do you mean that cyrosupernatant is acceptably termed a "minor" fraction? or that as a "minor" fraction it is therefore acceptable as a therapy? or both?

It looks like there is no such thing, technically, as a "major" or "minor" fraction. Blood is either whole, or it's broken down into fractions. Calling any of them major or minor is arbitrary. And of course the term fraction means exactly the same as component, It is arbitrary to say that blood separates into 4 "major" components or "major" fractions: plasma, platelets, red cells and white cells. So I only intended to use the term "minor" fraction as a way of following the arbitrary terminology of the WT publications which then allows anything defined as "minor" to be "your personal decision."

So let me think if that answers your question. Reviewing, cryosupernatant is a fraction of blood. It is derived as a fraction of whole plasma. It is treated as a "minor" fraction in Watch Tower usage in the sense that anything presented as a "minor fraction" can be left up to the choice of the individual. Calling any fraction a "minor fraction" is a kind of "code" by which we can justify allowing individual choice from the "Watch Tower" perspective. This is undoubtedly why the following source is worded in this same way when discussing Jehovah's Witnesses:

Hill, Steven, MD, Care of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Patient Refusing Transfusion, Medically Challenging Patients Undergoing Cardiothoracic Surgery edited by Neal H. Cohan, MD, Wolters Kluwer │ Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009, pp. 327-347.

 

17 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

Also, by "minor" do you mean minor in significance to the overal function of blood? or "minor" in respect of it's position in the heirachy of blood components? or "minor" in that it's use is of little consequence to Jehovah's Witnesses in deliberating choice in respect of non-blood medical management?

Again, restating, I am only utilizing the term with the Watch Tower's usage as a reference point. Through both words and charts, the Watch Tower uses the term to convey the idea of "minor" in respect to its position in the hierarchy of blood components, highlighting also a "minor" or low percentage of blood over-all. After arbitrarily dividing blood into four fractions called major, then any further fractioning after (or "below") those first four arbitrary divisions will be called minor. The implication is that the term minor is suitable because these "minor" fractions are typically labeled in percentages of 1% to 33%. This would explain the need to remove items on the list that would have been labeled 99%. Otherwise, I see no explanation for why the Watch Tower publications would keep any secrecy around a so-called minor fraction which is technically 99% of a whole "major" fraction (or component). 

17 hours ago, Eoin Joyce said:

And a composition question: Plasma appears to be 92-95% water. Cryoprecipitate is 1% (reasonably solid by definition). So, Cryosupernatant would appear to be mostly ...water, despite it's high proportion as a component? So leaving aside the water, what is it's % composition of plasma? about 4-5%? (Just trying to get a perspective).

That is approximately how I understand it, too. Cryosupernatant is 99% of the original plasma volume. (And plasma makes up 55% of the original volume of whole blood.) Without the water, plasma can be stored as dry powder and then reconstituted with distilled water for transfusion. Cryosupernatant contains all the original water that was in the original plasma from the time of donation, so it is usually frozen but still used fairly soon after a blood donation. But with or without the water it is still "your personal decision" to accept 100% of the original plasma, when offered in these two separate forms.

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

.

.

.

HAVE YOU PEOPLE COLLECTIVELY LOST YOUR MINDS?

After reviewing the previous posts .. the good .. the bad ... and the ugly .... I have come to this conclusion.

HAVE YOU PEOPLE COLLECTIVELY LOST YOUR MINDS?

What part of "Abstain from blood..." is not absolutely crystal and totally unambiguously clear?

This is the same thing that after a great revolutionary war against England, The people who fought, suffered and died fighting the greatest military in the world at that time to found the United States of America ... and wrote " ... The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed...", and drawing the conclusion that they were talking about future generations of bears, with arms ... or that the reason this was written was for deer hunters.

HAVE YOU PEOPLE COLLECTIVELY LOST YOUR MINDS?

What part of "Abstain from blood..." is not absolutely crystal and totally unambiguously clear?

 

[Evacuated]

4 hours ago, JW Insider said:

It looks like there is no such thing, technically, as a "major" or "minor" fraction. Blood is either whole, or it's broken down into fractions. Calling any of them major or minor is arbitrary.

I'll get back to this later as time allows, but just one thing I have noticed is that it is not the Witnesses who have arbitrated on the ranking of blood components or fractions. It is the general practice in most dicussion on the subject to designate in this regard:

"Blood is a specialized body fluid. It has four main components: plasma, red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets."

The American Society of Hematology (http://www.hematology.org/Patients/Basics/)

[James Thomas Rook Jr.]

.

I would like to apologize for directing my previous rant to individuals ... I try to be an "idea man" ... but I suppose it is a carry-over from when I worked for Dallas Area Rapid Transit years ago, sitting in a room with 25 very highly paid individuals  arguing about what kind of screws to put in bus shelters .. ONE SHELTER costing an average of about $55,000 ... in the early 1990's.

I told them "Why not just park a new Mercedes Benz Car on the corner, let the air out of the tires, and let them wait for the bus in the car?"

I occasionally stop and ask when that happens  "Did I actually say that out loud ?"

It was like that for two years, every day ... and I developed  uncontrollable high blood pressure.

When I left DART and went back to just straight Engineering, my blood pressure returned to normal.

I did learn a lot about the specifics of fractionating.