Jump to content

Indiana

Beware: Fake News about JW changes to doctrinal beliefs (Accepting blood transfusions, etc)

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

Indiana -
Indiana -
18
243

Top Posters


Recommended Posts

After decades of doctrinal embargo placed on blood transfusion for medical purposes for its members, the Governing Body of Jehovah’s Witnesses- the leadership group overseeing the religion’s activities wordwide has finally made a U-turn, reversing its stance on the matter.

In a letter to all its Congregations (Kingdom Halls) worldwide on Thursday, the Governing Body tacitly approved blood transfusion for medical purposes for adherents of the religion.
It is on record that a significant number of Jehovah’s Witnesses who had medical condition requiring blood transfusion for treatment died because they or their guardians refused blood transfusion because of religious belief.
Also, the age-old dogma that Jesus Christ (second coming) returned invisibly to earth in 1914 has been discarded, saying that it has no sound scriptural basis.
The Governing Body stated in the letter: “We now believe this to be in error… we must admit that this adventist practice entails human speculation without sound scriptural basis.”
While admitting that the doctrinal changes may prove disconcerting to believers whom have been hurt or lost their loved ones because of earlier stance on blood transfusion, the Governing Body admonished them to embrace the changes with the spirit of love and forgiveness.

    Hello guest!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is HIGHLY unlikely to be true for the following reasons:

1.) The GB never admits a mistake, or apologies for anything, no matter how blatantly absurd, or especially grievous, and

2.) Anything without proper attribution, and that cannot  be independently checked from that stated attribution, can be disregarded summarily.

The probability of this being true approaches ZERO.

e6f6d1ae5e08f36708af6f80ea7baeca2520b37872a5dbdbe0dfc3b2050134c4.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, buenas noticias hermano, noticias falsas. 🤨 Abstenerse de sangre.

Meanwhile...... it isn't even 3 days yet and I am working on an essay when I see this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Indiana said:

Please go ahead and remove it

I was able to change the title. So if people want to discuss this fake news phenomena, the item is still here. BTW, the linked site above gives many indications that they deal in Fake News (along with some real stuff too, to increase interest).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revisionist History.

If you change it ... you cover up the fact that gullibility reigns, and makes the context of remarks and comments confusing.

That is why they do not delete amendments to the US Constitution, such as for "Prohibition", which was later rescinded by ANOTHER amendment.

It is my opinion that revisionist history is dangerous to the mind, soul and personal integrity.

Give BOTH titles, if you must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some fake news is made for fairly obvious humorous purposes, and some is made for satirical purposes. But fake news that doesn't have much context to tell us whether it is for humor or satire can be dangerous. Putting it here is not a bad idea since there should always be people around to judge whether it's fake or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember a Bible Study, named Carl, that was very accident prone. As a Carpenter's Helper he ran his arm through a table saw and cut it off, just below the elbow.  I wrapped the arm in a plastic bag and took it and him to a local hospital, where they did miracles with stem cells, and blood derivatives.  The next day he was back at work with a small scar, and his arm was completely normal.

He was NOT a Witness, so I did not consider the "blood issue" for him. It seemed not to apply at the time.

A few days later, he cut off his foot with a chain saw when it jumped back on him when it hit a nail. I wrapped the foot in plastic, and we went back to that same doctor, and the next day, except for a small scar and stitches, he returned to cutting down trees and brush, with only the slightest of limp.

About a week later, someone else was mowing the lawn, hit a piece of steel, and the mower blade came off, spinning at high speed, and like a boomerang, cut off his head, just above the shoulders. I wrapped the head in a plastic bag, and took  his head and body, with some help,  back to the same doctor.

I expected to see him the next day, but after two days I went to ask the Doctor where Carl was.

The Doctor informed me that there was nothing he could do for Carl, and that he was dead.

I tried to console the doctor, telling him it was not his fault, he did the best he could do, but he was angry with me and said "I didn't kill Carl ... YOU killed Carl!".

I was stunned and asked him how is it that I had killed Carl?

He said " You should have cut some holes in the plastic bag!".

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, JW Insider said:

I was able to change the title. So if people want to discuss this fake news phenomena, the item is still here. BTW, the linked site above gives many indications that they deal in Fake News (along with some real stuff too, to increase interest).

Thanks again @JW Insider as long as you keep @James Thomas Rook Jr. cartoon which is so funny😁 it is ok to me 😊, this:

e6f6d1ae5e08f36708af6f80ea7baeca2520b37872a5dbdbe0dfc3b2050134c4.thumb.gif.b3515f3744ae216f65c85e6cb1a7e8a6.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Similar Content

    • By Jack Ryan
      British Movie about Jehovah's Witness refusing blood transfusion for child
    • Guest Indiana
      By Guest Indiana
      Durban - The parents of three children who are Jehovah’s Witnesses have suggested to the Durban High Court that erythropoietin can be used to treat their children instead of blood transfusions.
      Erythropoietin is a drug-based treatment which stimulates the production of red blood cells.
      The parents’ submissions were filed against an interim order granted in the high court which permitted doctors to administer blood transfusions for their children should they be required.
      The application for the orders was brought separately before court because each child was admitted to hospital and their parents refused to allow them to have blood transfusions because it went against their religious beliefs.
      First was a five-year-old boy, admitted to hospital in September last year, followed by two girls, aged three and 10, in October and November respectively.
      The Health Department approached the court for the orders and in December the department was granted an interim order to treat one of the children with a blood transfusion.
      Two units of blood were administered to one of the children.
      Currently the 10-year-old girl is a patient at a Pietermaritzburg hospital while the other two are back home with their respective parents.
      The boy’s parents included in their papers a statement from Dr Marcus Aniekan Inyama Asuquo, a specialist haematologist based at the University of Calabar in Nigeria.
      Asuquo, also a Jehovah’s Witness, said he had extensive experience in treating patients with sickle cell anaemia, which was prevalent in Nigeria.
      “I have perused the child’s medical records... There is no evidence that the quality of care given to the child at home will change for worse to warrant blood transfusion,” he said.
      The other two sets of parents asked the court for a two-month adjournment to get expert witnesses.
      It emerged in these papers that the law firm representing the parents of the five-year-old boy, Farnsworth-Hughes, received private backing from a donor that facilitated access to experts with a view to the matter being dealt with as a test.
      “Farnsworth-Hughes attorneys have agreed to instruct the experts that have been employed on their behalf to provide expert advice and opinion evidence for this matter, too,” said the father of the three-year-old girl.
      On November 22 last year a routine blood test revealed that she had sickle cell anaemia, and the hospital sought her parents’ consent to administer a blood transfusion, if necessary, to prevent an acute crisis, including a stroke.
      “We firmly believe that there are well-documented, medically-accepted alternatives to a blood transfusion that are compatible with our religious beliefs and that constitute appropriate treatment in the circumstances,” said the father.
      He explained that when the state doctor, Swaran Singh, made the application he indicated that while he wished to apply for a court order to authorise the administering of a blood transfusion in an emergency, he had used alternative treatment before and had seen it work.
      “As it happened, the hospital did not, in fact, need to administer a blood transfusion. We wish to express our appreciation to the hospital. At the same time, however, this begs the question of whether there was need for the application of the order,” he said.
      The matter goes back to court in May for the parents to file further expert witness affidavits.
       
    • Guest Nicole SG
      By Guest Nicole SG
      We explore the history of blood types and how they are classified to find out what makes the Rh-null type important to science and dangerous for those who live with it.
      KEVIN DICKINSON
      07 October, 2018
      Fewer than 50 people worldwide have 'golden blood' — or Rh-null. Blood is considered Rh-null if it lacks all of the 61 possible antigens in the Rh system. It's also very dangerous to live with this blood type, as so few people have it. Golden blood sounds like the latest in medical quackery. As in, get a golden blood transfusion to balance your tantric midichlorians and receive a free charcoal ice cream cleanse. Don't let the New-Agey moniker throw you. Golden blood is actually the nickname for Rh-null, the world's rarest blood type.
      As Mosaic reports, the type is so rare that only about 43 people have been reported to have it worldwide, and until 1961, when it was first identified in an Aboriginal Australian woman, doctors assumed embryos with Rh-null blood would simply die in utero.
      But what makes Rh-null so rare, and why is it so dangerous to live with? To answer that, we'll first have to explore why hematologists classify blood types the way they do.
      Read more: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Srecko Sostar
      1) When does blood cease to be blood?
      According to WT's interpretation blood stops, ceases being blood if it is divided into smaller portions, so-called fractions.
      WT believes (according to some medical science research) that there are 4 major parts, components of which the blood consists. This are:
      ... four primary blood components—red cells, white cells, platelets, and plasma. (source: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. ) WT teaches its believers that it is unacceptable (under threat of excommunication) to take blood and any of these 4 major blood components. But a personal decision of a JW member is permissible if accepts some of the fractions that can be obtained from this 4 major components.
       
      2) When does a new human being, person (or animal creature) emerge? By conception or by birth? Can life come only from 2 sex cells (specialized cells) during fertilization?
      Please note also that the Bible does not say that a woman conceives a piece of tissue. Instead, it states: “An able-bodied man has been conceived!” ( Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. ) This too indicates that according to the Bible, a child exists as a person from the time of his conception. Yes, that is when human life begins. (source: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. ) In this case, WT stands for the position that only two cells (only two components as the primary, major components) forms, creates a new person. Man consists of several different types and sizes of tissues. Tissues forms organs. How much tissues and organs man should have that would be called a man? According to WT, man is a man, person if he consists of only two cells. It does not have to be composed of tissues and organs to be called a man. Have to be only 2 cells. Only two coupled cells are needed for the existence of one new person, the new man. Two cells in comparison to 4 major components in blood issue. Human body consists of more than 50,000 billion cells. In 1 liter of human blood there are about 4.5-5 x 1012  red cells. Interesting comparison?! 
      Imagine! 4.5-5 x 1012  red cells are needed to make this part of the blood to be called "major, primary part of the blood". And such  part may not be used to treat a disease or operation for JW member, because it is called "holy, sacred". Blood is holy - red cells are holy - white cells are holy - plasma is holy - platelets are holy. Holy means forbidden in this case.   
      On the other hand, only two connected, coupled cells are needed to be called sacred, holy, person, life.  Interestingly and controversial.
    • By Jesus.defender
      BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS
      Watchtower Teaching WT forbids blood transfusions because of Genesis 9:4 ‘But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat’.
      The WT teaches that a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood, because it resembles intravenous feeding. This doctrine was invented in 1944.
      Bible Teaching and Historical facts:
      1) Thousands of JWs and their children have died because they followed this WT error.
      QUESTION: Would you really allow your baby to die because of this WT instruction?
      2) Most JWs are unaware that their leaders have a history of making medical prohibitions,then later changing their minds to allow them. Examples include:
      (i) Vaccinations were forbidden by the WT from 1931 to 1952. JWs had to refuse vaccinations because the WT taught that ‘vaccination is a direct violation of the everlasting covenant that God made’ (Golden Age, 4 Feb 1931, p 293).
      Awake of 22 Aug 1965 admitted that vaccinations have caused a decrease in diseases(p.20)
      QUESTION: How did the parents of children who died from not being vaccinated, feel when the WT reversed its view in 1952? How many of these children died needlessly?
      (ii) Organ transplants were allowed by the WT up to 1967, but were forbidden in 1967 saying that ‘organ transplants amounted to cannibalism and are not appropriate for Christians’ (WT, 15 Nov 1967, p 702-4, and Awake 8 June 1968, p 21). Hence all organ
      transplants were forbidden for 13 years, during which time many JWs died needlessly.
      Then in 1980, the WT changed its mind to allow them saying that ‘organ transplants are not necessarily cannibalistic’ (WT, 15 March 1980, p 31).
      (iii) Blood plasma and blood particles were forbidden to be used by JW haemophiliacs (Awake, 22 Feb 1975, p 30). Shortly after, the WT changed its mind to permit certain blood particles to be used, but failed to put it into print for 3 years until 15 June 1978, p
      30 (WT). Only those haemophiliacs who phoned WT headquarters from 1975-78 discovered the change. Others were left to suffer and die.
      QUESTION: How long before the WT changes its view on blood transfusions?
      QUESTION: Why does the WT keep changing its mind on medical issues?
      QUESTION: Is it right for an infallible prophet of God organisation (such as the WT claims to be) to keep changing its mind.
      (iv) In 1984, they allowed for a bone-marrow transplant. Bone marrow is the very source of blood. However, they would disfellowship you for receiving a bloodtransfusion.
      3) In Genesis 9:4 the context is God forbidding the eating of animal blood (as pagans did), not the transfusion of human blood. A blood transfusion is not intravenous feeding, because the blood so given does not function as food. When one gives a transfusion, it is not a loss of life, but a transference of life from one person to another. It replenishes and saves a life.
      QUESTION: Since blood is not taken in as food to digest, but as life sustaining fluid, is it not clear that transfusion is different from eating?
      4) Leviticus 3:17 ‘You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.’ (NWT)
      QUESTION: Why do WT leaders forbid blood transfusions but allow the eating of fat? Why not forbid both? The WT is not consistently interpreting the Bible. Leviticus 17:11,12: ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood’. Blood transfusion does not function as food, but simply transfers life from one person to another as an act of mercy.
      Key: Leviticus 3:17 prohibits eating animal blood, not transfusing human blood.
      QUESTION: Where is loss of salvation mentioned in Acts 15:9,11 for receiving a blood transfusion?
      Key: Acts 15:28,29. A blood transfusion uses blood for the same purpose that God intended, (as a life-giving agent in the bloodstream). Drinking blood is not God’s intended purpose for
      blood
      Conclusion: Even though JWs try to support blood transfusions with Scripture, their real reason for believing it is blind obedience to the WT. If the WT organisation lifted its ban on blood transfusions, JWs would freely accept them if needed.
      For the WT to admit they were wrong would cause too great a stir in their ranks. Therefore any changes must be presented as ‘new light’ in order to make it appear that ‘Jehovah’ is making the changes, rather than a few men on the governing body.
       
    • By James Thomas Rook Jr.
      If a Brother or Sister in good standing in the Congregation goes into the hospital, and agrees to a whole blood transfusion, and dies anyway, can they be disfellowshipped post mortem, and what about the funeral arrangements?  ( I have heard of this being done, but never explained....)
      Can they have a funeral at the Kingdom Hall?
      Let's say a Brother or Sister in good standing in the Congregation  goes berserk, and commits some crime, and either dies by misadventure, or gets shot by police ....
      Can they have a funeral at the Kingdom Hall?
      Considering such questions is like a submarine on the surface, at night, in the fog .... firing torpedoes randomly into the darkness, to see what lights up.
      .... sometimes survival depends on having the right answer about "What is out there?".
    • By Jesus.defender
      BLOOD TRANSFUSIONS
      Watchtower Teaching WT forbids blood transfusions because of Genesis 9:4 ‘But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat’.
      The WT teaches that a blood transfusion is the same as eating blood, because it resembles intravenous feeding. This doctrine was invented in 1944.
      Bible Teaching and Historical facts:
      1) Thousands of JWs and their children have died because they followed this WT error.
      QUESTION: Would you really allow your baby to die because of this WT instruction?
      2) Most JWs are unaware that their leaders have a history of making medical prohibitions,then later changing their minds to allow them. Examples include:
      (i) Vaccinations were forbidden by the WT from 1931 to 1952. JWs had to refuse vaccinations because the WT taught that ‘vaccination is a direct violation of the everlasting covenant that God made’ (Golden Age, 4 Feb 1931, p 293).
      Awake of 22 Aug 1965 admitted that vaccinations have caused a decrease in diseases(p.20)
      QUESTION: How did the parents of children who died from not being vaccinated, feel when the WT reversed its view in 1952? How many of these children died needlessly?
      (ii) Organ transplants were allowed by the WT up to 1967, but were forbidden in 1967 saying that ‘organ transplants amounted to cannibalism and are not appropriate for Christians’ (WT, 15 Nov 1967, p 702-4, and Awake 8 June 1968, p 21). Hence all organ
      transplants were forbidden for 13 years, during which time many JWs died needlessly.
      Then in 1980, the WT changed its mind to allow them saying that ‘organ transplants are not necessarily cannibalistic’ (WT, 15 March 1980, p 31).
      (iii) Blood plasma and blood particles were forbidden to be used by JW haemophiliacs (Awake, 22 Feb 1975, p 30). Shortly after, the WT changed its mind to permit certain blood particles to be used, but failed to put it into print for 3 years until 15 June 1978, p
      30 (WT). Only those haemophiliacs who phoned WT headquarters from 1975-78 discovered the change. Others were left to suffer and die.
      QUESTION: How long before the WT changes its view on blood transfusions?
      QUESTION: Why does the WT keep changing its mind on medical issues?
      QUESTION: Is it right for an infallible prophet of God organisation (such as the WT claims to be) to keep changing its mind.
      (iv) In 1984, they allowed for a bone-marrow transplant. Bone marrow is the very source of blood. However, they would disfellowship you for receiving a bloodtransfusion.
      3) In Genesis 9:4 the context is God forbidding the eating of animal blood (as pagans did), not the transfusion of human blood. A blood transfusion is not intravenous feeding, because the blood so given does not function as food. When one gives a transfusion, it is not a loss of life, but a transference of life from one person to another. It replenishes and saves a life.
      QUESTION: Since blood is not taken in as food to digest, but as life sustaining fluid, is it not clear that transfusion is different from eating?
      4) Leviticus 3:17 ‘You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.’ (NWT)
      QUESTION: Why do WT leaders forbid blood transfusions but allow the eating of fat? Why not forbid both? The WT is not consistently interpreting the Bible. Leviticus 17:11,12: ‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood’. Blood transfusion does not function as food, but simply transfers life from one person to another as an act of mercy.
      Key: Leviticus 3:17 prohibits eating animal blood, not transfusing human blood.
      QUESTION: Where is loss of salvation mentioned in Acts 15:9,11 for receiving a blood transfusion?
      Key: Acts 15:28,29. A blood transfusion uses blood for the same purpose that God intended, (as a life-giving agent in the bloodstream). Drinking blood is not God’s intended purpose for
      blood
      Conclusion: Even though JWs try to support blood transfusions with Scripture, their real reason for believing it is blind obedience to the WT. If the WT organisation lifted its ban on blood transfusions, JWs would freely accept them if needed.
      For the WT to admit they were wrong would cause too great a stir in their ranks. Therefore any changes must be presented as ‘new light’ in order to make it appear that ‘Jehovah’ is making the changes, rather than a few men on the governing body.
       
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      IRON RIVER, Mich. (WLUC) - Two years ago Mary Kurtz suffered from gastroesophageal reflux disease making daily activities unbearable.
      "I would wake up with terrible terrible pain in the chest area, it wasnÂ’t a heart attack, I knew that, but it took my breath away," said Kurtz.
      Typically a surgeon could perform an open surgery by making a long incision in the abdomen to prevent acid reflux. However this wasnÂ’t an option for Kurtz.
      "Being a witness, we abstain because in the Bible it tells us in Acts 15:20 to abstain from blood through digesting it or taking it in as a medical use and this is our belief," explained Kurtz.
      After consulting with non-witness and witness friends, Kurtz came across Dr. Fanous who could offer a TIF surgery where her esophagus could be worked on by entering through the mouth.
      "TIF or Transoral incisionless fundoplication where we use the device called the EsophyX HD device to go in, use the patient's tissues to construct the valve between the stomach and the esophagus," said Dr. Medhat Fanous.
      Currently Aspirus is the only program in the UP that provides this new option for surgery. Not only is it safe and durable but done as an outpatient procedure.
      "It was the best thing IÂ’ve ever done," said Kurtz. "After two years, I have no pain I have no acid reflux, I can eat things that I never even thought about touching before."
      And Kurtz isnÂ’t the only one who seen the benefits of the TIF procedure, in just under two years, Aspirus has helped more than 150 patients go through similar surgeries.
      "ItÂ’s a tight community and the word of mouth is very strong but the fact weÂ’ve seen 150 procedures, itÂ’s a testimony to the quality of our work," said Dr. Fanous.
      Recently Dr. Fanous published a study regarding the safety of the TIF with Jehovah witnesses and Kurtz couldnÂ’t be more thankful for his work and consideration of her beliefs.
      "I am happy that Dr. Fanous went along with this, because it is a big thing for us."
       

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      After being transported to Batroun Hospital suffering traumatic injuries, doctors were baffled after the girl's parents rejected a blood transfusion critical to save their daughter's life.
      BEIRUT: Farah D., the young girl who was involved in a recent car crash, received a blood transfusion Thursday after the Prosecutor of North Lebanon authorized Batroun Hospital Director Ayoub Moukhtar to perform the procedure despite her family's refusal because it goes against their beliefs as Jehovah Witnesses. 
      After being transported to Batroun Hospital on Wednesday suffering traumatic injuries, doctors were baffled after the girl's parents rejected a blood transfusion critical to save their daughter's life. 
      This bizarre development forced Moukhtar to contact his district's Prosecutor, who directed him to go ahead with the grueling operation which involved a set of blood transfusions. 
      The prosecutor argued the hospital was legally bound to save the girl's life.
      "I contacted the prosecutor, who stressed the need to save the girl's life regardless of the parent's religious beliefs, and the hospital duty is to keep the girl alive," he said.
      According to Moukhtar, Farah is now recovering from her injuries.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Bible Speaks
      Jesus' kindness to woman's flow of blood of 30 years
       A brothers personal notes taken from a talk given by brother William Malenfant of Brooklyn Bethel.
      Please read the account found in Mark 5:25-34 (New World Translation) before continuing.
       (Mark 5:25-34) 25 Now there was a woman subject to a flow of blood twelve years, 26 and she had been put to many pains by many physicians and had spent all her resources and had not been benefited but, rather, had got worse. 27 When she heard the things about Jesus, she came behind in the crowd and touched his outer garment; 28 for she kept saying: “If I touch just his outer garments I shall get well.” 29 And immediately her fountain of blood dried up, and she sensed in her body that she had been healed of the grievous sickness. 30 Immediately, also, Jesus recognized in himself that power had gone out of him, and he turned about in the crowd and began to say: “Who touched my outer garments?” 31 But his disciples began to say to him: “You see the crowd pressing in upon you, and do you say, ‘Who touched me?’” 32 However, he was looking around to see her that had done this. 33 But the woman, frightened and trembling, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell down before him and told him the whole truth. 34 He said to her: “Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace, and be in good health from your grievous sickness.”
       Isn’t that a beautiful account? 
      Who healed her? 
      Jesus didnÂ’t know who touched him, remember?
      - 30 Immediately, also, Jesus recognized in himself that power had gone out of him, and he turned about in the crowd and began to say: “Who touched my outer garments?” 31 But his disciples began to say to him: “You see the crowd pressing in upon you, and do you say, ‘Who touched me?’” 
      Who could see that woman working her way up the crowd to get to Jesus? 
      Who could appreciate all the pain she’d been through, the suffering she had been through? 
      Who could appreciate the quality of her faith? 
      Who allowed power to flow out of Jesus into that woman, so she’d be healed? 
      It had to have been Jehovah. 
      You see, Jesus knew something had happened that the apostles didn’t know. That’s why they said: “Well, why do you say: “Who touched me?” 
      ‘THIS is new, something happened’, thought Jesus. He felt ‘power’ go out of him. He knew something remarkable had happened 
      What does that tell you about Jehovah? 
      Isn’t that remarkable? 
      Now another question… 
      What’s her name? 
      Me neither… 
      The Bible doesn’t say. It doesn’t say. “Nobody. She was just nobody.” Was she? 
      Jehovah knew her. He took care of her.
      Do you see the point? 
      So don’t ever get into the feeling that: “Well, I’m nobody. What does God care about me?” 
      He DOES care! 
      And sometimes we’ll say: “Well, I’m so imperfect…” Well of course you are. Who isn’t? We all are. 
      We’re getting life by underserved kindness, brothers and sisters. We’re not getting it because we’re so righteous and so good. We do our best. Yes. But life is coming by God’s underserved kindness. Jehovah sees all of us and the beauty of it is…HE KNOWS! He understands us. He knows that we make mistakes and sometimes we get down on ourselves and beat ourselves, for sure. 
      You know what brother Franz used to say about that? 
      “I remember once at an assembly, the Israelites were all waiting for Jehovah to clear away all the fog and the mist when the Egyptians were after them, you know? And the Israelites were going to cross the Red Sea. Jehovah said to them:
      “Stop praying and get going!”
      And what that means is: 
      Get up! Get going with your life! Serve Jehovah with rejoicing! 
      Don’t ever go through life lamenting and looking at things that have happened and “’Ooh this’, and ‘Oh my, that’”. 
      Jehovah knows… 
      Jesus paid the price that covers our past mistakes; it covers current mistakes and even in the future, as long as we’re genuine in serving God and doing our best…Jehovah forgives us. But we have to put forth the effort and have faith in the arrangement. And then we can serve Him with a good heart. 
      Now, back to that woman… 
      She didn’t have the right to touch Jesus. That’s true, isn’t it? Because she had a flow of blood. And in the Hebrew Scriptures it tells us a woman with a flow of blood was unclean. 
      Now think of it… 
      Here’s this woman, unclean, coming through a crowd, and is going to touch The Holy One of Israel. Jehovah God obviously knew about it, could see it. His own law that He inspired said a woman with a flow of blood was unclean, and yet, what happens? 
      Evidently, He pushes His own law aside, lets her touch Jesus…she becomes clean. He heals her. 
      Doesn’t that tell you something else about Jehovah? 
      He takes everything into account. He looks at the whole picture. He sees our whole life, our whole background. The things we battle with, our imperfections. And He still loves us. And He does what He can to help us. 
      That’s a wonderful thing! That should really move us to really want to serve Jehovah and love doing His will. 
      There’s a scripture in 1 John that says: “Jehovah is greater than our heart.” Well, what that means is that our heart sometimes focuses in just on small individual imperfections and problems we have. But Jehovah sees much more than our little heart. He sees the whole picture. He’s greater than our heart. And we’re grateful for that because, He does, indeed, love every one of us. 
      And so, when you get discouraged and blue…think about that woman. And think about the wonderful hope we have and the beautiful things that are in store for us and our great privilege of serving Jehovah God right to the end. And then we can rejoice and be happy in our service. – Bible Speaks 

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Mrs Mortimer was undergoing a hip operation when she refused the blood transfusion
      A Jehovah's Witness lost her life after she refused a blood transfusion during a major hip operation due to her religious beliefs.
      Barbara Mortimer, 69, went against doctors' advice and sadly died on May 24, 2017, shortly after a hip replacement.
      A final hearing was held at The Old Courthouse in Hatfield yesterday (Wednesday, October 18) before Coroner Geoffrey Sullivan.
      The court heard that in January of this year, Mrs Mortimer visited her GP Mark Penwell with "severe left hip pain."
      Doctor Penwell said: "She was struggling to walk with it, even using a stick.
      "The only useful intervention was a hip replacement."
      He admitted however, that he had concerns about Mrs Mortimer, of Portland Road, Bishop's Stortford, who would decline any blood products due to her being a Jehovah's Witness.
      Mrs Mortimer also suffered what was thought to be a heart attack in 2006 and acute coronary syndrome after having chest pain in 2010.
      For her hip, Mrs Mortimer was referred to consultant orthopaedic surgeon Rajeev Sharma.
      He said: "She came to see me in the clinic on Thursday, March 23.
      "She came in with a diagnosis of hip arthritis on one of the sides.
      "She had an X-ray that showed the joints were worn out."
      Risks associated with the procedure including displacing the hip, heart attack and most commonly infection, were discussed with Mrs Mortimer.
      Mrs Mortimer chose to ungergo surgery, but was taking aspirin at the time which thins the blood. There was also a risk that she would need a blood transfusion during the operation.
      Steps included administering tranexamic acid, swabs soaked in adrenalin and a spinal aesthetic as opposed to general, as these all help to prevent and restrict blood loss.
      Mr Sharma said: "We needed to be sure our surgery is in such a manner to prevent bleeding.
      "It was safe to proceed providing we take all the necessary precautions."
      The procedure went ahead with Mrs Mortimer's haemoglobin levels being within an acceptable range.
      But during the operation after the joint was dislocated, the living part of the bone began to bleed.
      The bleed then became "exponentially massive," according to Mr Sharma following the removal of hard cartilage.
      The adrenalin swabs, an alternative method to stopping the bleed due to Mrs Mortimer's belief's, were inserted to constrict the blood vessels as well as a plastic membrane.
      Mr Sharma said: "We continued with the procedure, it was the best way to stop the bleeding.
      "I could not think why such a lot of bleeding would take place.
      "Was it the aspirin? Would it have had a significant effect on her or was there an anomaly in the pelvic bone?"
      Following the surgery, Mr Sharma spoke with Mrs Mortimer's family.
      "The recommended blood products were declined," he said.
      "We were struggling to keep her alive if we can't give her any blood. Persistent refusal was risking her life."
      Mrs Mortimer faced the decision of accepting blood products or hope that the fluids given to her post-operation would stimulate cell production after such a huge blood loss.
      She died during the early hours of the morning at Rivers Hospital in Sawbridgeworth.
      Mr Sharma was challenged in court by Counsel Kate Smith, who asked whether further enquiries should have been made prior to the hip replacement due to her age, religious beliefs, medical history and the fact she was taking aspirin.
      Ms Smith presented a booklet in court regarding Jehovah's Witnesses and surgery.
      It said "should avoid any medication that could increase blood loss," referring to aspirin which thins the blood and makes the likelihood of needing a blood transfusion more likely.
      Mrs Mortimer signed a refusal form indicating her religious convictions that "no blood transfusions are to be administered in any circumstances".
      Mr Sharma said in "hindsight" there are things that would have been done differently but at that stage all the safety precautions had been made.
      The operation was also not considered to be life-threatening.
      He was also challenged whether Mrs Mortimer needed to be on aspirin. The decision to take this course was made working on the basis that she had suffered a heart attack – later found to be untrue.
      Coroner Geoffrey Sullivan, said: "I cannot see a short form conclusion.
      "The adequate way to my mind is a narrative verdict to encompass blood loss [from the] surgical procedure and declining of blood products.
      "She was admitted to Rivers Hospital, she had advanced decision not to accept blood products, and asked to consider accepting blood products, but declined to do so."

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By JW Insider
      I can't describe my feelings very well about something I just learned. I seriously don't know how to handle this issue.
      A couple days ago, I made a post in the area of this forum about the blood doctrine. While writing that post, it reminded me that I have been holding on to a couple of questions about the ins and outs of the doctrine, more specifically about why we now accept just about 100% of the products that are made from blood. It's true that we don't accept "whole blood" transfusions, but "whole blood" transfusions are so rarely offered any more that even the word "transfusion" has come to refer to to several blood therapies that JWs regularly accept.
      Anyway, it occurred to me that I should have no problem getting a couple of these specific questions answered because I know some of the people who were involved very deeply in the blood issue. About three years ago, at the end of 2013, I talked to Brother Rusk in NYC immediately after the Annual Meeting. I hadn't seen him for many years. He was also good friends with my wife and he gave our wedding talk back in the very early 1980's. When I met with Fred Rusk in his office at Brooklyn Bethel in 1979 and 1980 to talk about the wedding, my fiancee, and leaving Bethel, among other things, he very often took phone calls about the blood issue. He wouldn't send me out of his office, but would usually just say, can you wait a second, and then he would go on for up to an hour (during my work time) talking to doctors, hospital personnel, elders, circuit overseers, patients, or sometimes a brother down in the Service Department who was trying to word a letter correctly about our policy. Our policy was still fairly straightforward back then. Fractions were not a big "thing" yet, but there were still questions about what did and did not contain blood, or whether certain kinds of blood storage machines were acceptable or not (containing the patient's own blood). There were also issues regarding blood decisions that I had never thought of before, related to child custody, headship over family decisions, etc.
      Brother Rusk died fairly recently, but he wasn't the one involved so much with the new "fractions" policy anyway. The person who began taking over for Brother Rusk as the Society's subject-matter-expert on blood was Gene Smalley, also from the Writing Department.
      These two brothers have very different reputations. Brother Rusk was a very well-loved, peaceful man, who was nearly always soft-spoken, kind, patient and helpful. Even when taking care of a serious issue, you never saw anger. He was a cornucopia of the fruits of the spirit. Gene Smalley was almost the opposite in every way. Spiteful, hateful, bad-tempered, yelling, angry, backbiting, divisive, contentious, etc., etc. (He wasn't that way all the time of course, but often enough to gain a reputation, and more than once threatened with losing his job in Writing.) But his sweet wife Anita just died very recently (from cancer) and I thought this might be a good reason to contact him and, perhaps, if the conversation could be comfortably turned, it could be a chance to get a couple questions answered about fractions. He would know the precise answer. 
      Well, I haven't called him yet. Instead, yesterday, I started asking around from friends who may have seen how he is doing recently. This includes one person who worked with him until fairly recently in Writing, and one person who was a close acquaintance of both Gene and Anita.
      Here is the most disturbing thing I learned. I was told that I shouldn't ask Gene Smalley about the blood doctrine. Although still on the Writing Committee, evidently he has not believed in the Blood Doctrine since about 1992, according to one of the persons I just spoke with. Yet, he has still promoted it and given interviews about it.
      I have always thought of Brother Smalley as the "father of the fractions doctrine." So he would be the perfect person to ask. But the persons I asked are both well known at Bethel, and one of them has even been mentioned in the publications as early as the 1970's. My obvious question was, "Well, if he doesn't believe in it, then why does he still defend it?" Both of the persons I asked gave me the same answer, even though I asked them separately. (Although one could have been repeating the answer they heard from the other.) The answer, paraphrased:
      Even though he doesn't believe in it, he still defended it because of all the persons who have died.
       
    • By Bible Speaks
      How Can Blood Save Your Life?
      APPEARED IN
      How Can Blood Save Your Life?
      Each day people face ethical decisions about health: organ transplants, abortion, the "right to die." Hopefully, you will never face those problems.
      Yet, there is one issue that demands your attention: How can blood be used to save life?
      With good reason, many now ask, 'How safe are blood transfusions?' But this is more than a medical issue. It has made news involving Jehovah's Witnesses. Have you wondered why these ethical people, who believe in good medicine, refuse to accept blood?
      As you will see, the medical and moral aspects of using blood bear directly on how you can save your most valued possession: LIFE.
      TABLE OF CONTENTS
      •    How Can Blood Save Your Life?
      •    Blood—Vital For Life
      •    Blood Transfusions—How Safe?
      •    Quality Alternatives to Transfusion
      •    You Have the Right to Choose
      •    The Blood That Really Saves Lives
      •    JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES THE SURGICAL/ETHICAL CHALLENGE 
      •    BLOOD: WHOSE CHOICE AND WHOSE 
      CONSCIENCE?

      Download the Free Brochure at:http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/blood/how-can-blood-save-your-life/

    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      A two year-old boy with failing health can receive blood treatment despite the reluctance of his parents,  the High Court has ruled.
      In An NHS Foundation Trust v T, the youngster, referred to as ‘Child T’, had an abnormally low blood platelet (cell) count which doctors believed was related to problems with his bone marrow. As a result he had fallen ill and regularly required hospital treatment.
      A haematologist (doctor specialising in blood disorders) concluded that T would require medical treatment for the foreseeable future “in order to prevent a very serious deterioration in his health”.
      But the likely use of “blood products” in this treatment had caused a dilemma for T’s parents because they were practicing Jehovah’s Witnesses, a high profile Christian sect based in the United States which objects to blood transfusions and similar procedures on religious grounds.
      High Court Judge Mr Justice Peter Jackson described the parents as:
      “…fully committed to their son and to achieving the best outcome for him.”
      The clash between their religious beliefs and their desire to do their best for their son meant they could neither consent to the treatment nor oppose it, a position they explained in letters to the court. They asked for alternative forms of treatment to be considered.
      The NHS Trust looking after the boy applied for a legal declaration that treatment with blood products would be lawful despite the parents’ reluctance to consent.
      Mr Justice Peter Jackson concluded that:
      “I am in no doubt at all, having read the medical evidence and having considered the views of T’s parents, that it is overwhelmingly in T’s best interests for him to be able to receive this treatment in order for his health to be supported.”
      If the hospital were unable to administer the necessary treatment, there could be “very serious and possibly even fatal consequences as time went on”, he explained.
      In the circumstances it was necessary, the Judge said, for the court to make this decision rather than the parents. The resulting legal order would, however, specify that blood products would only be used “if there is no clinically appropriate alternative.”
      Read the full judgement here.
      Image by Howard Lake via Flickr under a Creative Commons licence
      A two year-old boy with failing health can receive blood treatment despite the reluctance of his parents,  the High Court has ruled.
      In An NHS Foundation Trust v T, the youngster, referred to as ‘Child T’, had an abnormally low blood platelet (cell) count which doctors believed was related to problems with his bone marrow. As a result he had fallen ill and regularly required hospital treatment.
      A haematologist (doctor specialising in blood disorders) concluded that T would require medical treatment for the foreseeable future “in order to prevent a very serious deterioration in his health”.
      But the likely use of “blood products” in this treatment had caused a dilemma for T’s parents because they were practicing Jehovah’s Witnesses, a high profile Christian sect based in the United States which objects to blood transfusions and similar procedures on religious grounds.
      High Court Judge Mr Justice Peter Jackson described the parents as:
      “…fully committed to their son and to achieving the best outcome for him.”
      The clash between their religious beliefs and their desire to do their best for their son meant they could neither consent to the treatment nor oppose it, a position they explained in letters to the court. They asked for alternative forms of treatment to be considered.
      The NHS Trust looking after the boy applied for a legal declaration that treatment with blood products would be lawful despite the parents’ reluctance to consent.
      Mr Justice Peter Jackson concluded that:
      “I am in no doubt at all, having read the medical evidence and having considered the views of T’s parents, that it is overwhelmingly in T’s best interests for him to be able to receive this treatment in order for his health to be supported.”
      If the hospital were unable to administer the necessary treatment, there could be “very serious and possibly even fatal consequences as time went on”, he explained.
      In the circumstances it was necessary, the Judge said, for the court to make this decision rather than the parents. The resulting legal order would, however, specify that blood products would only be used “if there is no clinically appropriate alternative.”
       

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Much has changed as doctors have come to understand the risks of blood transfusions and the ways to avoid them — helped in part by studies of Jehovah's Witnesses. 

      Michael Anderson, a Jehovah’s Witness minister who underwent a bloodless emergency bypass procedure after a heart attack earlier this month, was visited in his hospital room by Syl Jones, a fellow Jehovah’s Witness and an administrative resident/fellow at Hennepin County Medical Center.
      Dr. Daniel DiBardino didn’t have much time for niceties on Sept. 8 as he consulted patient Michael Anderson about the emergency cardiac bypass he needed. Anderson is a Jehovah’s Witness — opposed to donor blood transfusions — and DiBardino needed to know if he could breach that religious conviction during the procedure.
      “What if he’s bleeding to death, which occasionally can happen in cardiac surgery?” he recalled asking Anderson and his wife. “A lot of things can go wrong.”
      “Absolutely not,” was the reply.
      A decade ago, that answer might have touched off a doctor-patient argument or the kind of ethics crisis featured in medical TV shows.
      But as doctors have come to understand the risks of blood transfusions and the ways to avoid them — helped in part by studies of Jehovah’s Witnesses — much has changed.
      Hospitals such as Hennepin County Medical Center (HCMC), where DiBardino practices, have become more accommodating — and more adept at conserving patients’ own blood during surgeries.

      “When I was in medical school, honestly, that was never a thing; people didn’t talk about blood conservation,” DiBardino said. “You just used blood because that’s what you did. And that has changed.”
      Today, for example, surgeons understand that one unit of blood often works as well as two and that excessive blood from donors can result in transfusion-related complications and even deaths. As a result, HCMC has reduced the use of donated red blood cells by 32 percent since 2009. Other Twin Cities hospitals have reduced their use of blood products as well.
      HCMC has taken the approach a step further through its Bloodless Surgery and Medicine Program, including a firewall in its computerized medical records system that prevents doctors from ordering donor blood products once patients have refused them.
      The computer system gives doctors alternatives, such as medications that stimulate more blood production in the body, which they can consider even when preparing for emergency surgeries, said Dr. Jed Gorlin, who directs transfusion medicine at HCMC and is the medical director for Memorial Blood Centers, a regional donor agency.
      “In the heat of battle, you won’t remember all of those,” Gorlin said, “so it’s a checklist to go through all of that stuff.”
      The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ objection to receiving donor blood comes in part from interpretations of the Bible, including a passage in Acts that calls on people to “abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.”
      Practical interpretations vary somewhat, Gorlin said. Some members of the religion accept the experimental use of a substitute made from cow’s blood, while others refuse it. A few object to the use of a machine that recycles a patient’s own blood once it has exited the body. But almost all reject transfusions of red blood cells from donors.
      Anderson, 66, has walked hundreds of miles visiting homes in southwest Minneapolis to teach his religion. He carried a medical directive with him for just such emergencies.
      Then, driving from his home in Robbinsdale to his Kingdom Hall on Sept. 8, the minister knew something was wrong.
      “All the way there, I had pain and it wouldn’t go away, and it wouldn’t go away and it wouldn’t go away,” he recalled.
      Medics determined that he was having a heart attack and gave him aspirin and nitroglycerin pills, which had eased his pain by the time DiBardino sat with him to discuss his surgery: a triple bypass to reroute blood flow around blockages to the heart.
      “There was no question ... transfusion would not be an option,” Anderson said in an interview from his hospital bed last week.
      Hemoglobin levels
      HCMC’s policy is to accommodate such objections for adult patients, when they are conscious and able to communicate their wishes, but not necessarily for parents acting on behalf of pediatric patients.
      A 1944 child labor decision in Massachusetts still governs such cases, stating that “parents are free to become martyrs themselves. But it does not follow that they are free ... to make martyrs of their children.”
      Once viewed harshly by the medical establishment, Jehovah’s Witnesses have taught doctors much about the body’s ability to survive surgeries without transfusions, Gorlin said. He gave a lecture in South Dakota this month titled “Management of blood: What we can learn from Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
      A key measure is the patient’s hemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen from the lungs. Doctors once thought a hemoglobin measure of 10 grams per deciliter was the key threshold at which patients needed a transfusion. Now, they have found that patients are just as likely to survive if their levels drop to seven.
      In one local case, a woman who hemorrhaged after childbirth survived despite her hemoglobin dropping to 2.3.
      “Nobody really knows for any given person how much blood loss they’ll tolerate,” DiBardino said. “You just have to kind of put your faith into it.”
      ‘Every red blood cell matters’
      Still, the odds of surviving the triple bypass that Anderson underwent are substantially lower without transfusions, DiBardino said.
      As a result, surgeons make it a priority to conserve blood, from the initial step — severing a leg vein to serve as a bypass line around a clogged artery — to connecting that bypass line to the heart.
      “It’s on your mind that every red blood cell matters for this guy,” DiBardino said. “You’re operating on the biggest structures filled with the most blood in the human body.”
      At the end of the four-hour operation, Anderson’s hemoglobin level stood at seven. But with rest, iron pills and other medications, it rose to 12.
      One week later, Anderson had fewer IV tubes and was standing and eating solid food. Two weeks later, he was back home.
      He believes his clean living helped him survive the surgery and said he is eager to ease back into walking and his door-to-door ministry.
      “It’s just a matter of pacing myself,” he said, “as I go.”

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Highlights
      •Neurosurgical outcomes in patients who refuse blood products are similar to control patients when blood management protocols are followed
      •No significant differences in mortality or morbidity were identified
      •No significant differences in hospital length of stay or readmission rates were identified
      Abstract
      Background
      Jehovah's Witnesses (JW) are a Christian faith with > 1 million members in the United States who do not accept autologous blood transfusions. The optimal management of these patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures is not well defined. Here, we examined the feasibility and safety of JW undergoing neurosurgery in a blood management program.
      Study Design and Methods
      Sixty-eight JW patients including 23 males and 45 females (mean age 53 +/- 12 years) who underwent a variety of cranial (n=19) and spinal (n=49) neurosurgical procedures over a 5-year period were identified retrospectively and their hospital charts, anesthetic records and operative reports reviewed. A concurrent cohort of sex - age- and procedure-matched non-JW controls also was identified.
      Results
      Among JW patients a cell-saving system was used in 27 cases, with blood re-transfused in 13 cases. Lactated Ringers solution was used extensively intra-operatively; albumin was given to 15 patients. The median decrease in Hgb was 2.1 g/dL. One patient had a postoperative Hgb value < 7 g/dL. One patient returned to the operating room to revise a lumbar pedicle screw, and one patient had postoperative seizures. No cardiopulmonary complications, sepsis, pneumonia, or wound infection were observed. When compared to the matched control group, similar outcome results were observed. Blood loss and operative time also were similar in JW patients and controls.
      Conclusions
      Neurosurgical procedures in Jehovah's Witnesses are feasible, safe, and have similar outcomes to patients willing to accept transfusion when managed within a multidisciplinary blood management program.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Jack Ryan
      Why would a God that values life so much he forbids having an abortion, even if there is a valid reason, rather have you die than submit to a live-saving blood transfusion, even if there is a valid reason?
       
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Donated blood at a bank in Indianapolis. The F.D.A. has recommended that all donated blood in the United States be screened for the Zika virus. CreditMichael Conroy/Associated Press
      The Food and Drug Administration on Friday took steps to safeguard the nation’s blood supply from the Zika virus, calling for all blood banks to screen donations for the infection even in states where the virus is not circulating.
      The recommendations are an acknowledgment that sexual transmission may facilitate the spread of Zika even in areas where mosquitoes carrying the virus are not present. Officials also want to prepare for the possibility that clusters of local infection will continue to pop up in parts of the United States for years to come.
      “There could be multiple outbreaks of Zika happening outside the known current ones in South Florida, but because we are not actively looking they could be happening silently,” said Dr. Peter J. Hotez, the dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, who applauded the F.D.A.’s move.
      Without federal funds, it is generally not possible for local health departments to conduct active surveillance for Zika virus in the blood or urine of patients with fever or rash, he added.
      “In some ways the inaction from Congress has forced the F.D.A. to adopt this position,” Dr. Hotez added. “They have no other choice.”
      The agency urged blood centers to use one of two experimental tests intended to detect active infections, called nucleic acid tests, before releasing donated blood for use in transfusions. As an alternative, banks may decontaminate plasma and platelets with so-called pathogen reduction technology.
      But the recommendations are likely to pose a significant challenge for some blood banks and for the third-party labs that perform much of the blood screening nationwide, some experts said.
      Eleven states must put the new safeguards into place within four weeks. They include Alabama, Arizona, California, Georgia, Louisiana, New York and Texas, which have many residents who travel to Zika-affected countries or are near an area that already has locally acquired mosquito-borne cases.
      Other states have 12 weeks to carry out the recommendations.
      “This is a bombshell, because this is extremely rapid introduction of a new test nationwide that’s almost unprecedented,” said Dr. Jeffrey McCullough, emeritus professor of laboratory medicine and pathology at the University of Minnesota Medical School. “To try to implement this, in four weeks, is really, really difficult.”
      Yet the new safeguards also are necessary, Dr. McCullough said. Under current guidelines, it is too difficult to identify infected donors by “trying to sort out risky donors by history of where they’ve been or what they’ve exposed to.”
      Nationwide, nearly 14 million units of whole blood and red blood cells are collected each year from about seven million donors. Every day, as many as 36,000 units of red blood cells are given to patients, along with 7,000 platelet units and 10,000 units of plasma. Consistent screening of the blood supply is an enormous task.
      There are more than 11,500 confirmed cases of Zika virus in states and territories, according to the C.D.C. Nearly 2,500 of them are people in the continental United States who traveled abroad where Zika-infected mosquitoes are circulating. More than 30 cases were acquired in Florida.
      Puerto Rico has been screening all blood donations since March. TheCenters for Disease Control and Prevention in June found that asurprisingly high percentage of donors had signs of active infection with the Zika virus.
      The F.D.A. provisionally approved two screening tests for Zika in blood donations on an investigational basis in March and June respectively. The first is made by Roche Molecular Systems, and the second by a collaboration between Hologic Inc. and Grifols.
      Neither test is fully F.D.A approved yet, and the facilities using them are enrolled in a continuing study. As part of Roche’s investigation, four centralized testing labs that screen blood for multiple banks in the South have been “collecting and testing blood for weeks now,” said Tony Hardiman, who leads the blood screening operations at Roche.
      For the 11 states that need to be ready in a month, he said, “we are pretty much locked and loaded.”
      “Our focus now is what do we do for the rest of the country to bring them up in 12 weeks,” he added.
      Officials at Blood Systems, which operates blood banks in 24 states, said they will be able to test blood donations in California and some Southern states like Mississippi in a month. The company will then work on getting sites in the Rocky Mountain States operational, said Dr. Ralph R. Vassallo Jr., the chief medical and scientific officer.
      Creative Testing Solutions, a large blood donor testing lab, already is using both experimental Zika screening tests. In Tampa, the company has relied on Roche’s test since the Zika outbreaks began in Miami-Dade County.
      In its Dallas and Phoenix outposts, C.T.S. has installed two so-called Panther machines to be able to screen tubes of blood with the Hologic-Grifols test, in case Zika-infected mosquitoes arrive along the Gulf Coast.
      In light of Friday’s F.D.A. recommendations, officials said they will have to train more employees to use new tests and significantly scale up.
      “We test 35 percent of the blood supply, so in order to be able to do that in all states in 12 weeks, we are going to need additional pieces of equipment,” said Marc Pearce, a spokesman for C.T.S. — 12 more Panthers and one more machine that runs the Roche test.
      Asked on a conference call with reporters about funding the new safeguards, Dr. Peter Marks, the director of the F.D.A.’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said, “I can’t speak to the cost of implementation at this time.”
      Hospitals may wind up paying more for each unit of blood because of additional screening costs, some experts said.
      “When hospitals hear this, they will be concerned that they could see a cost increase of up to $8 more per unit,” Dr. Vassallo said, which is roughly how much it costs to screen each unit for the Zika contamination.
      This month, after the first cases of local transmission in Miami were discovered, some blood banks near Zika hot zones in Florida began screening blood donations. According to Dr. Marks, one donation contaminated with the virus had been found in recent weeks in the state.
      The bag of contaminated blood was discarded. “The system worked correctly,” Dr. Marks said.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      When preparing a patient for safe bloodless spine surgery, a comprehensive evaluation is recommended. This ensures “no surprises” in the operating room.
      In this book, the factors that govern blood loss and blood transfusion are discussed.
      This manuscript presents the comprehensive preparation of a patient for bloodless spine surgery,  techniques for diminishing blood loss in the operating room, postoperative considerations, and includes case reports of patients who have undergone surgery using the blood management methods outlined.
      Digital images and illustrations are incorporated throughout the book to show important concepts, and  a dictionary is provided to thoroughly explain the important factors in bloodless surgery.
      An effort was made to ensure that the information is provided for readers who come from a non-medical background, with adhering to the basics.
      Jehovah’s Witness: It is estimated that there are more than 2 million Jehovah’s Witnesses in the United States. Followers of this religion believe that the Bible prohibits blood or blood product transfusion (Acts 15:28-29). Typically, patients of  this religion do not accept transfusions of whole blood, packed cells, white blood cells, platelets, or plasma or autotransfusion of predeposited blood.  Some witnesses may permit infusion of albumin, clotting factor solutions, or dextran or other plasma expanders and intraoperative autotransfusion, done under closed loop technique.
      Even though a transfusion may be necessary to save a patient’s life, the administration of blood and/or blood products in the face of refusal after informed consent can be legally considered a violation of a patient’s right to control what is done to his or her body. In the awake and otherwise competent adult, courts have ruled that physicians cannot be held liable if they comply with a patient’s directive and withhold life-saving blood administration following specific and detailed informed consent of the consequences of such an omission of treatment. The issue becomes diificult when patients are unconscious (most Jehovah’s witnesses carry cards informing medical personnel of their religious beliefs), or minors
      “Tweet this!” Bloodless Advice & Strategies For Jehovah’s Witnesses
      Jehovah’s witnesses suffer from herniated discs, spinal stenosis and require spine surgery, bloodless spine surgery, spinal decompression surgery, spinal fusion surgery, and revision spine surgery. These bloodless techniques are great for Jehovah’s Witnesses and for non-witnesses too.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • Guest Nicole
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By Ann O'Maly
      Sainsbury's apologises after a customer was told he could not have black pudding in his Full English breakfast because the Jehovah's Witness chef would not prepare it
      Alan MacKay told he could not enjoy black pudding at Nottingham store He was offered a full refund and instead made his own breakfast at home Supermarket giant said its chef had no issue serving bloodied sausage  Chef took object to dish as Jehovah's Witness believe blood is sacrosanct  By 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Published: 09:16, 24 March 2016 | Updated: 15:56, 24 March 2016
       
      Sainsbury's has been forced to apologise after its Jehovah's Witness chef refused to serve a customer black pudding with his Full English breakfast.
      Alan MacKay was stunned when he was told he could not enjoy the staple, made up of animal fat, blood and oatmeal, with his meal at the branch in Arnold, Nottingham.
       
      After receiving his incomplete dish the former police officer was told the black pudding would not be served because it was against the religious beliefs of the chef to do so.
        Missing: This is the Full English Alan MacKay should have received while dining at Sainsbury's in Nottingham
      Jehovah’s Witness regard blood as sacrosanct and if an animal hasn’t been bled to their standards they won’t eat it. 
       
      Mr MacKay, who had popped into the store after dropping his wife off at work at 9am, said:  'I know it sounds trivial, but it's the principal behind it that's ridiculous.
      'If she refuses to cook black pudding because of her religion, what is she doing working in a kitchen that sells it? She shouldn't be employed if she won't cook the menu.
        'I was really looking forward to my black pudding. You get a good breakfast in there.
      'But when I went into the cafe to order my black pudding, like as I have done before, I went away hungry. I was really cheesed off.
      'I came home and had my breakfast at 11.30am. I had crumpets, a poached egg and beans. I didn't buy black pudding because it's quite fatty so I only have it once a week or so.
      'Sainsbury's does a wonderful black pudding, so that's why I was so disappointed. It's one of the few big stores that sells black pudding. Morrison's doesn't.'
         Mistake: A spokeswoman said Mr MacKay was forced to go without due to a mix up between the kitchen team
      Mr MacKay said he was 'cheesed off' when he was not served his full meal at this Sainsbury's cafe because it usually serves up 'wonderful black pudding'
      Mr MacKay was offered a refund by Sainsbury's who explained the error was down to a mix up between the kitchen team on duty.
      A spokeswoman said a member of staff had misunderstood that the chef had asked them to prepare the black pudding, not that black pudding could not be served.
      'We have apologised to the customer for the misunderstanding.' she added. 
      JEHOVAH'S WITNESS BELIEFS: APART FROM MAINSTREAM CHRISTIANITY
      Jehovah's Witnesses are a worldwide brotherhood amounting to over eight million members.
      Jehovah's say that as Jesus Christ did not limit his kingdom to a certain part of the world, they do not allow themselves to be attached to a country, ethnicity or political belief system.
      Members believe that the bible was inspired by God or 'Jehovah' and is completely historically accurate. As a result, if a theory clashes with the bible they believe it to be wrong.
      Jehovah's do believe in Jesus, but they think he died on a stake rather than a cross. This is because of the Greek word used for cross in the bible which translates to 'stake' or 'tree'.
      Members say that when someone dies their existence stops completely and as a result they do not believe in Hell. Their other reasoning for this is that God would not want to punish humans for eternity.
      Members do not accept blood transfusions because they believe God has forbidden this in the bible (In particular making reference Genesis 9:3-4 and Acts 15:19-21).
      Jehovah's say that God believes blood represents life, so out of respect and obedience they do not tamper with it.
      Source:  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.

      Read more:  Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  
       
    • By Jack Ryan
      UPDATE: We're good to go! Our film begins pre-production in March and goes to Camera in October!
      This is a short clip based on the concept of the upcoming film written by Patrick Chilvers in collaboration with Alex Riker, a former Jehovah's Witness.
      Blood [working title] is a feature film about a woman torn between deeply held beliefs and the risk of losing her daughter. Filled with captivating characters and set against a backdrop of the Jehovah's Witness culture, this drama poses interesting questions and looks at the place where religious ideals clash with human rights.
      For more information or to inquire about partnering with us for this project, please contact Alex at ariker4@yahoo.ca
      Producer: Alex Riker
      Writer: Patrick Chilvers
      Director: Jason Armstrong
      DoP: David Mun
      Prod. Company SKG films.
    • Guest Nicole
      By Guest Nicole
      Iron overload is a potentially life-threatening consequence of multiple red-blood-cell transfusions. Here, we review factors affecting excess iron distribution and its damage to specific tissues, as well as mechanisms of oncogenesis by iron. Although consequences of transfusional iron overload are best described in thalassemia major and related inherited anemias, they are increasingly recognized in acquired conditions, such as myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Iron overload in MDS not only impacts on certain tissues, but may affect the clonal evolution of MDS through generation of reactive oxygen species. Iron overload may also influence hematopoietic-stem-cell-transplantation outcomes. Novel MRI methods for assessing body iron have impacted significantly on outcome in inherited anemias by allowing monitoring of iron burden and iron chelation therapy. This approach is increasingly being used in MDS and stem-cell-transplant procedures. Knowledge gained from managing transfusional iron overload in inherited anemias may be translated to general oncology, with potential for improved patient outcomes.
      Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
      Source: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
    • By admin
      A leading infectious disease doctor is warning that not only is the virus sexually transmitted but that it could affect blood donations
      New concerns have emerged over the widespread Zika epidemic as it's feared the virus can be spread through sex and can impact blood donations.
      Scientists probing the rapid onslaught of 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  claim pregnant women can catch it through unprotected sex. At least one UK resident was warned not to have sex without a 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  after contracting the virus. Leading infectious diseases expert Dr Amesh Adalja at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center says it has been well documented and part of that research was focused in the UK.
      And there's fresh concerns that it could end up contaminating emergency 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  . Only one in five people show symptoms of the disease and don't seek medical treatment - meaning Zika is a benign illness for the vast majority of patients.
      Read more: 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content. Dr Amesh A. Adalja is a leading infectious disease researcher at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center But this opens up major concerns for doctors worried that the disease can spread person to person - and infect 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  - without a mosquito bite. Dr Adalja said: "There have been cases of sexual transmission of Zika from male to female and, if the woman is 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  , the virus could theoretically pass to the gestating fetus. There are fears that the virus could end up contaminating emergency blood supplies "At least one case report of a sexual transmission event that spread Zika in the medical literature.
      "It involved a male scientist who was in 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  in 2008 and then traveled home to Colorado. "Both he and his wife developed Zika virus, though she had not traveled to any Zika prevalent areas but had engaged in sexual intercourse.
      "Interestingly, his symptoms included having blood in his semen (hematospermia).
      Getty The Zika virus can be transmitted through unprotected sex "Hematospermia was also reported in a Tahitian patient in 2013 and the Zika virus was subsequently isolated from the semen.
      "The US CDC has not made a recommendation regarding sexual transmission to pregnant women however, as a precaution, 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  has recommended condom use in a male patient returning from Zika-affected areas for 28 days and for 6 months in those with confirmed Zika. "More evidence of sexual transmission including its likelihood and its timeframe are needed."
      James Breeden Six young babies with microcephaly and their parents wait to be seen by medics in Brazil Millions of British people visit the 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  each year and the Government is warning pregnant women not to travel. However, these new revelations are worrying not only for pregnant women but for millions of people who rely on blood donations.
      Speaking exclusively to 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  , Dr Adalja, added that there are very real concerns over blood transfusions. He added: "There is also concern for the virus being transmitted via blood transfusion.
      "The UK is not home to 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  but still has to be prepared to identify and diagnose infected travelers. Getty Dr. Angela Rocha examines Ludmilla Hadassa Dias de Vasconcelos "The risk of contracting Zika via a blood transfusion was established via screening asymptomatic donors in 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  a few years ago and there has been at least one report of the virus being acquired in this manner. "The blood banking industry and regulatory agencies are rapidly developing donor guidance to minimize this risk." 

      Dr Adalja says any real vaccine offering could be at least 10 years off and British doctors have to be prepared for the real possibility that the virus could spread exponentially in the UK.
      He added: "Vaccine development is generally measured on the scale of years.
      Getty A health care employee examines blood infected with the Zika virus in a health centre in Caracas, Venezuela "However, there are a few extant 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  that may be able to reconfigured for Zika allowing the proceed to be accelerated but it will still be some time before vaccine is widely available. "It usually takes about a decade to fully commercialize a novel vaccine.
      "There are many new technologies that have been developed that may be able to accelerate the development and there are emergency use provisions facilitating human use earlier in clinical development than usual.
      "This acceleration will be dependent on how easy it is to devise a vaccine against Zika which will include deciding what part of the virus to target to stimulate protective immunity while not triggering autoimmune reactions, which may be an issue given the cases of 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  that have been linked to Zika. REUTERS/Denis Balibouse World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva has declared an emergency "However, once the vaccine development, safety, efficacy, storage and dosing studies all take time so it is hard to put an exact timeline on to a novel vaccine."
      Five cases of Zika virus have been diagnosed in UK travellers as part of this outbreak.
      There has only been one additional case of Zika virus infection diagnosed in the UK to date.
      Getty David Henrique Ferreira, 5 months, who was born with microcephaly which is believed to be linked to Zika This case was diagnosed in 2014 following travel to the Cook Islands and is not part of the ongoing outbreak in 
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.  and the Caribbean. Almost 1.4 million UK residents travelled to South and Central America and the Caribbean on average each year between 2010 and 2014.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in (it's free) to view the hidden content.
  • Forum Statistics

    60,861
    Total Topics
    110,870
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    16,344
    Total Members
    1,592
    Most Online
    Dafniter
    Newest Member
    Dafniter
    Joined




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.