Microbes

i find it ironic that people make an issue about JW who die in an operation, but the ones that do well are never mentioned . are they implying that people who have blood never die , i think we will find that people die lots of times because of complications. and it is a known fact that those who dont have blood recover much quicker than the one who have been given blood . if a person is very seriously ill the blood of a nother person is like an alian body, and it is just something else that our bodies have to fight against. in fact my sister who had her bowel removed and did not have blood recovered much much better than the ones on the same ward who had been given blood . and it was the same operation . the fact is people like to hear the bad news about JW , but there are many many good stories out there about JW all over the world who did not have blood and the results were great . in fact the medical world have learned lots of things by operating on the JW and now various things are used as a matter of coarse on other patients who are not witnesses because they know it works out better for people .
 
at the end of the day it is being faithful to God and abstaining from what he says we should ,regardless of if it is good or bad blood. even if the blood was totally free of germs and viruses, that is not the issue the issue is taking on board what the bible tells us . Acts 15;28-29
 
Tao_Equus said:
Interseting that they will use IVF treatment. They pick and choose what technology based on nonsense interpretations of the Bible. Personaly I believe anyone who witholds treatment from a child that subsequently dies is guilty of murder.

TE
Click to expand...
i think this would be a matter of concience , it is not technology that JW refuse ,it is blood because the bible says to abstain from blood. Acts 15;28-29[FONT=arial, helvetica][SIZE=-1]1. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica][SIZE=-1]A Baby Boom Through Assisted Reproduction - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site
Assisted reproductive technology has given hope to many infertile couples who want a child. Does it matter which method or procedure is chosen?
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=arial, helvetica][SIZE=-1]2. [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=arial, helvetica][SIZE=-1]Infertility: The Choices, the Issues - Jehovah's Witnesses Official Web Site
What are the ethical and moral implications of assisted reproductive techniques?[/SIZE][/FONT]
 
above all, mee, i have to say i in my heart completely agree with you. one scripture comes to mind always saying:
"man shall not live on bread alone, but by every Word that proceeds out of the mouth of God."
do we need "bread" to live? yes. does it mean that we should break God's Laws to survive at all costs? no. God's Law is more important than our very lives. but try explaining that to someone. they will think you are insane. Christ Himself says:
"Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall losehis life shall preserve it."
yep, i am officially insane! just like the little hyper midgets that are always running around in my house. oh gosh, their my kids! i would rather be like a child for it is written:
"Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."
i have learned something ever since i got on this forum, mee. people will think we are nuts when we give them the Gospel. but you already knew that. all we can do is "sow in tears, and reap in joy."
you know what? i just noticed this wasn't the christian board! oh well, hope i don't offend anyone.
 
What I can't understand on this whole IVF invitro fertilization is...

they take out a bunch of eggs...

you donate some sperm...

they fertilize the eggs...

they implant a half dozen eggs...

So when it comes to all of the anti-abortion advocates what happens with all the extra fertilized eggs?

It seems many many folks alter their religious beliefs when it comes to this procedure.
 
Mee,

it is a known fact that those who dont have blood recover much quicker than the one who have been given blood .
Click to expand...
Sorry but I disagree. And I challenge you to present independent (not watchtower) evidence from recognised experts in the field to support it.

TE
 
wil said:
What I can't understand on this whole IVF invitro fertilization is...

they take out a bunch of eggs...

you donate some sperm...

they fertilize the eggs...

they implant a half dozen eggs...

So when it comes to all of the anti-abortion advocates what happens with all the extra fertilized eggs?

It seems many many folks alter their religious beliefs when it comes to this procedure.
Click to expand...
this is why we should reason on the scriptures before going into things , put them all in the womb and the 6 could survive which could lead to problems later on , but throwing some away would be destroying life . but waiting till the time when we are perfect again in the new world , and looking foreward to the time when we can concieve with a perfect body , choices choices choices.
 
Tao_Equus said:
Mee,

Sorry but I disagree. And I challenge you to present independent (not watchtower) evidence from recognised experts in the field to support it.

TE
Click to expand...

What's the use.... He won't.... He'll just post something from his beloved information centre.... That tells him what to think and say..... :D
 
Tao_Equus said:
Mee,

Sorry but I disagree. And I challenge you to present independent (not watchtower) evidence from recognised experts in the field to support it.

TE
Click to expand...
The journal Cancer (February 15, 1987) gave the results of a study done in the Netherlands: "In the patients with colon cancer, a significant adverse effect of transfusion on long-term survival was seen. In this group there was a cumulative 5-year overall survival of 48% for the transfused and 74% for the nontransfused patients." Physicians at the University of Southern California followed up on a hundred patients who underwent cancer surgery. "The recurrence rate for all cancers of the larynx was 14% for those who did not receive blood and 65% for those who did. For cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, and nose or sinus, the recurrence rate was 31% without transfusions and 71% with transfusions."—Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, March 1989.​
What do such studies suggest regarding transfusions? In his article "Blood Transfusions and Surgery for Cancer," Dr. John S. Spratt concluded: "The cancer surgeon may need to become a bloodless surgeon."—The American Journal of Surgery, September 1986.
 
mee said:
The journal Cancer (February 15, 1987) gave the results of a study done in the Netherlands: "In the patients with colon cancer, a significant adverse effect of transfusion on long-term survival was seen. In this group there was a cumulative 5-year overall survival of 48% for the transfused and 74% for the nontransfused patients." Physicians at the University of Southern California followed up on a hundred patients who underwent cancer surgery. "The recurrence rate for all cancers of the larynx was 14% for those who did not receive blood and 65% for those who did. For cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx, and nose or sinus, the recurrence rate was 31% without transfusions and 71% with transfusions."—Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, March 1989.​
What do such studies suggest regarding transfusions? In his article "Blood Transfusions and Surgery for Cancer," Dr. John S. Spratt concluded: "The cancer surgeon may need to become a bloodless surgeon."—The American Journal of Surgery, September 1986.
Click to expand...

Well I could not check the sources you quote as they charge a lot of money for the privelige. However I did check out some other studies specificly in regard to organ transplant and transfusion of blood products. It seems that there is indeed a significant (up to 8%) decrease in survival rates that is linked to the number of units of blood recieved. However this can be misleading as those that recieve a lot of blood usually do so due to complications during surgery and this in itself has not been discounted as the cause for the lower survival rate. No two cases are ever identical and there are variables that are very difficult to factor in.
When a surgeon has a problem of bleeding and significant blood loss it is ridiculous to think that witholding transfusion will aid that patiant. The perfectly smooth running surgery often requires no transfusion but when it does then it will greatly increase the survival potential of that patiant. So in one respect you are correct in quoting survival statistics but they are presented in a scewed way to support your contention and do not represent the chances of survival should blood be witheld. It is a dishonest logic that you use to support your claims.

TE
 
Tao_Equus said:
When a surgeon has a problem of bleeding and significant blood loss it is ridiculous to think that witholding transfusion will aid that patiant.

TE
Click to expand...
there are other means to stop bleeding , it is not a case of withholding medical treatment, just one aspect of it , and that is blood . it would be ridiculous to stop treatment as you say.
Are there legitimate and effective ways to manage serious medical problems without using blood? Happily, the answer is yes.
 
mee said:
there are other means to stop bleeding , it is not a case of withholding medical treatment, just one aspect of it , and that is blood . it would be ridiculous to stop treatment as you say.
Are there legitimate and effective ways to manage serious medical problems without using blood? Happily, the answer is yes.
Click to expand...

I stated witholding transfusion, not treatment. And I think it is absolutely clear I am refering to cases where bleeding has caused significant blood loss.
 
Tao_Equus said:
I stated witholding transfusion, not treatment. And I think it is absolutely clear I am refering to cases where bleeding has caused significant blood loss.
Click to expand...
remember it is not transfusions that JW refuse ,it is only the blood ones that they refuse . there are other alternatives to transfuse .
 
At a conference of pathologists, the point was made that hundreds of medical papers "have linked blood transfusions to immunologic responses."—"Case Builds Against Transfusions," Medical World News, December 11, 1989.
 
We have clear evidence that Jehovah God takes a keen interest in the health of mankind. Our immune system provides striking proof of this concern. Many laws that Jehovah gave to ancient Israel revealed his desire to protect them from infectious diseases.
The Mosaic Law contained instructions regarding waste disposal, sanitation, hygiene, and quarantine. Dr. H. O. Philips noted that "the facts of life, diagnosis, treatment, and preventive medicine as given in the Bible are far more advanced and reliable than the theories of Hippocrates."
 
mee said:
We have clear evidence that Jehovah God takes a keen interest in the health of mankind. Our immune system provides striking proof of this concern. Many laws that Jehovah gave to ancient Israel revealed his desire to protect them from infectious diseases.
The Mosaic Law contained instructions regarding waste disposal, sanitation, hygiene, and quarantine. Dr. H. O. Philips noted that "the facts of life, diagnosis, treatment, and preventive medicine as given in the Bible are far more advanced and reliable than the theories of Hippocrates."
Click to expand...

Well can you copy and paste these Mosaic Laws that pertain to waste disposal, sanitation, hygiene, and quarantine.? - so that I might interpret them for myself
 
Tao_Equus said:
Well can you copy and paste these Mosaic Laws that pertain to waste disposal, sanitation, hygiene, and quarantine.? - so that I might interpret them for myself
Click to expand...
why not read the bible for yourself ,
Leviticus 13:1-59; 14:38, 46; Deuteronomy 23:13) This is remarkable considering that much of Egyptian medicine in Moses’ day was a dangerous mixture of quackery and superstition. In developing lands today, millions could be spared from disease and death if the standards of hygiene taught by Moses were practiced.
For instance, laws requiring the burying of human waste, the quarantining of the sick, and the washing of anyone who touched a dead body were many centuries ahead of the times.—Leviticus 13:4-8; Numbers 19:11-13, 17-19; Deuteronomy 23:13, 14.
 
17th Angel said:
Oh a cut and paste from the JW teaching titled "Blood Transfusions - How safe?" Seriously... You must be very trustworthy... I mean, you do not even know that is fact....
Click to expand...
oh yes, i am glad you mentioned that ,here is another good read a very informative brochure , i like the way that it is very factual and lists many many medical people in the brochure . i enjoyed reading about what the medical people have to say . here is a link to that brochure , very informative indeed.How Can Blood Save Your Life?
Presents moral and medical aspects regarding the use of blood, and shows how this bears
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top