Bloodless Medicine and Surgery: The Case AGAINST Blood Transfusions

Paul H

Well-known member
ARTICLE SOURCE: HERE

The-case-against-blood-transfusions.jpg
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News


I used to think that religious groups, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, were the only ones against blood transfusions.

But did you know that blood transfusions are a fairly recent medical practice, mainly becoming popular with the start of allopathic medicine and the pharmaceutical industry in the 1800s here in the U.S.? How did the human race survive for thousands of years before that without blood transfusions?

I was actually surprised to learn that there are mainstream medical facilities in the U.S. that practice “Patient Blood Management” and discourage the use of blood transfusions, due to the risk of contaminated blood, long before the current COVID vaccine blood contamination controversy.

There are actually hospitals and doctors in the U.S. who perform surgeries today, even open heart surgeries, without using blood transfusions.
Englewood-Hospital-Institute-for-Patient-Blood-Management-and-Bloodless-Medicine-and-Surgery.jpg
One of those hospitals is Englewood Hospital and Medical Center in Englewood, New Jersey, which claims to be the first hospital in the U.S. to offer bloodless surgeries and medicine.

They claim that the scientific data supports the practice of bloodless medicine and surgery with much better patient outcomes than patients who receive blood transfusions.

Watch this short 5-minute video to learn more:

Here is a longer, 53-minute documentary, about how Englewood progressed from offering bloodless medicine and surgery only for specific groups of people requesting it, in this case the Jehovah’s Witnesses, to making it the standard care of practice for ALL patients, because science and ethics demanded it. They have now trained many doctors from around the world, and other hospitals and medical centers in the U.S. now also offer bloodless medicine and surgery.

 

Ms_ladyblue

Well-known member
ARTICLE SOURCE: HERE

View attachment 2457
by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News


I used to think that religious groups, like the Jehovah’s Witnesses, were the only ones against blood transfusions.

But did you know that blood transfusions are a fairly recent medical practice, mainly becoming popular with the start of allopathic medicine and the pharmaceutical industry in the 1800s here in the U.S.? How did the human race survive for thousands of years before that without blood transfusions?

I was actually surprised to learn that there are mainstream medical facilities in the U.S. that practice “Patient Blood Management” and discourage the use of blood transfusions, due to the risk of contaminated blood, long before the current COVID vaccine blood contamination controversy.

There are actually hospitals and doctors in the U.S. who perform surgeries today, even open heart surgeries, without using blood transfusions.
View attachment 2458
One of those hospitals is Englewood Hospital and Medical Center in Englewood, New Jersey, which claims to be the first hospital in the U.S. to offer bloodless surgeries and medicine.

They claim that the scientific data supports the practice of bloodless medicine and surgery with much better patient outcomes than patients who receive blood transfusions.

Watch this short 5-minute video to learn more:

Here is a longer, 53-minute documentary, about how Englewood progressed from offering bloodless medicine and surgery only for specific groups of people requesting it, in this case the Jehovah’s Witnesses, to making it the standard care of practice for ALL patients, because science and ethics demanded it. They have now trained many doctors from around the world, and other hospitals and medical centers in the U.S. now also offer bloodless medicine and surgery.

Do you remember WT put out a few videos on this topic around 2000?

Here’s an excerpt highlight from the 2002 Yearbook:

Bloodless Medicine and Surgery—ThreeVideos

A series of three videos has been produced by Audio/Video Services, together with brothers from Germany and other countries, that presents the reasonableness and effectiveness of bloodless medicine and surgery. In all three videos, well-known surgeons contrast the effectiveness of transfusion-alternative strategies with procedures that use blood. The first video in the series is entitled Transfusion-Alternative Strategies—Simple, Safe, Effective. It was designed particularly for doctors and medical students. Computer animation is used to illustrate the function of blood components.

That first video was completed in time to qualify for entry in the 34th annual U.S. International Film and Video Festival. In all, there were 1,500 entries from 33 countries. The Transfusion Alternatives video was evaluated in three categories. In two of the categories—Research Documentation and Professional-Educational—the video was awarded second place and received the Silver Screen Award. In the third category, Current Issues, the video won first place and received the Gold Camera Award. The awards show that experts within the film industry recognize the quality, accuracy, and professionalism of the video, thus contributing to the credibility of its message.

The second video is entitled Transfusion-Alternative Health Care—Meeting Patient Needs and Rights. It was designed especially for medical journalists, health officials, social workers, and the judiciary. As the title suggests, this program considers how to care for patients’ medical needs while also recognizing their legal rights. Additionally, bloodless surgical techniques are shown to be cost-effective.

The third video in the series is entitled No Blood—Medicine Meets the Challenge.Designed primarily for the general public, this video has already aired on television networks in the United States. Doubtless, the positive comments from non-Witness professionals interviewed in the video will do much to educate people about the value of bloodless surgery and to offset prejudicial thinking of those who are uninformed.






 
A

AnnaNana

Guest
"“This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in your behalf."

"Poured out."

Did Jesus withhold "a fraction"? To use for something else?

"Well, Jehovah, I'd like to be a whole offering, but I think I'll reserve a fraction to use for something else."

No way! Jesus was whole-souled in every way to Jehovah.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life." We follow him.

Here is what the first century governing body said:

"...write them to abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from what is strangled, and from blood..."

"For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to you except these necessary things: to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you carefully keep yourselves from these things, you will prosper. Good health to you!”

"As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent them our decision in writing that they should keep away from what is sacrificed to idols as well as from blood, from what is strangled, and from sexual immorality.”

It is proper and scriptural to have organization and elders and a governing body. We must respect the authority of those taking the lead, because they are allowed their authority by God. However, we must obey God as ruler rather than men when those taking the lead apostatize from what is recorded in God's Word.

"Conscience matter" is a phrase that comes from the same book as "alternative lifestyle." (Neither phrase is in the Bible.)

Jezebel lived an alternative lifestyle. Immorality was acceptable to her. She also viewed killing prophets as a conscience matter. It didn't bother her conscience.

Jeroboam viewed idolatry as an alternative lifestyle. It didn't bother his conscience to worship idols and call it worship of Jehovah.

Both Jezebel and Jeroboam were those taking the lead in the nation at their time, and they encouraged others to follow their lead.

Jehovah made known how He felt about both of them.

In ancient Israel, at times the people said: "For success in war, we go to Jehovah. But for rain, we go to Baal."

Today the people say: "For success at Armageddon, we go to Jehovah. But for medical issues, we go to the prevalent philosophies of the world."

What did Elijah say? ""How long will you be limping between two different opinions? If Jehovah is the true God, follow him; but if Baʹal is, follow him!” But the people did not say a word in answer to him."

"If any man of the house of Israel or any foreigner who is residing in your midst eats any sort of blood, I will certainly set my face against the one who is eating the blood, and I will cut him off from among his people. For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have given it on the altar for you to make atonement for yourselves, because it is the blood that makes atonement by means of the life in it. That is why I have said to the Israelites: “None of you should eat blood, and no foreigner who is residing in your midst should eat blood.”

Was eating a fraction of blood a conscience matter for the ancient Israelites? If they poured out MOST of the blood but held back A FRACTION of the blood and ate it, was that just a conscience matter in Jehovah's eyes?

“‘If one of the Israelites or some foreigner who is residing in your midst is hunting and catches a wild animal or a bird that may be eaten, he must pour its blood out and cover it with dust. For the life of every sort of flesh is its blood, because the life is in it. Consequently, I said to the Israelites: “You must not eat the blood of any sort of flesh because the life of every sort of flesh is its blood. Anyone eating it will be cut off.” If anyone, whether a native or a foreigner, eats an animal found dead or one torn by a wild animal, he must then wash his garments and bathe in water and be unclean until the evening; then he will be clean. But if he does not wash them and does not bathe himself, he will answer for his error.’”

What you wear or what restaurant you go to or what music you listen to is a conscience matter. What car you buy or what person you hang out with is a conscience matter. Taking blood is not a conscience matter.

Jehovah has not changed in His view of taking in blood. "Keep abstaining from blood" and "write them to abstain from blood" and "As for the believers from among the nations, we have sent them our decision in writing that they should keep away from blood.” There's nothing "conscience matter-y" about that.

I do not recommend eating birthday cake or opening Christmas presents, but those things are a conscience matter. I do not recommend voting or having a political party card, but those things are a conscience matter. The Bible does not say anything about those decisions; the Christian must, before God, decide whether or not those things would violate his conscience, much like eating meat sacrificed to idols in Paul's conversation to the congregations.

Blood is not a conscience matter. Abstaining from all blood is a clear command.

The governing body, in their efforts to appease the medical professionals of the nations, have obtained "professionals" of their own, namely, the HIS/HID/HLC. It's just like when Israel lusted after the gods of the nations and built similar altars in Israel to what the surrounding pagan nations had. It's sick, and it makes Jehovah sick. How does Jehovah feel about the matter?

"Only flesh with its life—its blood—you must not eat."

"If any man of the house of Israel or any foreigner who is residing in your midst eats any sort of blood, I will certainly set my face against the one who is eating the blood, and I will cut him off from among his people."

Is it any surprise the current governing body says it's okay to take blood fractions? They are showing who they are part of:

"And I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of the holy ones and with the blood of the witnesses of Jesus."

The governing body has led the people in false worship. They clean the outside of the cup (PID), but the inside is full of lawlessness (anti-christ doctrines). The governing body is in bed with the medical soothsayers of the world and the legal soothsayers of the world. They are committing spiritual fornication in order to do what is pleasing to the masses. Rather than keep their integrity, they prostitute themselves to fit in with the practices of the nations and then say, "we did nothing wrong," just like the proverb: "This is the way of an adulterous woman: She eats, she wipes her mouth; Then she says, “I have done nothing wrong.”"

The current governing body is like the Jezebel of Revelation chapter 2:

"‘Nevertheless, I do hold this against you, that you tolerate that woman Jezʹe·bel, who calls herself a prophetess, and she teaches and misleads my slaves to commit sexual immorality and to eat things sacrificed to idols. And I gave her time to repent, but she is not willing to repent of her sexual immorality. Look! I am about to throw her into a sickbed, and those committing adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of her deeds. And I will kill her children with deadly plague, so that all the congregations will know that I am the one who searches the innermost thoughts and hearts, and I will give to you individually according to your deeds."

Jesus is coming to remove "her". The organization will be cleaned.

Here is what Jesus says: "However, I say to the rest of you who are in Thy·a·tiʹra, all those who do not follow this teaching, those who did not get to know the so-called “deep things of Satan”: I am not putting on you any other burden. Just the same, hold fast to what you have until I come."

Jehovah is sending Jesus to strike with the sword of his mouth. Jesus will remove lawless ones completely at the manifestation of his presence. The organization will be cleansed so as to give Jehovah worship that is holy.

Taking in blood is not for true Christians.

"For if we practice sin willfully after having received the accurate knowledge of the truth, there is no longer any sacrifice for sins left, but there is a certain fearful expectation of judgment and a burning indignation that is going to consume those in opposition. Anyone who has disregarded the Law of Moses dies without compassion on the testimony of two or three. How much greater punishment do you think a person will deserve who has trampled on the Son of God and who has regarded as of ordinary value the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and who has outraged the spirit of undeserved kindness with contempt? For we know the One who said: “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again: “Jehovah will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God."

If the nations told you to do an act of worship to an idol, you would not do it, correct? Why not? "Because we must obey God rather than man." The men on the governing body are telling you it's a conscience matter to disobey God's clear command to abstain from blood. What is the response of a loyal witness of Jehovah?

"We must obey God as ruler rather than man."

Jehovah's Name Will Be Sanctified. Praise Jah!
 
Top