SUMMARY OF BLOOD ARTICLES
(Investigator 24, 1992 May)
The J W anti-blood doctrine has been thoroughly thrashed out in Investigator before.
Investigator No. 10 gave the
history of the doctrine. No. 12 showed how it was a "spin-off doctrine"
from the previous J W opposition to vaccinations. No. 8 discussed
"fluosol" (artificial blood), No. 12 hyperbaric oxygen therapy, and No.
22 hemophiliacs and factor VIII.
In South Australia five J Ws have needlessly died when a transfusion
should have saved them. Since about 1/700 of all J Ws in the world live
in South Australia, a rough, initial, estimate of needless J W deaths
worldwide would be 5 x 700 = 3,500.
Mr Russo [in another article] mentioned hepatitis, AIDS and cancer transmitted by transfusion.
Since 1985 donated blood is tested for HIV and the risk in Australia is
now about 1 chance in 2 million. There's a far higher risk of Russo
dying from food poisoning or from choking on his food in the course of
a year. Should people therefore stop eating? Cancer via transfusion
seems even more negligible but the risk of hepatitis is higher (though
still negligible in Australia) of about 1 chance in 5,000. If a
transfusion is judged to be medically necessary I would take the 1/5000
risk!
Recent deaths of J Ws in Australia from not accepting blood are:
Aged woman dies after rejecting blood offer
An elderly Helensvale road accident victim has died in
the Gold Coast Hospital after refusing a blood transfusion because of
her religious beliefs...
(Gold Coast Bulletin, April 26, 1989)
Father explains blood faith
Melbourne: A coroner's inquest has been told how the
Jehovah's Witnesses parents of a 12-year-old girl refused blood
transfusions that would have given her a longer life…
(Sydney Morning Herald, March 25, 1992)
As regards the Bible the critical chapter is Acts 15 which lists four "necessary things" to "abstain from" which were:
• "what has been sacrificed to idols",
• "from blood",
• "from what is strangled" and
• "from unchastity".
J W leaders have compared transfusion to "intravenous feeding" when
nutrients are introduced via the veins. The comparison is misleading. A
transfusion is better compared to a tissue transplant, in this instance
of a liquid tissue. A transplant whether of a kidney, cornea, blood,
etc. is not given to a person because he's hungry and neither is it
digested as food in the intestines would be!
Acts 15 has been variously interpreted:
1) "Blood" is a figure of speech and means "circumcision". See Investigator 12, pp. 14-19
2) "Abstain from blood" means
"abstain from murder". Murder, idolatry and immorality are the three
things Jews must avoid at all costs.
3) The four "necessary things"
were necessary to maintain peace between Jews and Christians and
therefore the ruling was a temporary measure. "Unchastity" on this
interpretation meant a non-Jewish marriage ceremony. See Investigator 12, p. 26
4) R. Franz [former Governing
Body member] says that the four "necessary things" are the same four
given in Leviticus 17 & 18 which non Israelites who lived in Israel
had to observe. Christians observe much more than these four
necessities but only these four are listed in Acts because these four
were behaviors which Gentiles condoned but Jews condemned. (In Search
of Christian Freedom 1991 Chapter 9)