Would you accept a blood transfusion ?

Now with the Swine Flu going on, and other diseases that are arising. Or would you prefer Blood Ex-panders which are much safer ?

For your information Blood dectectors, do not work that good. Why? Because the disease virus is dormant most of the time. Hundreds of people have contracted Aids, Hepatitis, and other illnesses because of this. It seems to me that many people prefer to trust in man rather then in God, who gave us the commandment to abstain from blood.

yo he confiado durante mas de 30 a帽os en jehova dios y realmente y si he necesitado una trasfucion de sangre,,mas no me la han administrado,,,,pues han habido opciones,,y cuando eso llego a pasar,,antes de las tres cirugias por las que pase la ultima fue de vida o muerte y ,,y cuando yo estaba inconciente,,mi esposo estaba en una disyuntiva,,pero no acepto la transfusion,,y porque el sabia que yo no queria algo asi,,y con la esperanza puesta en el,, asi,,jehova sabia en cuanto he confiado en el y cuanto lo he amado,,desde que se su nombre,,y milagrosamente me recupere,,el cirujano me dijo,,,madre a que santo le rezaste,,,,,,ademas todos sabemos que por ese medio es facil contagiarse de sida,,hepatitis,,B,,,y C,,que es la ultima la mas atroz,,y que necesidad,,,ademas ya en muchos hospitales tienen,,otras alternativas para evitar la transfucion,,,un beso para ti,,,y un fuerte abrazo,,,

All blood is checked thoroughly before it is allowed to be transfused and donors are well-questioned before they are allowed to give blood, at least in England anyway. You have to fill in an extensive form, including all details about where you've travelled to in the past year. Regardless of that, the blood is tested following donation and is destroyed if it's not 100% safe.

So yes, if it was going to save my life, I would accept a blood transfusion. I don't know anything about blood expanders.

I do my best not to have a blood transfusion, not because there's anything wrong with blood transfusions but as I've given blood for over 25 years I'd like to carry on for a while longer. If however, I do have to have a blood transfusion I won't be worrying about getting Swine Flu, I'll probably be more worried about the reason they were giving me one in the first place.

Blood transfusions are usually safer in terms of living than the alternative of not having them.

Your a JW and you or actually your beliefs have actually caused the death's of many as to there refusal of a transfusion when Plasma or other sources were not available or worked. But you failed to also mention the millions of lives saved with a transfusion,now are you telling me GOD was not happy they received a transfusion and lived.

Depends on how much blood I had lost. If you lose a certain amount blood expanders aren't going to be enough to save you and you really need a normal blood transfusion. I don't find the risk of contracting Swine flu in a blood transfusion a consideration. I'd go with what my physician recommended.

The swine flu isn't as much of a threat as people think. It's not a blood borne pathogen, so that would not be my concern. And, if it were, it would show up in the testing that they do on donated blood, and the donation would be destroyed, so it's not an issue.

The fact is, swine flu isn't as dangerous as many seem to think. It's not deadly to those of us who are in general good health, and the few that have died were either babies/infants, or they had weakened immune systems due to another serious illness. So...if I were faced with this decision: survive to watch my daughter grow up (and possibly have to take some antibiotics for a few days to fight off a flu bug) or die due to loss of blood (blood expanders can only help if you only need a little bit of blood, from what I've read about them)? You better believe having a chance at watching my daughter grow up would be my first choice with no qualms.

i am not a jw but nevertheless i would prefer to die rather than have any new to me parts from another human installed to keep me alive any longer than necessary in this hellish world.

You do know that all blood used in Blood Transfusions are screened and checked to make sure there are no diseases in it right? Hospitals do not want to get sued....

Also, Swine Flu is not a blood disease.


**Actually the last time someone got a disease from a failure of a blood transfusion scan was somewhere in the early 1990's. I suggest you get your facts straight when trying to go up against something that saves countless lives; please do not put down something like blood transfusions because your religion says so. Just shut up and let people have a chance at living.

that's an additional reason to not accept blood transfusion.
I mean if blood ex-panders and other substitutions do the same result (with actually a safer way) why not using them?

and you are correct, blood detectors are not working well! because it cost a huge amount of money to check for all known diseases! so what hospitals do is only check for most propagated diseases.

people people, the virus is not detectebal in the blood, it looks just like a normal flu virus!!

They screen donors for illnesses before they allow them to donate. If you've even had a cold within I think I month, they won't allow you to give blood.

And even so, death from lack of blood, or getting the flu.....mmmmmmm.

I think I go with the flu!

Edit:
"Hundreds of people have contracted Aids, Hepatitis, and other illnesses because of this."

I would like a source please.

And hundreds out of how many? What's the percentage of people that contract a disease after a blood transfusion?

I found that about 4.5 million patients in the U.S. and Canada need blood transfusions annually. 53% being women, 47% being men.

So if your accusation of "hundreds" lets say 500 out of that 4.5 million contract a disease, that's less than 1%.

Making blood transfusions pretty darn safe!

Blood transfusions are very safe. In fact, the blood supply in the USA and Europe has never been safer.

You don't get the flu from blood transfusions. Swine flu is not that dangerous.

If I needed a blood transfusion to save my life I certainly would accept a blood transfusion. To say no would mean commiting suicide. Swine flu is not transmitted through blood transfusions.

I would accept a blood transfusion,but I would want it to be from someone I know.

I don't know what that other thing is so I will look it up

edit: oh I get it,your a J.W.
nuff said.

Swine flu is not a blood borne illness. Are you one of those people who also stopped eating pork products?

Please take a science class.

he's not necessarily a fool,

he's a bit afraid and cautious.
don't know the blood ex-panders thing :)

I regularly give Blood so the answer is yes I would receive a blood transfusion if I needed it.

only if i needed one.


i need to research blood ex-panders...i've never heard of it.

Nahh i'll just get the transfusion.
And where in the bible does God say to abstain from blood? That is not in the ten commandments

I'd trust my doctor's superior expertise in the matter.

You would have to put your faith in the Doctor that was treating you. Strange thing, faith.

They do know how to screen for swine flu, so yes.
And it's airborne aside.

yes definately, and id'e be ever so grateful to the donor.

Yes I would and I've had a blood transfusion before

I wouldn麓t

id assume the american red cross would test for swine flu

yes, they can screen for it.