Comparing blood transfusions to abortion is a false linkage. That's a false Jehovah's Witness linkage.
blood transfusion is needed at times -- do you seriously wish to argue that it is not? What kind of WatchTower issue tries to argue this?
If you knew anything about the subject you would know that over a thousand people in Canada were infected with HIV (AIDS) and another 20,000 with Hepatitis C. About 3000 died.
This from contaminated blood distributed by the Canadian Red Cross in the eighties.
Hepatitis C is a cause of cirrhosis and liver cancer.
Back in 2005 when the Canadian Red Cross finally plead guilty and accepted its responsibility the story was well reported and you can find it with a few keystrokes.
Much of this scandal arose from the practice of buying blood from prisoners like those in Arkansas in the eighties.
From it about 6000 in England were infected with HIV (AIDS) and Hepatitis C and nearly 2000 died.
Also reported widely and easily found.
Judith Reitman wrote an excellent book on the subject that is available at very low cost.
But you knew all this already, right? You've done research before you write, of course.
For those who are concerned about possible side effects or for religious reasons wish to avoid blood transfusions University Hospital of Newark, N.J. set up a “bloodless” surgery center and treats both elective and emergency cases.
Had you read my comment instead of making a “shoot from the lip” response about false linkages you would see the comparison was about claims of “medical necessity” going by the way.
You said “blood transfusion is needed at times”.
What times? Are you a physician who has treated people with very low blood counts?
If so you tell me all about low blood counts, delayed reactions, cancer rates with and without transfusion, alternatives like hyperbaric chamber plasma oxygenation for those with exceedingly low blood counts such as is used at Allegheny Hospital in its Bloodless Medicine and Surgery Center in Pennsylvania.
Yes, inform me of your research on the subject.
On the opposing side, Cyc poses the Jehovah's Witness point of view that blood transfusion is not needed.
Yes, there most definitely are times when blood transfusions are not only medically necessary but ethically mandatory, i.e., without them you would be condemning a patient to death.
Its not even open to debate. Any attempting to argue the opposing position is simply following a cult, not science. There is no medical or legitimate moral justification for withholding a lifesaving blood transfusion.