New Scientist article

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
I read in New Scientist yesterday that a study revealed Jehovah's Witnesses, who refuse to accept blood transfusions, have better survival rates after surgery than patients in general. It seems to be something to do with a lot of the blood in blood banks being a bit stale. That means all those years I thought I was helping to save people's lives I was actually helping to kill them. Never mind, it's the thought that counts :blush:
 

Renard

Guest
Sponsored by... Jehova Witnesses :blush:
 

Maz

Guru
Yellow Fang said:
I read in New Scientist yesterday that a study revealed Jehovah's Witnesses, who refuse to accept blood transfusions, have better survival rates after surgery than patients in general.
This obviously presupposes that no blood transfusions are needed in order to carry out the surgery in the first place. Does the article say what type of surgery?
 

Tetedelacourse

New Member
Location
Rosyth
And is the reported survival rate attributed to the blood transfusions that have or have not taken place? Or did they just correlate two random stats?
 
OP
OP
Yellow Fang

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
Maz said:
This obviously presupposes that no blood transfusions are needed in order to carry out the surgery in the first place. Does the article say what type of surgery?

It says the surgeons use special techniques for Jehovah's Witnesses that mean they don't have to transfuse any blood.
 
OP
OP
Yellow Fang

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
Tetedelacourse said:
And is the reported survival rate attributed to the blood transfusions that have or have not taken place? Or did they just correlate two random stats?

Yes, the survival rate is attributed to blood transfusions not having taken place. It's been borne out by several studies.
 

craigwend

Grimpeur des terrains plats
A bit more info

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/24/medicalresearch.health

Interesting article - particually if this includes the changes around advance decisions?

Normally a bit sceptical, but questions the validity of the use every time balanced with the risks of not using it.

Jehovah Witnesses can have (limited) blood 'products' harvested from their own blood & have been at the forefront of pioneering 'bloodless surgery' techniques.

there's a good page on wikipedia on this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah's_Witnesses_and_blood_transfusions

Not religous myself but spoke to a 'witness' about the subject, generally interesting.
 
Top Bottom