1 edit
Originally posted by ZahlanziIf it's not "entertaining" why are you posting?
behavior becomes apparent after 100 posts. we have 400+ posts here and he has not presented a single extra argument. or even bothered to rehash his current points a little differently.
Your disappointment with this thread has no impact on or relevance to anyone.
1 edit
Originally posted by Zahlanzion the contrary Zahnazi, I provided a plethora of medical evidence which not one of your h8ter friends could being themselves to investigate, oh dear, perhaps you should try something more original in future?
behavior becomes apparent after 100 posts. we have 400+ posts here and he has not presented a single extra argument. or even bothered to rehash his current points a little differently.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou provided no such evidence. You gave figures on the number of people who died after a blood transfusion. You provided no evidence on how many of these people died as a result of the transfusion.
on the contrary Zahnazi, I provided a plethora of medical evidence which not one of your h8ter friends could being themselves to investigate, oh dear, perhaps you should try something more original in future?
4 edits
Originally posted by deennyon the contrary i provided many links link which not only demonstrated why people die as a result of transfusion but that the number claimed may have been in the millions, if you don't understand why people die as a consequence of blood transfusions then ask someone for help. You provided a meaningless opinion.
You provided no such evidence. You gave figures on the number of people who died after a blood transfusion. You provided no evidence on how many of these people died as a result of the transfusion.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn your opinion, has a blood transfusion ever saved a life
on the contrary i provided many links link which not only demonstrated why people die as a result of transfusion but that the number claimed may have been in the millions, if you don't understand why people die as a consequence of blood transfusions then ask someone for help. You provided a meaningless opinion.
2 edits
Originally posted by deennyyou have already stated that a blood transfusion saved your daughters life and I have no reason to doubt you, you have not told us what alternatives were offered to her despite being asked, you have also not addressed any of the content of any of the posts that i have made with regard to the dangers of blood transfusions and instead seek to make the debate personal, how predictable and how banal, can you tell us how many of the allegedly thousand of persons that were saved via a blood transfusion how many might have been saved with an alternative, no you cannot, can i cite references for people who have died after a needless blood transfusion, yes i can, but it will be a waste of time because you have only one perspective, your own. you want to take blood its your affair, not mine.
In your opinion, has a blood transfusion ever saved a life
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/9605799/Killed-by-a-needless-blood-transfusion.html
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-11-03/news/9104080918_1_michel-garretta-blood-scandal-national-blood
http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.nl/2009/11/canadas-tainted-blood-scandal.html
http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-07-02-09#S2X
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper Knoboh dear another EPIC FAILURE, can you tell us how many of the thousands of persons who were given blood might have equally survived if they had been offered an alternative and why some hospitals are switching to bloodless alternatives? hmmmmmm
I bet you he won't answer that question.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSorry, was there an answer to the question asked in that blather of yours? Here it is again, do you accept blood transfusions have saved people's lives? A straight forward yes or no will suffice.
oh dear another EPIC FAILURE, can you tell us how many of the thousands of persons who were given blood might have equally survived if they had been offered an alternative and why some hospitals are switching to bloodless alternatives? hmmmmmm
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
Originally posted by robbie carrobiei have three questions for you to dodge.
oh dear another EPIC FAILURE, can you tell us how many of the thousands of persons who were given blood might have equally survived if they had been offered an alternative and why some hospitals are switching to bloodless alternatives? hmmmmmm
do you agree that currently there are some medical conditions in which blood is more effective than blood substitutes.
do you agree that there are some medical conditions in which it would be dangerous to the patient to use blood substitutes rather than blood.
is using blood substitutes.................natural.
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI also would like to know if you believe that a blood transfusion has ever saved a life
you have already stated that a blood transfusion saved your daughters life and I have no reason to doubt you, you have not told us what alternatives were offered to her despite being asked, you have also not addressed any of the content of any of the posts that i have made with regard to the dangers of blood transfusions and instead seek to make the ...[text shortened]... 9/11/canadas-tainted-blood-scandal.html
http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb-07-02-09#S2X
4 edits
Originally posted by Bull McCabeI have already stated that I have no reason to doubt that it has, but then again it has also killed people as well. Is that clear enough for you? further to that we have no way of knowing how many of these people that took transfusion might also have survived if offered an alternative.
I also would like to know if you believe that a blood transfusion has ever saved a life
so lets ask you a question, have blood transfusions also killed people?