Watchtower society rejects medical quackery

As is obvious this site doesn't shun controversial subjects. This comment is because I found a ridiculous accusation on the internet that the Watchtower society should support medical quackery. In all health related watchtower publications they mention something like "the watchtower society does not support any medical therapy". In the 70s and 80s when the whole medical community had fully embraced the practice of blood transfusions, the watchtower pioneered lonely in rejecting this practice. They based their main arguments on the bible, but they also mentioned the many side effects which were known at that time. Medical science categorically denied those problems and insisted that as many people as possible would have a transfusion.

Now some years further and Aids and other abnormalities appeared on the horizon it appeared that those people were not so stupid after all. The Watchtower society set up medical guiding committees to help their members when facing blood transfusions. Instead of supporting quackery the society has contributed to more advanced surgery techniques and other alternative methods (which became regular) instead of giving blood such as hypotensive anesthesia (1982), pediatric cardiac operations (1984), the employment of iron dextran (1986), safe renal transplantation (1988), heart and vascular surgery and brain surgery (1989)

In another headline it seems whether the Watchtower supports occultism, of course this is rather ridiculous as they are against everything that is related to "demons", the only thing they do is praying and singing. The Watchtower society is regularly accused of everything false etc. but this information is mostly coming from people who are expelled from their organization, people with bitter feelings, very like those quack busters who cannot handle true information.

Opinion: Republicans support medical quackery

The last comment is right about our controversial subjects. Let's add another. The story behind the headlines of medic quack from 10-30-2006 and 11-6-2006 is quite interesting concerning recent history of medical quackery. As the New York Times from the latter date suggests, the drug industry evidently seduced the US. Republican party to let the government "invest" into their products. The perception from outside the U.S. is that the U.S. government is much influenced by lobbyists. The article proves this also: Mr. Johnson, a main lobbyist, complaints that the government would have "too much market power" if Democrats do it their way. It is evident what his priorities are, they are not health related.

The argument from Republicans is that the current Medicaid program saves money; however when taking a short look at the profits of the drug companies, evidence proves otherwise. The largest drug maker in the world Pfizer doubled its profits from $1.6 to $3.4 billion, only in the third quarter of 2006, a raise of 14 percent only in the U.S.

And democrats support it as well

While democrats don't support the lobbyists too much on the other hand they have less problems with ethical dilemmas. Apparently this clouds their view on medical quackery as well as they support stem cells and genetic research (see stem cells research and 1/2007, 12, 13 jan.). Apparently Americans didn't have a real vote against medical quackery, it's a pity it is usually not perceived that way.