Today, on March 20, 2026, Gerrit Lösch, who is a member of the Governing Body, repealed the prohibition against storing one’s own blood in order to use it in a future operation.
The Watchtower of October 15, 2000, page 31, says that the prohibition against storing one’s own blood is based on what “the Bible says.” But what Lösch said today shows that these words were not true.
Witnesses who previously insisted that the Bible does not forbid us to store our own blood, and therefore disagreed with Lösch and the other members of the Governing Body, would be viewed as apostates and would have been disfellowshipped.
I will now take a closer look at what the Bible and the members of the Governing Body say about blood.
From the 1920s, the magazine The Golden Age had many articles condemning vaccines. One basic reason for denouncing vaccines was that they contained much blood, which was forbidden by God.
During World War II, blood transfusions became an important medical tool, and this continued after the war. In 1945, The Watchtower discussed blood transfusions and argued that receiving them was against God’s will.
Doctors learned quickly to fractionate blood, and during the 80 years since World War II, The Watchtower has condemned some of these fractions for later to say that the same fractions can be used. Storing one’s own blood to get it back at an operation has been forbidden. But from today, the members of the Governing Body have allowed storing one’s blood for an operation.
Because of all this back-and-forth regarding blood fractions, the important question for those who believe the Bible is: What does the Bible teach about blood? The answer is simple: In The Hebrew Scriptures, the word dam refers to the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals, and in the Christian Greek Scriptures, the word haima refers to the read fluid in the veins of humans and animals. The use of this red fluid for any purpose is forbidden!
THE BIBLE SAYS THAT DAM AND HAIMA REPRESENT THE LIFE OF HUMANS AND ANIMALS, IT IS GOD’S SPECIAL PROPERTY, AND IT IS FORBIDDEN TO TAKE THE MENTIONED RED FLUID INTO ONE’S BODY IN ANY WAY, AS ACTS 15:29 SHOWS.
This means that eating blood or taking a transfusion of full blood is a violation of God’s law. But what can we say about blood fractions? The members of the Governing Body have decided that accepting albumin, immunoglobulins, coagulation factors, and other small fragments is a matter of the conscience of each person. But red cells, white cells, platelets, and blood plasma are forbidden to take into one’s body.
What is absolutely clear is that no scripture in the Bible forbids red cells, white cells, platelets, or blood plasma. This prohibition is a human commandment that was invented and introduced by the members of the Governing Body. So, from the point of view of the Bible, any blood fraction is allowed to be used, including the four forbidden fractions. The only thing that is forbidden to take into the body is the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals.
There are several articles dealing with the use of blood and blood fractions on my website www.mybelovedreligion.no. Below are excerpts from two of these articles.
What are the consequences for individual Jehovah’s Witnesses in connection with the prohibition against full blood and some blood fractions? There is no doubt that refusing blood transfusions has been a blessing for Jehovah’s Witnesses. Foreign blood is a dangerous fluid. Over the years, a great number of people have died because they received blood transfusions, and thousands more have had their lives shortened because foreign blood had severed or damaged their immune systems.
Please remember that blood fractions can also cause death and damage the immune system. So, even though the Bible does not forbid the use of any blood fraction, that does not mean that these fractions are safe from a medical viewpoint.
I was a member of the Hospital Liaison Committee in Oslo, Norway, for 20 years. We carefully monitored the condition of hospitalized Witnesses during these 20 years. In connection with accidents with great blood loss and operations, only 2 Witnesses died, who probably could have survived if they had received blood transfusions.
Storing one’s own blood in order to infuse it at a future operation has been forbidden. While the prohibition against transfusion of full blood has been a blessing, the prohibition against storing one’s own blood has shortened the lifespan of thousands of Witnesses. I will explain the situation.
Another member of the HLC and I had close contact with the chief surgeon at one of the big hospitals in Oslo, who educated us on all aspects of treatment without the use of blood. Surgeons use volume expanders and cell savers to salvage blood. However, some operations, particularly some cancer operations, may be so large that they cannot be completed without the use of blood. If surgeons can use the patient’s stored blood, these large surgeries can be performed.
The chief surgeon explained to us that when he performed a large cancer operation, he would take away a great part of the tumor, but he could not remove all the outgrowths, because that required blood. Two weeks later, when the hemoglobin level of the patient had increased, he would re-operate on the patient and remove all the cancerous outgrowths.
Most other surgeons do not follow his example, because it requires time and money. When they have a large cancer operation, they remove what they can without using blood, and parts of the cancer may remain. Because of this, the cancer can later return. I have used cancer as an example, but the situation is the same in all large operations where blood is needed.
BECAUSE OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST STORING ONE’S OWN BLOOD AND AGAINST RED CELLS, WHITE CELLS, PLATELETS, AND BLOOD PLASMA, THOUSANDS OF WITNESSES HAVE RECEIVED AN INFERIOR TREATMENT COMPARED WITH THOSE WHO ACCEPT BLOOD IN CONNECTION WITH LARGE OPERATIONS.
This problem is not limited to surgery. But this is also true of chemotherapy and other chemical treatments. I have seen several examples of Witnesses who have not received the best chemotherapy because of the prohibition against storing their own blood.
There was a sister in the same congregation where I was who got a tumor in her brain. I accompanied her to the doctor, and I remember that he said: “We cannot give you the best chemotherapy because that will destroy many of your red blood cells, and you refuse a blood transfusion. But we will give you a good alternative. That she did not get the best available treatment most likely shortened her lifespan. If she had stored her blood or had accepted infusion with red cells, her ligespan would not have been shortened.
BECAUSE OF THE PROHIBITION AGAINST STORING ONE’S OWN BLOOD AND AGAINST RED CELLS, WHITE CELLS, PLATELETS, AND BLOOD PLASMA, THOUSANDS OF WITNESSES HAVE RECEIVED AN INFERIOR TREATMENT IN CONNECTION WITH CHEMOTHERAPY COMPARED WITH THOSE WHO ACCEPT BLOOD. BECAUSE OF THIS, THE LIFESPAN OF THOUSANDS OF WITNESSES HAS BEEN SHORTENED.
Excerpts from the article, “Disassociation 1 (I) Willingly and unrepentantly accepting blood.” (https://mybelovedreligion.no/2025/01/07/disassociation-1-i-willingly-and-unrepentantly-accepting-blood/)
HOW BLOOD IS VIEWED IN THE BIBLE
The basic principle of this study is as follows: I take the Bible’s text literally unless the context clearly shows otherwise. And I will not accept any exception to a law of God when the context does not clearly show that there is such an exception. Neither will I accept an interpretation of a Bible text that is not directly rooted in the text itself.
THE LAWS OF BLOOD IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES
The Bible shows that blood is God’s special property and that it should not be used for anything except as a sacrifice on the altar, as outlined in the law of Moses. But the Mosaic law, with its animal sacrifices, was terminated. And Jesus’ perfect offering of his flesh and blood, of which the Jewish sacrifices were a shadow, has been sacrificed once and for all. (Hebrews 7:27) So, there is no longer any scripturally sanctioned, legitimate use of blood.
Before the worldwide flood, humans were not allowed to eat animals. This changed after the flood, and Genesis 9:3–6 (NWT84) says:
3 Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for YOU. As in the case of green vegetation, I do give it all to YOU. 4 Only flesh with its soul—its blood—YOU must not eat. 5 And, besides that, YOUR blood of YOUR souls, shall I ask back; from the hand of man, from the hand of each one who is his brother, shall I ask back the soul of man. 6 Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image he made man.
From these words, we understand that 1) blood represents the life (the soul) of living beings, 2) blood must not be eaten, and 3) blood must not be shed by taking the life of someone. The common thread running through all three points is that blood has a value, which value is asked back if blood is misused. God has created living creatures as well as their blood that represents their lives. With him is the source of life. (Psalm 36:9) Therefore, only he has the right to decide how life and blood can be used.
God’s law to Israel contained several commandments regarding blood. Leviticus 17:11, 13 says:
11 For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for YOU to make atonement for YOUR souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement, by the soul [in it].
13 As for any man of the sons of Israel or some alien resident who is residing as an alien in YOUR midst who in hunting catches a wild beast or a fowl that may be eaten, he must in that case pour its blood out and cover it with dust.
The passages show that the only authorized use of blood is for sacrifice on the altar. When an animal was slaughtered, it should be bled before eating its flesh. By pouring out the blood on the ground and covering it with dust, life symbolically returned to God, who is its source. The word “holy” refers to something pure, which is set aside exclusively for one purpose. The passages above indicate that blood is holy.
THE LAW OF BLOOD IN THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES
The Christian congregation was instituted on the day of Pentecost in the year 33 CE. At that time, the law of Moses, including its commandments regarding blood, was no longer valid. In the year 49 CE, the question arose as to whether people of the nations should be circumcised. This question was discussed at the meeting of the apostles and the elders in Jerusalem. And influenced by holy spirit, the following decision was made, according to Acts 15:28, 29:
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication.
As stated, in most instances where blood is mentioned, there is a prohibition against eating blood. However, the quotation from Leviticus 17:11, 13 shows that the use of blood for any purpose was also forbidden. When an animal was slaughtered, the blood was to be poured out on the ground and covered with dust. On this background, we need to ask the question: Are the words in Acts 15:29 “to abstain from blood,” a prohibition only against the eating of blood, or do the words cover any use of blood?
(The answers to these questions are discussed in detail in the article. It shows that both eating and using blood are forbidden.)
ARE BLOOD FRACTIONS INCLUDED IN THE PROHIBITION AGAINST BLOOD?
In connection with the worship of God, it is important to differentiate between actions and material. I use an illustration: The soldiers of Emperor Nero have arrested a Christian family of father, mother, and a child. The family is led to an altar with a fire. Beside the fire is a receptacle with incense, and the father is told to put some incense in the fire, which means that he is sacrificing to the genius of the emperor. If he refuses to do that, he and his family will be killed. What is idolatry in this situation? It is the action of putting the incense on the fire. There is nothing wrong with the fire or with the incense. The family has used fire on different occasions, and they may even have lit incense on the fire for a special occasion, but this would not be idolatry.
Would the situation be different if the man were ordered to pour some blood on the fire instead of incense? No. There would be nothing wrong with the blood. And the idolatry would be the action of pouring incense or blood on the fire.
Paul also differentiates between material and action in his discussion of meat sacrificed to idols in his first letter to the Corinthians. There were several temples in Corinth where meat and other items were offered to idols. There were also restaurants in the temples where parts of the animals offered to the idols were served to the guests. Other parts of these animals were sold at the market.
Could Christians eat this meat in restaurants or buy this meat at the market? Paul answers the question in 10:25:
25 Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience.
Even though a part of the animal had been offered on the altar, there was nothing wrong with the meat because it was no longer an idol sacrifice. But what is the meaning of the words “making no inquiry on account of your conscience”?
In connection with the sacrifices, the animals were slaughtered, and big chunks of meat were put on the altar, and a part of this meat was burned in the fire as a sacrifice to the idol. It could be that a Christian would differentiate between pieces of meat that had been put on the altar but were now sold at the market, and pieces of meat from animals that had been slaughtered but had not been put on the altar. His conscience would forbid him to eat meat that one time had been put on the altar. The point of Paul is that it is not necessary to inquire about what previously happened to the meat. Now, when it was served in the restaurant or sold at the market, it was not a sacrifice to an idol.
The important point is that there was nothing wrong with the meat. It was the action of participating in the ceremony when meat was put on the idol altar that was wrong.
How can these examples help us better understand the prohibition against blood? The important point is that there is nothing wrong with the liquid blood. But some actions connected with blood are wrong.
The issue seen in the law for all humans after the flood (Genesis 9:4-6) and in the law to Israel (Leviticus chapter 17) is that the blood in all creatures represents the lives that Jehovah has given them. In order to approve Jehovah as the life-giver, we shall not use the blood of other creatures for anything. And when a creature dies, its blood must go back to the earth, and by this, showing our respect for Jehovah as the life-giver.
No one can dispute that the Hebrew word dam and the Greek word haima refer to the red fluid in the veins of humans and animals. The only right use of blood was as a sacrifice on the altar. It is not the liquid blood that is important, but the action of sacrificing it on the altar. When the blood was sacrificed, it poured down the sides of the altar, and this liquid was no longer holy because it had been used according to its purpose.
When blood is drained from an animal or taken from a human, Christians respect that this blood represents life and is God’s property. Therefore, they will not use it for any purpose. If doctors process this blood and fractionate it into different parts, they violate the law of God. But each of these parts can no longer be called haima (“blood”), and therefore, they are not included in the words to abstain from haima (“blood”) in Acts 15:29. They can be compared with the blood that poured down the sides of the altar that is no longer holy.
We can also see this situation from another point of view:
Only full blood (dam/haima) is forbidden to use, according to the Scriptures, and fractions of blood are not mentioned in the Bible. Therefore, it collides head-on with the Bible when the members of the Governing Body claim that red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and blood plasma are forbidden for Christians.
According to the pattern Paul gives in 1 Corinthians chapter 10, we must leave it to the conscience of each Christian, to decide whether to accept red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, or blood plasma, which has departed from the veins of a creature, just as we leave it to the conscience of each Christian if he or she will eat meat from an animal that once was lain on the altar of an idol.
When an animal lies on the idol altar, it is an idol sacrifice that cannot be eaten by Christians. When parts of this animal are served in restaurants or sold at the market, they are no longer an idol sacrifice and can be eaten by Christians.When an animal is bled, and its blood comes out, or when blood is taken from a human, this blood (haima) represents the life of the animal or the human, which belongs to God. Any use of this blood is a violation of God’s law, just as serious as eating an idol sacrifice.When doctors take blood from an animal or a human and fractionate it into different parts, each of these parts no longer represents the life of the animal or the human, which belongs to God. This means that each of these parts is no longer haima (“blood”) and is not included in the commandment to abstain from haima (“blood”) in Acts 15:29.Because red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and blood plasma are no longer haima (“blood”), the conscience of each Christian must decide whether he or she will use any of these fractions for a medical purpose, just as the conscience of him or her will decide whether to eat meat from an animal that at one time was an idol sacrifice. |
The members of the Governing Body have overruled the consciences of individual Witnesses by deciding that some fractions of blood can be used and others cannot. This is a violation of Peter’s words (1 Peter 5:3) that elders should not “lording it over those who are God’s inheritance.” No humans have the right to make binding rules for Christians that are not directly based on the Bible
STORING OUR OWN BLOOD IN ORDER TO GET IT INFUSED LATER
Both the refresher course for the members of the Hospital Liaison Committees and the book How to Remain in God’s Love? states that storing one’s own blood for later infusion is prohibited. The issue was discussed in The Watchtower of October 15, 2000, page 31:
Rather than deciding solely on the basis of personal preference or some medical recommendation, each Christian ought to consider seriously what the Bible says. It is a matter between him and Jehovah.
Occasionally, a doctor will urge a patient to deposit his own blood weeks before surgery (preoperative autologous blood donation, (or PAD) so that if the need arises, he could transfuse the patient with his own stored blood. However, such collecting, storing, and transfusing of blood directly contradicts what is said in Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Blood is not to be stored; it is to be poured out—returned to God, as it were. Granted, the Mosaic Law is not in force now. Nevertheless, Jehovah’s Witnesses respect the principles God included in it, and they are determined to ‘abstain from blood.’ Hence, we do not donate blood, nor do we store for transfusion our blood that should be ‘poured out.’ That practice conflicts with God’s law.
Other procedures or tests involving an individual’s own blood are not so clearly in conflict with God’s stated principles. For instance, many Christians have allowed some of their blood to be withdrawn for testing or analysis, after which the sample is discarded. Other more complex procedures involving one’s blood may also be recommended.
For example, during certain surgical procedures, some blood may be diverted from the body in a process called hemodilution. The blood remaining in the patient is diluted. Later, his blood in the external circuit is directed back into him, thus bringing his blood count closer to normal. Similarly, blood that flows into a wound may be captured and filtered so that the red cells can be returned to the patient; this is called cell salvage. In a different process, blood may be directed to a machine that temporarily carries on a function normally handled by body organs (for example, the heart, lungs, or kidneys). The blood from the machine is then returned to the patient. In other procedures, blood is diverted to a separator (centrifuge) so that damaging or defective portions of it can be eliminated. Or the goal may be to isolate some of a blood component and apply that elsewhere on the body. There are also tests in which a quantity of blood is withdrawn in order to tag it or to mix it with medicine, whereupon it is put back into the patient.
The details may vary, and new procedures, treatments, and tests will certainly be developed. It is not our place to analyze each variation and render a decision. A Christian must decide for himself how his own blood will be handled in the course of a surgical procedure, medical test, or current therapy. Ahead of time, he should obtain from the doctor or technician the facts about what might be done with his blood during the procedure. Then he must decide according to what his conscience permits. (italics of the author)
QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF
If some of my blood will be diverted outside my body and the flow might even be interrupted for a time, will my conscience allow me to view this blood as still part of me, thus not requiring that it be ‘poured out on the ground’?
Would my Bible-trained conscience be troubled if during a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure some of my own blood was withdrawn, modified, and directed back into (or onto) my body?
We should note that the reason given for not storing one’s own blood is different from the reason given for not taking full blood, red cells, white cells, platelets and plasma into the body. The mentioned blood components are prohibited because taking them into the body is the same as eating them, which is forbidden, was the argument from the refresher course. But the prohibition against storing one’s blood is based on the commandment in the law of Moses that blood must be poured out on the ground; that is, the blood of a dead creature must not be used for any purpose.
However, the blood was poured out on the ground when the creature was dead. This was a token indicating respect for the life-giver. When the blood was poured out, the life of the creature was symbolically returned to God. But when a person stores his own blood with an operation in view, the person is not dead, and his life should not be returned to God. Also, the blood that is transfused into the veins of the person is not the blood of another human being, but it is his own blood.
An article in The Watchtower of March 15, 1980, page 31, discussed transplantation and whether taking a transplant is the same as eating another person’s flesh, thus being a cannibal. The article says:
It may be argued, too, that organ transplants are different from cannibalism since the “donor” is not killed to supply food.
In a similar way, it is the blood of a dead creature and not a living one that should not be stored. Because the person who is storing his blood is not dead, the prohibition against storing the blood of a dead creature cannot be used to show that storing a living creature’s blood is wrong. Moreover, the law against storing blood was part of the law of Moses, which is no longer valid. There is no law in the Bible showing that the storing of one’s own blood is against God’s law.
We must, therefore, conclude that the decision — or rather the order — of the Governing Body that one’s own blood must not be stored has no biblical basis. So, whether to store one’s blood is a matter of conscience; each person has the right to decide.
Blood from dead creatures must not be stored but must be poured out on the ground. The commandment for doing this cannot be used as a prohibition against storing one’s own blood for a future operation because the commandment only relates to the blood of dead creatures. And it was a part of the law given to Moses that is no longer valid. |
In order to drive home the points above, I will compare the situation of blood storage with other procedures mentioned in the Watchtower literature. Please consider the following examples:
- When a quantity of blood is withdrawn in order to tag it or mix it with medicine, it can be stored for several minutes before it is returned to the patient.
- When blood flows into a wound, and it is captured, filtered, and the red cells are returned to the patient, the red cells can be stored in the process for half an hour or more.
- When blood is withdrawn for testing and analysis, the blood can be stored for several days if it is sent to a laboratory specializing in particular tests. After that, it will be discarded.
- When blood is withdrawn from the patient with the purpose of returning it to the patient during an operation, the blood can be stored for one or two weeks before it is returned to the patient.
In all these cases, blood is withdrawn from the patient and later returned to him or discarded. The basic difference between the four examples is the time, i.e., how long the blood is stored. It does not make sense to claim that a person’s blood that is withdrawn and stored for three days before it is processed at a laboratory is a matter of conscience, but a person’s blood that is withdrawn and stored for seven days or two weeks before it is returned to him during an operation is forbidden.
CONCLUSION
The Watchtower has shown for 80 years that blood transfusions are a violation of the law of God. This has been a blessing for Jehovah’s Witnesses because it has prevented them from illness and death that are caused by blood transfusions.
The members of the Governing Body have forbidden the use of red blood cells, white blood cells, platelets, and blood plasma, and they have forbidden and allowed different other blood fractions at different times. This has been a disaster, because thousands of Witnesses have not received the best treatment in connection with surgery and chemotherapy, and because of this, their life spans have been shortened.
That it has now been allowed to store one’s own blood for a future operation is a step in the right direction. But the prohibition on red cells, white cells, platelets, and blood plasma remains in place. This will prevent some Witnesses from receiving the best medical treatment in the future. Moreover, this prohibition contradicts the Bible.
See the article, The Governing Body’s View of Blood Contradicts the Bible (II) Blood Components
(https://mybelovedreligion.no/2026/03/24/the-governing-bodys-view-of-blood-contradicts-the-bible-ii-blood-components/)
