The Confession of a Blood Donor Abstainer

Transfusions, Transplants and Transhumans, How Are They Related?

 Now I fourfold vision see,
    And a fourfold vision is given to me;
    ‘Tis fourfold in my supreme delight
    And threefold in soft Beulah’s night
    And twofold always.  May God us keep
    From single vision & Newton’s sleep!
                        William Blake (Click here for a discussion about Blake's ideas.)

Morris Berman. The Re-Enchantment of the World. Toronto: Bantam Books, in conjunction with Cornell University Press, 1984, pp.122-3

---

What’s in the Blood?

I don’t give blood to blood banks. I haven’t given blood ever. Which means I haven’t given my blood to others and for most of my adult life I’ve wrestled with the guilt-pressure I have experienced in having failed to give the gift of life.

I have walked past collecting stations that have been set up in convenient locations such as the office or shopping malls with their planned engendering of guilt. Ostensibly I have been selfish and unthinking of people undergoing life saving surgeries after mishaps or illness. (It is interesting that that same argument was used during the covid psyop manipulation.) One of my good friends regularly donated her blood and wore with prideful ostentation her lifetime achievement pin for her number of donations. And another friend had blood so special he was called regularly, many times a year, to donate.

---

🙏 If this epistle gives you some pleasure, and/or an ‘aha’ benefit, become a paid subscriber. 🙏

🙏 Thank you. 🙏

---

So why did I feel guilty every time I walked passed a blood drive or whenever those frequently placed ‘humanitarian advertisements’ were pressed into my awareness? And why didn’t that feeling of guilt succeed in coercing me to comply with the well orchestrated and steady stream of guilt inducing social programming? Why didn’t I roll up my sleeve and do the ‘right’ thing as a ‘good’ citizen and give freely what my body easily makes?

With post covid eyes, I now understand that that was and is a form of psyop, the use of social programming of an ostensible good to convince people to behave in a certain way. Was my resistance to that emotional manipulation a precursor, a strengthening exercise that later contributed to the fortitude I had that resisted the pressure of the most comprehensive and forceful psyop ever enacted, that of covid? (“Brad Wylder - Important Message To The Unvaccinated”).

And that takes me to my experience of living with the emotional manipulation of a sociopathic/narcissistic mother. Perhaps she was the source of my resistance to the psychological manipulation of blood giving and the injection? Since I have two sisters who got jabbed and one who did not, it would seem even environment is not a complete predictor of obeisance or not.

---

The Buddhist and the Body

This is an exploration of that question that expanded its scope after I was introduced to Francisco Varela, a prominent neuroscientist and Buddhist, via his essay “Intimate Distances”. 

Varela shared his experience of getting a previously used liver, the subsequent bodily rejection of it and, ultimately, his movement towards death. 

“I've got a foreign liver inside me. But: Which me? Foreign to what?

We change all the cells and molecules of a liver every few weeks. It is new again, but not foreign. The foreignness is the unsettledness of the belonging with other organs in the ongoing definition that is an organism. In that sense my old liver was already foreign; it was gradually becoming alien as it ceased to function, corroded by cirrhosis, with no other than a suspended irrigation of islands of cells, which are then left to decay and wither away. Years before the transplant, during a biopsy the surgeon came to see me: "I saw your liver, it looks very sick. You must do something about it." The statement made this silent organ suddenly un-me, threatening and already designated to be put at a distance in the economy of the body's self.

Seeing from outside had penetrated me as a blade of otherness, altering my habitual body forever (pg.244).”

(You can read extracts from “Intimate Distances” on line at Google Books pg.244, from The Best Buddhist Writing 2005. )

At one time I remember attempting to rationalise my cold-blooded inaction with my pinned donor friend with something about life and death being a continuum and when it is time to die then die we will. I was struggling to articulate an irrational non-verbal feeling. That feeling wasn’t fear of needles and so that wasn’t it. It – giving my blood so another would receive it the gift of life – simply felt wrong and beyond rationalisation. In a world enamoured by and idolising the rational this was the worst kind of blasphemy, one that I unconsciously compensated for with guilt without a confessional to assuage it. I am sure that I sounded as lame to my friend then as writing it out now reads to me.

---

To be the hypocrite or not, that is a question.

Another question I wrestled with was would I be a hypocrite and receive blood from another if push came to shove? Or would I accept full responsibility for not having given blood and, like Jehovah’s Witnesses and others, choose death rather than transfusion? (The JW’s claim that it is very very rare that transfusions are absolutely necessary. And they cite medical research that has developed many effective methods that by-pass the need for transfusion. See “Why Don’t Jehovah’s Witnesses Accept Blood Transfusions?”)

I’m not sure I had the answer at that time. Perhaps the evidence of my having recently chosen to keep my sleeve rolled down and remain uninjected despite the (fake) threat of death-by-virus suggests that I would choose death rather than compliance to social norms and the religion of a rationality warped to think that killing oneself for another is somehow sound rational humanitarianism. (For a prescient and powerful look at reason as mind-weapon, see Voltaire’s Bastards: The Dictatorship of Reason in the West by John Ralston Saul.)

Maybe it was simply an ornery push against emotional manipulation like that which I experienced as a child.

In recent years the societal manufactured guilt for failing to give blood had been dormant, hibernating away in some cave of my psyche because I had removed myself from being an employee within corporate work structures and had turned away from TV, radio, print and social media news sources over the previous eight years. This total media fast helped me remain calm while everyone else was busily losing their heads and, I now realise, had also eliminated exposure to the widely accepted blood gifting guilt-stimulation practices rampant there. 

---

Dormant Guilt Wakes Up

Oddly enough, donating blood came into my awareness last year via an ex-MD now alternate health writer making the strong argument, with references, that excess iron buildup in the body (hemochromatosis) is a widespread, perhaps an even chronic, health issue that allopathic medicine is mostly oblivious to because the symptoms are similar to other diseases. Since the allopathic method is fixated on treating symptoms without looking for causes, iron toxicity isn’t usually considered until a last resort so long as pain relief or other medications assuage the discomfort well enough. Iron overload damages the mitochondria and telomeres, which prematurely ages and kills the cell. (An example of which is a scientific article linking iron build up in brain cells with increased advancement of dementia, ie, the death of brain cells. See “Measuring Iron In The Brain Can Point To Dementia”. (For the article on hemochromatosis, see “Understanding Your Liver Health: Your Liver Performs Nearly 500 Functions, Including Regulation Of Your Cholesterol Levels And Purifying Your Blood”. (Unfortunately because of the expansion of US Federal censorship practices around covid against alternative medical practitioners such as this one, this article has been archived on a site that requires a small fee to join it. The fee goes to charity and the archive there is rich with alternative wholistic health information and detailed research.)

The health writer pointed out that compounding and confusing the problem of iron excess or insufficiency is that the current accepted methodologies for blood tests for iron are misleading because these tests don’t look at the iron levels in the cells where iron ‘secretly’ accumulates. He describes that anaemia measures may be misleading if the required copper levels in the body are not properly balanced to effectively engage the iron for healthy cell function. He also cites studies that show that people who give blood regularly have longer lives than those that don’t. And, of course, there is the documented history of women outliving men, and a part of that may in fact be associated with menstruation reducing iron levels in the cells.

I found this fascinating and it prompted me to reconsider ’donating’ blood. And if I were to do that I am aware enough to see that I would become both totally selfish and a hypocrite at the same time. Oddly enough, my preferred procedure would be to go back to the old practice of blood letting, which is actually still practiced, according to the writer, albeit difficult to find.

---

17th Century Mechanics, Iatricide, and Treating Medical Intervention Adverse Side Effects

That brings to mind an anecdote from the 17th century history of blood transfusions. A physician let an excess of blood from a feverish young man and was inspired to have someone attempt to save the man from his iatricide by using the latest scientific panacea and wonder, blood transfusion. At the time transfusions were new and the next best thing to the Science God despite a total lack of evidence or even a previous example of human success. There may have been a handful of successful non-vigorous experiments done with animals before that – something like the eight mice used for the bivalent covid booster.

The transfusion ultimately failed and provides us with 17th century confirmation of a medical practises history and just how little that has changed in today’s accepted practices: often allopathic treatments create the need for medical intervention to address the previous medical intervention’s side effects and thus perpetuates reliance on medicinal quackery pushed by various certified medical practitioners. Of course panacea quackery long predates the 17th century as inferred by the absolutely ignored caution ‘First do no harm.’ And another ‘truth’ dies, post covid apocalypse, because it turns out that this phrase is mistakenly attributed to the Hippocratic oath. It’s not there. The first written instance of that phrase, in Latin, is from a 19th century reference to the 17th century physician Thomas Sydenham. 

To give or to let, that became the question I put to my body. ( For my body muscle testing practices see “7. To Not Be a Number Means Appropriate Eccentric Action: My Body Lives Now, It Doesn’t Lie and It Knows What is False”.)

---

7. To Not Be a Number Means Appropriate Eccentric Action

---

Please Offload the Excess Iron

Despite my best efforts at practicing non-surprise at the surprises of life, I was a little surprised that my body does indeed want me to let blood out to reduce my iron load. How to do that safely and effectively without taking advantage of blood banks? Hmmmm. I honour and respect my body’s wisdom, and yet as of this writing I haven’t found my way to helping my body create optimal health by either letting or banking my blood. Is it laziness and my ambivalence to giving the gift of life that keeps me putting that off?

---

Where is the Body? Where is it Not?

Something I read from Varela’s essay jarred discordantly with yogic ‘oneness/nothingness’ principles and the ideas of Gautama Buddha. Varela speculates about that too: what does ‘Varela’ mean when the he that he is, even somatically, does not exist as a cellular continuum and yet physically at the same time there is such an astonishing precision of the continuity of Varela’s bodily self that his somatic body knows absolutely the truth of the other as life threateningly distinct. That awareness is so strong, that the many rejection suppression drugs he took were unable to forcibly recreate bodily resonance and harmony.

When I first began to wrestle with this guilt-awareness after reading Varela’s essay I talked with my sister about it. She mentioned that our mother had also refused to give blood. I have no conscious memory of that, and my sister was unsure of the rationale our dead mother used at the time. And we don’t know if her thinking included receiving blood from another. Is this the source of my antipathy, a simple familial samskara (habit or unconscious pattern of thinking or behaviour) unremembered? My quiet practices since then haven’t articulated an answer, although I haven’t put energy towards getting an intuitive or deep dive memory answer. (Editing this essay has prompted me to re-look at that, and I will do that in the next while. )

---

Glasses? What Glasses? They Have All Been Trashed.

Becoming a refugee in the time of covid has knocked so many glasses of delusion off my face that I am free to be more aware and critical of societal norms and their ostensible and especially ostentatious ‘goods’.

So, do I think blood transfusions are a bad thing? I was tempted to say ‘No’, and paused when I realised I had quietly acquiesced to the programmed bi-furcated thinking practices into which we have been inculcated.

To be fixated with arbitrary good/bad thinking is actually a limiting samskara that directs us away from expanded or creative ideas. Buddhist yogi Michael Stone suggests that those story-habits keep us from being our eccentric authentic self. And CG Jung talked about bi-passing (I do like peculiar puns when I get the chance) the trap of two by using the tertium quid, the third option between a binary choice. He argued that this process is integral to personal growth and individuation as a mature human in his book Symbols of Transformation. Jung argued that life has a metaphysical or spiritual purpose that can be realised with expanding our understanding beyond bifurcated thinking. That development creates within us the ability to see that ostensible opposites are arbitrary definitions and are actually part of a (yogic) whole. And, as Jung had anticipated, his book was the final straw for Freud who subsequently broke off their friendship and professional collaboration. With that Freud confirmed his own unconscious fixation in bifurcated ‘with me’ / ‘against me’ thinking. and projected his psychology outwards when he enforced his adherents to comply with it.

---

Nice writing synch with the song ‘Animal Games’ by Emilíana Torrini.

Human Animal as Machine

And, speaking of Freud, there is a peculiar attitudinal connection between the first transfusions and his own expressions of psychology: that the human animal is a mechanical construct. Micheal Stone makes that comment in passing when talking about Freud’s model of repression, comparing it to a pressure device.

---

🙏 If this epistle gives you some pleasure, and/or an ‘aha’ benefit, become a paid subscriber. 🙏

🙏 Thank you. 🙏

---

OOPS! I Walk into Woke Delusion and Correctness and the Bifurcations of Gender

Now I’m laughing at myself for stating the importance of non-binary thinking as the expression of freedom from limiting truth traps, such as hero/villain, good/bad, deserving/underserving, etc. because I have beautifully, immediately and humorously walked into the trap of the current cultural attack on gender as male or female as distinct from male and female. Isn’t that one of the top delusions that woke is arguing, that gender binary is arbitrary and delimiting?! RotFL! I just read that a delusional or opportunistic chromosomal-denying male won a women’s bicycle race as being a self-declared female. The highlight, or perhaps the ‘real’ story, was that the victor was shunned by the people whose chromosomes describe them as female without need of proclamation.

With that I have been given, yet again, the Universal gift of “OMG, that is unbelievably funny.”  Is not this whole gender joke thing confirmation that Life has a wicked sense of humour and simply has to be laughing at us and with us at such vehement obfuscation and contradictions?

With extraordinarily rare exception we humans (and most animals) are born into a core existence of binary chromosomal gender. So, our somatic reality is one of two and no amount of woke delusion, drugs or mutilating surgery will change those chromosomes. (Although I image that Pharma are working on a gender change vaccine and a future threat that a male killing virus is planned and every male will need to be vaccinated out of being male.)

“Suppose that you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans, but that he can have the right to have babies.”

We are actually living Monty Python! 

At the same time some of the greatest philosophers, spiritual leaders and even psychologists have suggested that suffering in life can be best reduced, and perhaps even happiness achieved, when we are able to integrate our disparate manifestations of our psychological Self into the Uni-verse (however that is defined), and recognise that the story of two is a trap keeping us stuck in karma or hell, either on or after earth, etc. We are born as two and the ‘game of life’ is to realise that that truth falls to the truth of one. We humans cannot make that stuff up and yet we can certainly laugh with the pointed wisdom of Monty Python.

---

Cheap Tricks

And so I have philosophically or sophistically danced around the ‘good’ or ‘bad’ of blood transfusions. This may look like a cheap trick, because it is tritely argued that transfusions save lives. Of course it can be argued that they have killed lives, too, having carried deadly secrets of another life that are beyond the blinding arrogance of science and the laziness of financial efficiency. And what about that absolute somatic awareness of the bodily other that inconveniently baffles all medical attempts to pretend that blood is a fancy engine oil and the body a meaty machine?

When I looked into the history of blood transfusion, my somewhat limited research took me to the mid 17th century. I was curious to see if there might be a connection between transfusions and and the subsequent development of mechanical engines. And there is: Descartes died in 1650 and his ideas that science is to be the examination of life as a mechanical process had invaded the thinking of the sheep-like scientist wannabes. And with great humour, Life affirmed to them the (limited) truth of that because in fact there are many aspects of life that are or appear to be mechanical, such as everything, ie matter. Gravity is true enough most of the time and yet variable.

William Harvey was a dedicated scientist who is attributed to having ‘discovered’ the singularly ‘true’ nature of the circulatory system as a mechanical process of the heart moving blood through the body. Modern non-Rockefeller ’science’ recognises that the heart isn’t actually strong enough to do that without the assistance of the rest of the body’s vascular system. So, that simplistic mechanical theory of 400 years ago is still unrefined by much of western medical thought.

---

In Our Shadows We Walk Through the Valley of Death In Fear of Great Evil

What if transfusions are a first and unconscious expression of our acceptance of transhumanism? When the first ones failed, the French court made them basically illegal. They became something looked at in the 20th century and then with certain advancements in the understanding of blood, were seen as an important medical practice in the First World War.

What if DesCarte’s hypothesis of a dead mechanical universe is being promulgated like a mind virus in our ‘science’, and science fiction and intellectual disregard for a ‘spiritual’ energy in life? What if the pitch of the good of transfusions is a kind toxoplasmosis that preconditions us to accept organ transplants as a great advance in the mechanisation of the body in medical treatment? What if transfusions are the unconscious expression of our having embraced a machine-dead life, ie of having become transhumans?

What if the cabal is, in their obvious and clunky mechanical and deluded way, telling us that their ideals of transhumanism are really simply expressing our collective belief in the mechanical universe? 

I am reminded of Alex Story describing how his Down syndrome son prompted from everyone expressions of sympathy for his misfortune and the question ‘If you had known, would you have had your son?’ After many repeats of this encounter Story became aware that the ubiquity of the expressed emotion and abortion question was expressing a tacit, likely unconscious, acceptance of eugenics. See “Eugenics: Flawed Thinking Behind Pushed Science | Alex Story | EP 294”:

What if the cabal who want to clean up the earth from useless meat eaters are in fact attuned to the part of our collective shadow that has embraced eugenics and transhumanism?

---

Guy Duperreault - Newton’s Figs Read by Guy Dupereault

Newton's Figs.

I know, I know, I've bleated this blah blah before.
Your eyeballs roll backwards yet again.
No more will I pray to reason's god
for a chink in its armour through which
we can squeeze the motes of living unpredictability.
The strength to be still,
the courage to mute unsounded truths
that ache with a heart's loss,
not to the flatulent many,
but to the miasma of a squared world
well rested in Newton's figs.
                              Guy A. Duperreault 2012

---

🙏 If this epistle gave you some pleasure, and/or an ‘aha’ benefit, become a paid subscriber. 🙏

🙏 Thank you. 🙏

---

Thank you for reading.

And to close. The comic and song writer-singer Ray Stevens wondered about the wisdom of transplants back in the 1970s! Enjoy.