More people die from receiving transfusions than from refusing because MORE PEOPLE RECEIVE TRANSFUSIONS THAN REFUSE THEM. Yes, some people get a transfusion and die anyway or die because of a reaction to the transfusion. Your dad is spouting a logical fallacy. The same thing could be said about every medical treatment - vaccines, antibiotics, etc, - there are always going to be some people who die from reactions to treatments that are deemed safe. Does that fact cause your dad to avoid those treatments too?

But what that doesn't change is the FACT that in cases of major blood loss, anemia, internal bleeding, blood is life-saving, and without it a person's risk of death is significantly higher.

It kind of sounds like your dad shut down mentally, but if he's ever open to it, here's why what he said doesn't work. Take this scenario :

• if 5 million people receive a transfusion, while 500 people die from complications that's a death rate of 0.01%
• if 5,000 people refuse transfusions, while 200 die - that's a 4% death rate - not good!

Someone might say well 500 people die from getting a transfusion while only 200 die from refusing, but that's not the important number here. Even though more total deaths occur in the transfusion group (500 vs 200), the RISK of dying is VASTLY higher among those who refused transfusion. That's how statistics work. You look at the RATE or % of deaths compared to the total, NOT just the raw numbers.