Which part of the bible dose it say that we should not accept help to live in the form of a blood transfusion?

Jehovahs witness take the dietary prohibition in Leviticus , not to eat blood and being also it cannot be taken in transfusion. Dietary law meant you could not eat some things, a medical procedure is not covered under this law.
Jesus said He came to fulfil the Law, and at the council of Jerusalem it was decided that all things were legal to eat.
A christian has the freedom to eat what he/she will except food offered to idols, and that is not common today.

That's a Jehovah's Witnesses aberration. There was a case in the UK of a child who fell down a cliff in North East England. Her injuries weren't life threatening, but she had lost a lot of blood. Her parents, Jehovah's Witnesses, refused permission for a blood transfusion, but the doctors went ahead. The parents then said that they could not accept the child back into the family. If I remember correctly, the child was subsequently adopted.
I don't know anywhere in the Bible where it says that blood transfusions are forbidden.

Blood transfusion is never mentioned in the Bible but it does say that blood represents God-given life and so is not to be eaten or drunk. God made a covenant with Noah and all his descendants (so that includes us) saying not to eat flesh with its blood. In the Old Testament, any Israelite breaking that law was to be stoned to death.

In the New Testament, Gentile converts to Christianity were told not to get circumcised but so as not to offend the Jews, they must not commit idolatry, be sexually immoral or eat blood (Acts chapter 15). Around 1950 the Watchtower Society decided this meant Jehovah's Witnesses must be prepared to die rather than to accept blood transfusions and hundreds of thousands of JWs have died since then. Today the Society has re-written the 'rules' so that JWs can have individual components of blood (fractions) separately, but they must not have the sum total of those fractions in one go, in the 'skin' of whole blood. It looks suspiciously like they are preparing the ground to let go of this obnoxious doctrine of theirs, but going ever so slowly to cover the leaders' backs.

It is patently absurd that the symbol for life - blood - should become more important than the thing is symbolizes - life. It is life that is precious and God does NOT require people to sacrifice their lives, or the lives of their children, in some token gesture meant to illustrate that life is important. When it gets to that point, clearly those people have lost the plot.

Acts 15:28 and 29 - there are others also.

The scripture says to "abstain from blood". Some will say that it is not talking about blood transfusions.

BUT, the Bible does not tell us that we should avoid x-rated movies, but it does say to keep our minds and hearts clean and pure.

Blood transfusions and x-rated movies were not in existence in Bible times, but the principles are there for us to use.

If it says to "abstain from blood". then we should not use it for food, for medicinal purposes, for decorative purposes, for gardening, or whatever other purpose has been thought up for its use.

You might find it very helpful to Google "bloodless surgery" or "bloodless medicine" and find what is going on in the modern world of medicine. Many, many doctors are doing all they can to avoid the use of blood for their patients due to the dangers and the contamination involved.

Concerning the comment above, what proof is there of "hundreds of thousands" dying due to no transfusions? I have been a Witness since the late 1950's and I'm unaware of such a thing.

My husband is a hemophiliac (free bleeder) and is a Witness. Even with a difficult medical situation as his, he has never had to take a blood transfusion or blood fractions. And he has had over 25 operations, some extremely serious.

Shortly after Christianity was founded some 2,000 years ago, believers were given the divine commandment to 鈥渁bstain from . . . blood.鈥?The prohibition was based, not on health concerns, but on the sacredness of blood. (Acts 15:19, 20, 29) Some argue that this God-given restriction applies only to the eating of blood, but the word 鈥渁bstain鈥?speaks for itself. If a doctor told us to abstain from alcohol, we would hardly feel at liberty to inject it into our veins.

This is a JW misconception. The dietary law in Leviticus forbids eating meat with blood in it. JW's say a transfusion is 'eating blood' Utterly illogical.

well in my bible (king James version-christian) it says it no where. at least i never saw it. in my church we took up collection for brother jay to get some kind of transplant idk i wasn't paying attention. but yea i never was taught that

Only Jehovah's Witnesses believe so.
They say blood represents life(which is true),so they concluded that it is not right to simply accept blood in any form.

Nowhere. This is a manmade religious law, there is no scripture which prohibits blood transfusion.

Gen 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat......but this verse is speaking of animal blood.

it does not but old testament teaching is not to eat blood as the live is in the blood.

Jehovah's Witnesses believe in that. My grandma is one (I'm not) and she said because "the blood is the spirit". It's stupid thought b/c she didn't even give me a text to prove her right.

The bible doesn't say you cant have a blood transfusion but the Jehovah Witness believe that.