13 minute read
The commercial use of aborted children in the new vaccines
torsos and other body parts for sale to the scientific market – universities and laboratories wanting to test new drugs or procedures. He described seeing babies still alive when technicians began dissecting them. On one occasion he witnessed a pair of twins “still moving on the table” who were “cuddling each other” and “gasping for breath”.5
Since then, the undercover videos and eye-witness evidence collected by the Center for Medical Progress, has established that the traffic in foetal tissue remains highly organised and extremely profitable.6 This trade is an integral part of research and development at major commercial laboratories, especially in the pharmaceutical industry. The harvesting of foetal tissue is a daily occurrence and likely to continue until public opposition is sufficient to end it.7
Advertisement
VACCINE DEVELOPMENT Unlike bacteria, viruses aren’t capable of reproducing on their own, they can only multiply in the cells of a host. To obtain a sufficient sample for use in a laboratory, a virus must be grown in a cell culture. It is then extracted, inactivated, and processed to make a vaccine.8
The commercial use of foetal tissue largely began with research on vaccines.9 In 2018, Dr Stanley Plotkin, who famously developed a rubella vaccine in the 1960s while working at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wistar Institute, testified under oath in a court case in the US.10
Plotkin described how his colleague Dr Sven Gard of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden harvested organs, hearts, eyes, tongues, etc from hundreds of fully-formed aborted children to make their vaccines. At the time abortion was restricted in the US, so foetal tissue needed to be obtained abroad. It was the deliberate intention of the abortionist and researchers to secure foetal tissue for vaccine cultivation. And specific foetuses were chosen according to the medical history of their parents.
Plotkin’s team successfully isolated the rubella virus (clinically named RA273 – R for rubella, A for abortus, 27 indicating the 27th foetus, 3 means the 3rd tissue explant) which was then cultivated on WI-38, the cell line grown from tissue specimen number 38, from the 32nd of approximately 99 babies used in that project.11 There are at least 19 vaccines currently available which are grown on
roughly 11 different cell lines derived from tissue harvested from aborted children.12 These include vaccines for chickenpox, hepatitis A and B, shingles, measles, mumps and rubella. For some of these diseases, there are alternative vaccines which are not manufactured through the use of foetal cell lines.
It is important to understand that while the final products do not contain actual foetal cells, they may retain DNA contaminants from the cell-line used in their manufacture.13 Removing all foetal DNA would make the vaccines too expensive to be commercially viable. Dr Theresa Deisher, a genetic engineer with over 30 years’ experience in pharmaceutical research warns that: “When we use human fetal produced vaccines or cosmetics, we are also injecting or transferring DNA and viruses from the human fetus used to create the cell line into our own bodies.”14 Deisher, the president of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, argues that there are serious health risks attached to the use of these products.15 The pharmaceutical industry, of course, rejects these claims but it is the morality of these vaccines and not their safety which we are concerned with here.
THE OXFORD COVID-19 VACCINE RESEARCH The Oxford University research which is being carried out in partnership with pharmaceutical giants Merck16 and AstraZeneca17 uses the HEK 293 cellline (Human Embryonic Kidney – derived from cells taken from a baby aborted in the 1970s).18 It is one of ten Covid-19 vaccines in development which are known to involve the use of foetal cells. There are, however, nineteen laboratories working on a Covid-19 vaccine which do not utilise foetal cell lines.19 This shows that alternative methods of production are available if manufacturers choose to use them.
Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine, for example, which the company claims is 90 per cent effective, was developed through the use of genetic sequencing on computers.20 Instead of using an actual virus, this experimental technology manipulates RNA to mimic the antibodies produced in the human body when exposed to a virus. The vaccine is intended to alter the genetic information of the inoculated person by programming an immune response to occur without exposure to the virus.21 If approved, Pfizer’s vaccine will be the first pharmaceutical which acts in this way to be licensed for human use. Nevertheless, it is not clear whether those who wish to be inoculated against Covid-19 through the NHS will have the option of receiving an “ethically” produced vaccine.
Earlier this year the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW)22 called on the faithful to educate themselves on this issue in light of the principles set out by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) in Dignitatis personae23 and by the Pontifical Academy for Life (PAV).24,25 While Dignitatis personae deals mostly with the culpability of researchers engaged in the scientific exploitation of unborn children, the PAV has addressed the responsibilities of parents more specifically. In 2005 it warned that:
“…doctors and fathers of families have a duty to take recourse to alternative vaccines* (if they exist), putting pressure on the political authorities and health systems so that other vaccines without moral problems become available. They should take recourse, if necessary, to the use of conscientious objection…” It called on Catholics “to oppose by all means” these vaccines and to lobby for the “rigorous legal control of the pharmaceutical industry”. It is right, it concluded, to abstain from using them provided it can be done “without causing children, and indirectly the population as a whole, to undergo significant risks to their health”.
In 2017, however, this changed when the PAV issued a new statement downplaying these concerns. It speculated that its 2005 paper could soon be “revised and updated” stating:
“As for the question of the vaccines that used or may have used cells coming from voluntarily aborted foetuses in their preparation, it must be specified that the ‘wrong’ in the moral sense lies in the actions, not in the vaccines or the material itself.
“The technical characteristics of the production of the vaccines most commonly used in child-
hood lead us to exclude that there is a morally relevant cooperation between those who use these vaccines today and the practice of voluntary abortion.”26
The potential confusion for the faithful from the contradiction of the 2005 and the 2017 statements is obvious. However, it has also been interpreted by the pharmaceutical industry as evidence that the Church is now prepared to look the other way on the issue. When questioned, in 2018, about his use of aborted children in vaccine development Dr Plotkin was dismissive stating:
“The Catholic Church has actually issued a document on that, which says that individuals who need the vaccines should receive the vaccines regardless of the fact …and that, I think it implies, that I am the individual who will go to hell because of the use of aborted tissues which I am glad to do.”27
CONCLUSION In 2005, much of the PAV’s discussion had centred on the use of the rubella vaccine and the potential risk of birth defects in children whose mothers contracted the virus while pregnant. These children, themselves, could then face the additional threat of abortion because of those defects. When no alternative is available, the PAV found that the use of an illicit vaccine is to be understood as “passive material cooperation and, in its mildest and remotest sense, also active, morally justified as an extrema ratio [a last resort] due to the necessity to provide for the good of one’s children and of the people who come in contact with the children (pregnant women)”.28 Thankfully, the risks to children, either born or unborn, from Covid-19 are not as grave as those presented by viruses like rubella or meningitis.
11 WEEKS AFTER GESTATION © LIFE ISSUES INSTITUTE Statistics from various nations now indicate a recovery rate, in patients without comorbidities, close to 99 per cent29 and a growing range of therapeutics may increase this still further.30 It is, therefore, difficult to argue that the use of an illicit Covid-19 vaccine should be considered a morally justified “last resort”.
Until 2017, the Church urged the faithful to conscientiously object to vaccines produced by immoral means and to work to end this practice. The recent CBCEW statement largely reverses this approach. The offence to human dignity caused by treating foetal remains as raw material is simply ignored, while the revulsion it provokes is dismissed as “moral distress” at seeming to be complicit in abortion. According to the CBCEW, the first priority for Catholics ought to be the mitigation of any risk which might arise from their refusal of an illicit vaccine.
Although the number of children exploited by “Big Pharma” is small when compared to the untold
loss of life in, for example, the IVF industry, this is not an issue which the Church can afford to ignore.
In April, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas wrote in a pastoral letter: “I believe today’s ugly threat of new vaccines being developed and tested using aborted children gives us an opportunity in divine providence to right this incredible wrong that strikes at the very root of the threats to the sanctity of life that continues to harm human civilisation. …our immediate task is to demand ethical vaccines for Covid-19. We must go further, however, and pursue the prevention of future development of vaccines using remnants and available cells of aborted children’s bodies and to use only ethically developed vaccines.”31
ACTION POINT: Make your GP aware that should you be offered a Covid-19 vaccine which has been produced using cell lines of aborted babies that you will refuse to take it on grounds of conscience.
ENDNOTES:
1. Children of God for Life, US Aborted Fetal Products, Updated July 2020; https:// cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/fetalproductsall.pdf 2. Andrea Byrnes, Human Life International: Products That Use Aborted Fetuses, 23 April 2019; https://www.hli.org/resources/products-that-use-aborted-fetuses/ 3. Life Dynamics; https://lifedynamics.com/ 4. Pro-life America, The Marketing of Aborted Baby Parts, 8 March 2000; https://www. prolifeamerica.com/marketing-aborted-baby-parts-2/11/ 5. Investigate Daily – Fetal body parts used for research; http://mv3462p2bnv2ptxqp33ikj2j-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/INVESTIGATE-2012-Fetal-Body-Parts.pdf 6. Center for Medical Progress, Human Capital; https://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/human-capital/ 7. A boycott of Pepsi products ended in 2012 when PEPSICO announced that it would no longer take advantage of flavour enhancers developed by Senomyx laboratories using foetal cells in their research and development. (Children of
God for Life, US Aborted Fetal Products) 8. Steven Kellmeyer, Children of God for Life, Medical Cannibals: The Moral Implications of Fetal Tissue Vaccines Medical; https://cogforlife.org/steven-kellmeyer/#more-845 9. As early as 1936, foetal tissue from forced abortions performed under the US eugenic laws were used in polio research. See Albert B Sabin, Peter K Olitsky,Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Virus in vitro in human embryonic tissue. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1936, 34:357-359. 10. As early as 1936, foetal tissue from forced abortions performed under the US eugenic laws were used in polio research. See Albert B Sabin, Peter K Olitsky, Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Biology and Medicine, Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Virus in vitro in human embryonic tissue. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1936, 34:357-359. 11. Children of God for Life, Aborted Fetal Material Used in Vaccines and Medicines; https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/AbortedFetalCellLines.pdf 12. Children of God for Life, Aborted Fetal Cell Line Products For USA & Canada – And Ethical Alternatives (Updated June 2020); https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/ uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf 13. Theresa A. Deisher et al, Epidemiologic and Molecular Relationship Between Vaccine Manufacture and Autism Spectrum Disorder Prevalence (2015), Issues in Law & Medicine, 30 1; https://www.soundchoice.org/wp-content/uploads/ Deisher-VaccineManufactureAndASD.pdf 14. DNA Mutations; https://www.soundchoice.org/research/ 15. Open Letter from Dr Theresa Deisher to Legislators Regarding Fetal Cell DNA in Vaccines 8 April 2019; https://www.soundchoice.org/open-letter-to-legislators/ 16. Merck: Merck Supports Jenner Institute to Reach First Milestone in Covid-19 Vaccine Manufacturing; https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-releases/merck-supports-jenner-institute-to-reach-first-milestone-in-covid-19-vaccine-manufacturing-891225678.html 17. AstraZeneca: AstraZeneca and Oxford University announce landmark agreement for
COVID-19 vaccine, 30 April 2020; 18. PER C6 & HEK-293, Children of God for Life; https://cogforlife.org/per-c6-hek293/#more-776 19. Children of God, Covid-19 Vaccines and Treatments in Development – Updated 7 August 2020; https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/CovidCompareMoralImmoral.pdf 20. Wesley J Smith, ‘Pfizer COVID Vaccine Not Created with Fetal Cells’ National Review 9 November 2020 https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/pfizer-covid-vaccine-not-created-with-fetal-cells/?fbclid=IwAR21XXINGa1HNwfNljmCmK79KJuyo-wx3Je1m2cHExkxYdM6zeOPfYhI0rM [Accessed 13 November 2020] 21. “RNA vaccines use a different approach that takes advantage of the process that cells use to make proteins: cells use DNA as the template to make messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules, which are then translated to build proteins. An RNA vaccine consists of an mRNA strand that codes for a disease-specific antigen. Once the mRNA strand in the vaccine is inside the body’s cells, the cells use the genetic information to produce the antigen. This antigen is then displayed on the cell surface, where it is recognised by the immune system.” PHG Foundation, RNA vaccines: an introduction https://www.phgfoundation.org/briefing/rna-vaccines [Accessed 13 November 2020] 22. COVID-19 and Vaccination Department for Social Justice Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, 24 September 2020; https://www.cbcew.org. uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/09/Covid-19-Vaccination-240920.pdf [Accessed 30 October 2020] 23. Congregation For The Doctrine Of The Faith, Dignitas Personae Instruction On
Certain Bioethical Questions, 8 September 2008; https://www.vatican.va/roman_ curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html [Accessed 30 October 2020] 24. Pontificia Academia Pro Vita, Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Human Foetuses, Rome, 9 June 2005;https://www.immunize. org/talking-about-vaccines/vaticandocument.htm [Accessed 30 October 2020] 25. Pontifical, Academy for Life, National Office for Health Pastoral Care (CEI), Association of Italian Catholic Doctors, Note on Italian Vaccine Issue, Rome, 31 July 2017; http://www.academyforlife.va/content/pav/en/the-academy/activity-academy/ note-vaccini.pdf [Accessed 30 October 2020] *The alternative vaccines in question are those that are prepared by means of cell lines which are not of human origin, for example, the Vero cell line (from monkeys) (D Vinnedge), the kidney cells of rabbits or monkeys, or the cells of chicken embryos. However, it should be noted that grave forms of allergy have occurred with some of the vaccines prepared in this way. The use of recombinant DNA technology could lead to the development of new vaccines in the near future which will no longer require the use of cultures of human diploid cells for the attenuation of the virus and its growth, for such vaccines will not be prepared from a basis of attenuated virus, but from the genome of the virus and from the antigens thus developed (G. C. Woodrow, W. M. McDonnell and F. K. Askari). Some experimental studies have already been done using vaccines developed from DNA that has been derived from the genome of the German measles virus. Moreover, some Asiatic researchers are trying to use the Varicella virus as a vector for the insertion of genes which codify the viral antigens of Rubella. These studies are still at a preliminary phase and the refinement of vaccine preparations which can be used in clinical practice will require a lengthy period of time and will be at high costs. D. Vinnedge, The Smallpox Vaccine, The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, Spring 2000, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 12. G. C. Woodrow, “An Overview of Biotechnology as Applied to Vaccine Development” in “New Generation Vaccines”. G. C. Woodrow, M. M. Levine eds, Marcel Dekker Inc, New York and Basel, 1990, see pp. 32-37. W. M. McDonnell, F. K. Askari, Immunization, JAMA, 10 December 1997, vol. 278, no. 22, pp. 2000-2007, see pp. 2005-2006. 26. Note on Italian Vaccine Issue. 27. See note 10. 28. PAV, Moral Reflections on Vaccines 29. The Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine reports that patients with no comorbidities had a Case Fatality Rate of 0.9%. Global Covid-19 Case Fatality Rates, 17 March 2020. Updated data 7th Oct 2020. https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/ global-covid-19-case-fatality-rates/ [Accessed 31 October 2020] 30. As of October 2020, there were at least 52 drugs or therapies in trial or development globally. Regulatory Affairs Professionals Society, Regulatory Focus, COVID-19 therapeutics tracker. https://www.raps.org/news-and-articles/ news-articles/2020/3/covid-19-therapeutics-tracker [Accessed 31 October 2020] 31. Pastoral Letter from Bishop Joseph E. Strickland On the Ethical Development of Covid-19 Vaccine 27 April 2020 https://stphilipinstitute.org/2020/04/27/ pastoral-letter-from-bishop-joseph-e-strickland-on-the-ethical-developmentof-covid-19-vaccine/ [Accessed 5 November 2010]
