Lies About Vaccine Ingredients -- The Role of Fetal Cells Version

Anti-vaccination activists and extreme opponents of abortion like to use language that gives the idea that ongoing abortions are necessary for the manufacture of vaccines.

An example:

It is time to say “enough is enough” with respect to “the worst type of cannibalism you can imagine” – the use of aborted fetal cell lines in vaccines.

....  Debra Vinnedge, executive director of the Children of God for Life organization....“The pharmaceutical industry has imported, exported, exploited and profited using hundreds of innocent aborted babies. And they continue to do so in the present … .”

Uhm, Debra Vinnedge? The ninth Commandment?

  The truth is rather different, as even the Catholic Church has recognized.

There are three cell lines, derived from three abortions in the 1960s, that are involved in vaccine manufacture. From the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii): Immunization Issues: Human Fetal Links with Some Vaccines

Two different strains of human diploid cell cultures made from fetuses have been used extensively for vaccine production for decades. One was developed in the United States in 1961 (called WI-38) and the other in the United Kingdom in 1966 (called MRC-5).

WI-38 came from lung cells from a female fetus of 3-months gestation and MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus. Both fetuses were intentionally aborted, but neither was aborted for the purpose of obtaining diploid cells. The fetal tissues that eventually became WI-38 and the MRC-5 cell cultures were removed from fetuses that were dead. The cellular biologists who made the cell cultures did not induce the abortions.

The virus that led to the only rubella vaccine available in the United States and that is widely used overseas (Meruvax II, Merck) came from tissues obtained at the time of an abortion performed on a rubella virus-infected mother.  The abortion was not conducted in order to isolate the virus, but rather because the mother and the fetus were infected with wild rubella virus that posed a risk of major birth defects.

Since that wild strain of rubella virus (known as RA27/3) was isolated, it has been grown in human fetal diploid cells. There is no need to obtain additional cells from aborted fetuses to sustain the supply of attenuated rubella viruses used to manufacture additional batches of rubella vaccine for the future.

Update from the Canadian Coalition for Immunization Awareness and Promotion (CCIAP).  A PDF format version of the following information:  Download Fact4_fetalcells_e

Do vaccines contain cells from aborted fetuses?

No. Vaccines do not contain human cells or tissue. During purification of the vaccine all cells are removed. Human cell lines are used in the early stages of production of some vaccines* because viruses need a living cell to grow. The virus for the vaccine is grown in a human cell line, then killed or damaged so it cannot cause disease. This cell line comes from legal abortions in the early 1960s and continues today from the original source. The abortions were not conducted for the purpose of vaccine discovery or vaccine production. No new fetal tissue is required in the ongoing production of vaccines because cell lines can reproduce themselves in culture and can be used for a very long time.

*MMR, varicella, hepatitis A, Rabies, Quadracel and TdP

Vatican documents confirm that "In the absence of effective alternatives, individuals may use the morally tainted vaccines", and assert that it is necessary to "provide for the good of one's children", including the prevention of disease where possible.

References:

Your Child’s Best Shot p 325

Catholic News Service

Moral reflections on vaccines prepared from cells derived from aborted human foetuses, Pontifical Academy for Life 2005

Two different strains of human diploid cell cultures made from fetuses have been used extensively for vaccine production for decades. One was developed in the United States in 1961 (called WI-38) and the other in the United Kingdom in 1966 (called MRC-5).

WI-38 came from lung cells from a female fetus of 3-months gestation and MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus. Both fetuses were intentionally aborted, but neither was aborted for the purpose of obtaining diploid cells. The fetal tissues that eventually became WI-38 and the MRC-5 cell cultures were removed from fetuses that were dead. The cellular biologists who made the cell cultures did not induce the abortions.

The virus that led to the only rubella vaccine available in the United States and that is widely used overseas (Meruvax II, Merck) came from tissues obtained at the time of an abortion performed on a rubella virus-infected mother.  The abortion was not conducted in order to isolate the virus, but rather because the mother and the fetus were infected with wild rubella virus that posed a risk of major birth defects.

Since that wild strain of rubella virus (known as RA27/3) was isolated, it has been grown in human fetal diploid cells. There is no need to obtain additional cells from aborted fetuses to sustain the supply of attenuated rubella viruses used to manufacture additional batches of rubella vaccine for the future.

Comments

[kwombles]

Nicely done. :-)

[Natalie]

I know all this, and our family still cannot morally justify using a product that took innocent life to develop it.

The Japanese Rubella vaccine came from a throat swab, why can't I have something like that available for my kids instead of one that took 28 lives?

[custom waterfall]

Throughout sanitization of the vaccine all cells are removed. Human cell lines are used in the early stages. The disease for the vaccine is grown in a human cell line, then kill or spoiled so it cannot cause disease. The abortions were not conducted for the purpose of vaccine discovery or vaccine production. No new fetal handkerchief is required in the ongoing production of vaccines because cell lines can reproduce themselves in culture and can be used for a very long time. Nice post quite interesting.

[Cleft Palate Lawsuits]

This is quite interesting. Can you guys file a lawsuit against peopel who do this? Recently I've approached a Topamax Birth Defects Lawyer because my baby had congenital problems when she was born and I was under the medication Topamax when I was pregnant.

Anyways, thanks for sharing your opinion on this post.

[Enda]

I am curious if you are doing the swine flu vncciae also? I don't believe that vncciaes cause autism, but they can cause inflammation and therefore I think that children whose autism is related to some sort of auto-immune reaction are not unlikely to experience some aggravation of symptoms. I find it fascinating that in all the debate, I have yet to see anyone point out that hte CDC fact sheets for these vncciaes warns to be cautious with children with autoimmune disorders. I am not really anti-vax, but I have not done any vaccinations since dx which was about 8 months ago, since none of them seems really critical to have at this point and I figure, why heap more inflammation on an already struggling brain? But I am really torn about the swine flu vncciae. I worry about that one mostly because it seems like it was rushed to market. I am having a hard time trusting it. Not to sound like a commie, but I have seen too much from the inside to trust corporate America. And while privilege prevents me from telling you why, let me tell you that I have absolutely zero faith in the fda. negative faith, even, if that is possible.

[Chris]

Enda:

but they can cause inflammation

So does any infection. The swine flu has been incorporated into this year's influenza vaccine, which my children and I all received (my kids are all older than seventeen). It may not be in next year's influenza vaccine.

There is no evidence that vaccines have a connection to autoimmune diseases, which was one of the things covered by the Vaccine Safety Datalink studies. Which you can find here.