Embryo Derived Vaccines

Introduction:

Vaccination as well as modern methods of sanitation have undoubtedly saved more lives than just about any other medical discovery. Edward Jenner began the present era of vaccination when he inoculated a young boy in the year 1796 with the less virulent cowpox, protecting him from smallpox. We now can protect the population from many illnesses by vaccination/inoculation. It is a moral imperative, however, that you can not justify a good result (ends) by using bad or morally corrupt methods (means) to get those results. Such is the case with some of our present vaccines that are derived from abortion products (using aborted babies-bad means for potentially good ends). This page will hopefully bring the light of truth on this problem. I hope to present the related issues in an easily understandable way, offer some pages (link) for clarification, and provide web-sites (www) for a more in depth understanding.

The Problem:

There are presently many human embryo derived vaccines (from aborted baby tissues) available for use or in the process of being developed. Those in use include vaccines for Measles+Rubella, Measles+Mumps+Rubella, Rubella, Hepatitis A, Hepatitis A+B, Hepatitis A+Typhoid, Rabies, Chickenpox, MMR+Chickenpox, Polio, Polio combination (DTaP+Polio+HiB), Rheumatoid Arthritis, Sepsis, Shingles, and Smallpox (www,www). Work on human embryo tissue for vaccines for HIV, Flu, Asian Flu, and Ebola is taking place now. It must be noted that the 3 cell lines of embryo tissues being used did not come from single fetal tissue culture attempts. The present successful lines of fetal tissue culture material came after numerous failed attempts with numerous aborted human fetuses. While it can not be proven that these abortions were done for the purpose of obtaining the babies to culture cells from, there is no question that scientists were immediately available on site to quickly harvest the aborted babies’ organs for cell cultures.

All tissue cultures have a senescence or life expectancy. In other words; they need at some point to be replaced with new cell cultures. The Dutch biotechnology company Crucell was discovered to be looking for 30,000 aborted fetuses to produce viable fetal cell lines and willing to pay hospitals and doctors an “hourly rate”, “overheads”, and a substantial “success fee" for them. (116,117,118,119) The moral point here is that it was not just an accidental event that gave us embryo derived vaccines or that the length of time they have been around makes their use morally justified (time can not justify immoral means to an end), but the real point is that when man fails to be guided by and obey moral absolutes, he almost invariably allows himself to increasingly slide down the proverbial slippery slope of immorality. The opened Pandora’s box of fetal body part use (sales) in medicine (and industry) is now a multi-million (billion?) dollar business (www).

Good and Bad Vaccines:

There are presently only 4 human embryo derived vaccines in the USA for which there is no other morally licit choice presently available for use in this country. These embryo derived vaccines are Rubella, Chickenpox, Shingles, and Hepatitis A. Japan has vaccines made from rabbit kidney (Rubella) and monkey kidney (Hepatitis A), but they have not been allowed into the United States to compete with the embryo derived vaccines sold here. The only 2 illnesses for which there is not an acceptable substitute anywhere available are Shingles and Chickenpox. This whole subject of human embryo derived vaccines is covered in detail at The Children of God for Life website (www). The details reveal that drug companies can produce, and have already produced, alternatives to these vaccines. These companies need to be pressured to discontinue this line of business by getting the truth out into the open as well as by financial competition from morally made vaccines from other countries (such as Japan). Phone calls or letters of complaint sent to the particular companies as well as to our congressional representatives (www) just might make a difference on reducing the number of embryos killed for this industrialized process. [Merck (Measles,Mumps; Shingles,Chickenpox,Hepatitis-A) www 800-422-9675; Sanofi Pastuer (Hepatitis-A,Polio,Rabies,Smallpox) www 800-822-2463; GlaxoSmithKline (Hepatitis-A,Hepatitis-B,Chikenpox) www 800-475-8222; Chiron www 800-244-7668; Wyeth (Flu) www 800-666-7248; Eli Lilly (Sepsis) www 800-545-5979; Amgen (Rheumatoid Arthritis) www 800-772-6436] Steady pressure can help persuade these companies, and our country, to move in a more ethical direction; moving away from a culture built on death towards that of one built on life.

Of note is that a new, ethical company has come on the scene, AVM Biotechnology, located in Seattle, WA, which is dedicated to developing moral alternatives to embryo vaccines. They plan to "Work to provide safe, effective and affordable alternative vaccines and stem cell therapies that are not tainted by embryonic or electively aborted fetal materials." Support for this organization and encouragement can be directed to www 206-906-9922 or by
Email: info@avmbiotech.com.

The Moral Dilemma:

The aspects of the moral dilemma that has been produced by the production and use of human embryo derived vaccines are debated by ethicists and theologians. The problems I would like to highlight are; the possible encouragement and support of these improper vaccines (and abortion) by their use and the possible illness and death that may result from a refusal to use them. Then a synopsis of the principles of the 'cooperation in evil' will be presented. I will finish this page with a few helpful points from a study entitled "Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Human Fetuses" (120,www) conducted by the Pontifical Academy for Life.

Our use of these embryo derived vaccines does indeed risk encouraging the abortion industry, the pharmaceutical industry, and researchers to continue their use and destruction of embryos (see www , Aborted Fetal Cell Line Vaccines, a Moral Perspective then Encouraging Further Abortions & Research). There is also a risk of the moral degradation of individuals and society; a cheapening of life. To encourage in any way those who voluntarily offer, procure, and make these abortion products places ourselves and them at moral risk (our very souls!). We also assume some guilt if we do nothing and allow them to continue unchecked. Enlightened individuals (those who know of the vaccines immoral nature) have a higher degree of cooperation with evil than do those who are unenlightened when they stand by passively and do nothing to resist the continued existence of this industry . The only way to be able to accept the use of these vaccines is if there is some other rationale for their continued use (see next paragraph):

We will concentrate our attention on the congenital rubella syndrome for the arguments for the rationale for the use of these immoral vaccines to prevent illness and death. If everyone refused to use these vaccines we might return to a state such as in 1964 when there were 20,000 cases of congenital rubella syndrome in the USA resulting in 11,250 abortions (spontaneous and surgical?), 2,100 neonatal deaths, 11,600 cases of deafness, 3,580 cases of blindness, and 1,800 cases of mental retardation.(120,121,122) This was the epidemic that pushed the development of these improper vaccines. Our human will to treat this illness enabled immoral men to take advantage of our society, brushing aside moral boundary lines on the use of human embryos and also on abortion. While this was a record year of cases and the numbers can not turn a moral wrong into a moral right; the refusal now to vaccinate requires one to make other moral decisions. A man-made 2 pronged moral dilemma! All those involved in the formal cooperation in evil with the production of embryo derived vaccines are the ones who have placed us on the horns of this dilemma (see the moral principles of 'cooperation in evil' below link ). Not immunizing children with these immoral vaccines has the moral downside of potentially (eventually very likely) causing illness and death in our own children as well as in others.

The Moral Principles Of Cooperation In Evil (link):

It is simply fact that the embryo derived vaccines of Hepatitis A, Polio. Rubella, Shingles, Rabies, Rheumatoid Arthritis, and Chickenpox, by being produced with the use of aborted fetal tissues, have an immoral nature. Any connection to these, including simple use, is tainted to some extent with a connection to evil. The approximate degree of connection to evil can be ascertained by referring to the moral tenets of the principles of 'cooperation in evil'. (see link) You can not totally rid oneself of evil by resorting to a 'lesser evil'. There is also the problem of encouraging the industry that produced these vaccines, through our continued use, which brings about scandal (the encouraging of sin, immoral behavior) in others. It may be unfair, though, to harshly judge those parents, who in their attempts to obtain holiness and with reverent respect for the gift of life produced in God's image, and through the resulting depth of their consciences, determine not to vaccinate their children with these vaccines. The call to holiness in these parents and their refusal to vaccinate may be just what the Lord has encouraged to help push us to bring about an end to this immoral use, and increasing use, of aborted fetal tissues in research.

To Vaccinate or Not with These Vaccines?:

There is a helpful correspondence on this problem of embryo derived vaccines and what actions parents (and all of us) should consider. Debra Vinnedge, Executive director of Children of God for Life wrote to the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Bennedict XV1) who was head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith and asked about the liceity of these vaccines and the parents' rights to oppose such a vaccination required by schools and mandated by law (120). The Pontifical Academy of Life examined the question in a study of the subject entitled "Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared from Cells Derived from Aborted Human Fetuses" (www). Their summary was as follows:

     "To summarize, it must be confirmed that there is a grave responsibility to use alternative vaccines and to make a conscientious objection with regard to those which have moral problems.
     As regards the vaccines without an alternative, the need to contest so that others may be prepared must be reaffirmed, as should be the lawfulness of using the former in the meantime insomuch as is necessary in order to avoid a serious risk not only for one's own children but also, and perhaps more specifically, for the health conditions of the population as a whole -- especially for pregnant women
     The lawfulness of the use of these vaccines should not be misinterpreted as a declaration of the lawfulness of their production, marketing and use, but is to be understood as being a passive material cooperation and, in its mildest and remotest sense, also active, morally justified as an "extrema ratio" 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.
     Such cooperation occurs in a context of moral coercion of the conscience of parents, who are forced to choose to act against their conscience or otherwise, to put the health of their children and of the population as a whole at risk. This is an unjust alternative choice, which must be eliminated as soon as possible."

There are alternatives to 2 of these vaccines (hepatitis A and rubella) available in the world (Japan) and one could argue that the present dilemma was not brought about at all because of chickenpox, which is universally a 'mild' childhood illness. Chickenpox and Shingles are the only illnesses for which there is not a non-embryo derived vaccine available anywhere. The embryo derived immunization for hepatitis A is only good for several years and hepatitis A can be treated successfully with gamma globulin. The option of getting children immunized for measles and mumps is available now without the rubella product in it. The pressure on parents opposed to vaccination would be relieved if the government were to allow the Japanese non-tainted rubella and hepatitis A products to compete with the only existing (tainted) US products available to these parents' children. The generally mild chickenpox could be allowed to flourish, or at least opposing parents not forced to use the tainted vaccine, until a moral product comes onto the market.

As noted in the study and response from the Pontifical Academy of Life we are all obligated to maintain a conscientious objection to and fight against these morally abhorrent embryo derived vaccines; their developers, and the companies that continue to manufacture them. We can not rest while these gifts of life, human embryos, are destroyed in the guise of an argument for saving lives. The truth needs to get out about these morally tainted vaccines by word of mouth and by phone calls and letters of opposition to the drug companies and our government representatives. Requests to our doctors (teaching them) for available moral vaccine alternatives and support of companies (AVM Biotechnology www, 206-906-9922, Email: info@avmbiotech.com) helps defend the moral high ground. The fight in the name of these baby's lives that were taken for vaccine development will save many more and open the window of truth on the practice of using aborted human fetuses in research and science. It is the least we can do as a thank you for the gift of life we have been given; and they have lost.

(Top)