Moral Question: Vaccine Ingredient WI-38 & WALVAX-2 -- Aborted Fetal Tissue

Discussion in 'Theological Forum' started by RobertPGH1981, Feb 13, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    Here are a few direct quotes from Facebook none of which are theological in nature:

    1. "This question has been faced before in another context. At the end of WW2, the question arose, should we use the results of the Nazi's experiments on Jews in the concentration camps. Ignoring for a moment the fact that they were scientifically dubious, there was real question as to whether we should use their results."

    2. "Let me give you a similar example.

    It is rare for people who freeze to death to be obliging enough to wear appropriate monitoring equipment for research purposes. Therefore much of our medical knowlege of hypothermia comes from those enterprising Nazi scientists who managed to "convince" Jewish "volunteers" to be submerged in water of varing temperatures for prolonged periods UNTIL DEATH.

    While we have repeated some of these experiments, we seem to feel the need to remove the subjects before death, and therefore limit our information.

    What do we do with the data generated by these experiments, horrific as they are, from the 1930s? Do we take advantage of the information to save current victims, or do we take a stand on principal and pretend that they never happened, potentially costing lives NOW?"

    I think the issue with the parallel between the Vaccine Ingredient WI-38/Warvax-2 and WW2 data is the continuous nature of the abortion rate. I don't see a reason to terminate the data from WW2 studies. However, since WI-38 is coming close to the end of its lifespan WARVAX-2 should be used continuing the cycle.
     
  2. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    Here is the direct link to the CDC's website which provides the ingredients referred to as contents. Here is a screenshot below to save you time if you don't want to look at the page. Measles, Mumps, Rubella (MMR)

    upload_2019-2-14_7-42-18.png

    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/pinkbook/downloads/appendices/B/excipient-table-2.pdf

    I am not a DR so if I am reading it wrong its due to the fact that the column to the right is titled contents. The top paragraph on the page says the following:

    "Others are residual trace amounts of materials that were used during the manufacturing process and removed. These include: Cell culture materials, used to grow the vaccine antigens. For example, egg protein, various culture media. Inactivating ingredients, used to kill viruses or inactivate toxins. For example, formaldehyde. Antibiotics, used to prevent contamination by bacteria. For example, neomycin."
     
  3. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

  4. Romans922

    Romans922 Puritan Board Professor

  5. hammondjones

    hammondjones Puritan Board Sophomore

    We do not use those particular vaccines. We feel that it legitimizes the potential further use of such methods, and we don't want to be part of it.
     
  6. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    I am not in the groups known for promoting “all vaccines are BAD”. I do think there is a missing piece on this thread that vaccines VERY often can be accredited for preventing death. It is always easier to critique systems that take a “preventative” approach because if they actually work, then it is always easy to question “did I really need it” and often times can easily be seen as unneeded. Whereas with reactive approaches the question is always “why did we NOT do something”.

    However for many that have opted out of vaccines to there own death or the death of others, those who died do not get a chance to wonder “maybe I should have taken the shot”. It is a good work to look into what you are being Injected with and try and make the best decision morally with each vaccine. However I keep a FAR distance from those who enter the world of the paranoid and to become teetotalers with any and ALL vaccines. Bottom line ALL vaccines are not harmful. One can simply look as the MASS death tolls in history to see their benefit. This in no way excuses those who murder the unborn to make drugs and because the components mentioned in the OP is tied to abortion we need to at least pause and seriously consider.

    This I think is a matter of conscience. Unless you are able to be logically consistent and avoid purchasing from any of the listed companies here:
    https://familycouncil.org/?p=14353

    Was I guilty of sin when I purchased a coffee from Starbucks in my hotel this morning since i know they support planned parenthood? I sure hope not:detective:
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
  7. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    What Starbucks does with their money after we pay for is on their conscience. If Starbucks somehow used aborted fetus' in their coffee production it would be a better parallel. I guess the ultimate question here is

    "Does the vaccine require aborted fetal tissue to be effective? If not, why are they not seeking other means to produce the vaccine." Answer: nobody is pushing them to do so...
     
  8. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    These are good thoughts.

    Why can’t this same logic be used for the vaccine. No one is forcing Starbucks to decide to fund Planned Parenthood. No one is forcing the chinese to use aborted fetus material as other alternatives could be developed.

    P.S. It is because of this that even though I am now much more hesitant to get the measle vaccine, this is a matter for individual family conscience.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2019
  9. Nate

    Nate Puritan Board Junior

    A point of clarification: these vaccines are not produced using cells from an aborted child. The vaccines are produced using a cell line derived from the aborted child. This may not seem like an important distinction, but it is.

    The cell line (WI-38) derived from the aborted child does not possess any physical substance from the aborted child. It does contain the same genetic code possessed by the child, but this is information, not a physical substance. The WI-38 cells are composed entirely of biological material unrelated to the aborted child. So, these vaccines are produced using cells containing no physical material from any aborted children; rather, they are produced using cells that contain genetic information from an aborted child's lung cells.

    Certainly, Christians can still object to products made from these derived cell lines, but we should not propagate the false claim that vaccines are made from pieces and parts of aborted babies.
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Amen Amen x 1
    • List
  10. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    Thank you very much for sharing this, especially considering your field of work!
     
  11. timfost

    timfost Puritan Board Junior

    Which one of us does not already benefit from the death of an innocent Man?
     
  12. lynnie

    lynnie Puritan Board Graduate

    I didn't read this whole thread, but supposedly you can still ask for the older vaccs made in Japan on non human tissue. Right?
     
  13. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    I am not a doctor but I see that you are making a distinction above. But quite honestly I am not seeing much of a difference. Still confused I guess you can say since the CDC website says it contains WI-38 which is short for 'Human diploid lung fibroblasts'. My understanding is that those cells are the cells that are still alive and making the vaccine possible. What am I missing?

    The insert describes the process as:

    "The Wistar RA 27/3 strain of live attenuated rubella virus propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung fibroblasts.{1,2}"

    1. Plotkin, S.A.; Cornfeld, D.; Ingalls, T.H.: Studies of immunization with living rubella virus: Trials in children with a strain cultured from an aborted fetus, Am. J. Dis. Child. 110: 381-389, 1965.
    2. Plotkin, S.A.; Farquhar, J.; Katz, M.; Ingalls, T.H.: A new attenuated rubella virus grown in human fibroblasts: Evidence for reduced nasopharyngeal excretion, Am. J. Epidemiol. 86: 468-477, 1967.

    https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM123789.pdf
     
  14. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    I don't think you can actually. THe measles vaccine used to be just the measles and then they moved to giving everybody Measles, Mumps and Rubella. Hence the abbreviation MMR. I am not sure what other alternatives everybody has to be honest.
     
  15. Von

    Von Puritan Board Freshman

    They have to mention it. Just like "THIS PRODUCT WAS MADE IN A FACTORY THAT PRODUCES NUTS - MAY CONTAIN TRACES."
    Any ingredient (like egg, if the culture is grown on egg) must be mentioned, for possible allergies, etc.

    This might sound like semantics, but the reason why this is important is that as soon as some of your facts are not true, you lose credibility in the things that are. The issue that you raised, of people benefiting from sinful practices is a valid issue, and it is making me think (and I am a pro-vaccine medical practitioner). But stick to the facts, otherwise you are losing the group that needs convincing.
     
  16. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    A tentative hypothesis:

    If the wages of sin is death, perhaps that is why the autism and vaccine-complication rates are sky-rocketing in the US. It may be a result of us using sinful means to "protect" ourselves.

    After thimerosal was removed from most vaccines, autism rates still did not drop, but kept steadily rising. Merck’s aluminum adjuvant may still be the culprit.

    But there is another possibility: Just as cannibals in New Guinea suffered central nervous system effects from eating other humans, perhaps we are now experiencing ailments from the same cause (injesting alien animal and human-derived proteins directly into our systems).

    Regressive autism is not genetic. It must be triggered by an external event that can create hundreds of different DNA breaks and mutations. What is that trigger you may ask? I think it might be vaccines. The DNA of other humans might just do it.

    I do believe either the (1) ingredients used in vaccines, (2) the early dates of vaccinations, (3) or the multiple vaccinations at once, is probably a cause of some autism.

    The dramatic rise in autism is not merely a reporting error and it must be either environmental or associated with foods or things we ingest into our bodies. Even if the substance derived from an aborted baby is not the dead baby but only derived from the dead baby, merely containing the genetic information may still be enough to mess up our systems.

    I am not anti-vax. But the nature of what composes a vaccination has drastically changed since the days of protecting America against polio.

    Remember, the government denied Agent Orange and Gulf War Syndrome for years.

    The Vatican has ruled that the good of protecting life outweighs the bad of using these vaccinations. But MAYBE the good does not outweigh the bad and we are reaping the rewards now upon the younger generations.

    I believe this needs to be investigated. But since the issue can be so partisan, it is not likely to be investigated objectively. Some groups ARE investigating this link:

    http://www.whale.to/vaccine/is_aborted_fetal_dna.html

    "How could the contaminating aborted fetal DNA create problems? It creates the potential for autoimmune responses and/or inappropriate insertion into our own genomes through a process called recombination. There are groups researching the potential link between this DNA and autoimmune diseases such as juvenile (type I) diabetes, multiple sclerosis and lupus. Our organization, Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, is focused on studying the quantity, characteristics and genomic recombination of the aborted fetal DNA found in many of our vaccines."


    My wife and I are both RNs. We've vaccinated our children because we live in the jungle. But we've gone to great effort to do it safely. We get single-dose vaccines. We vaccinate very late. We only vaccinate for one thing at a time. We avoid anything that doesn't seem needed. We try to avoid some brands of vaccines (sometimes you have a choice).

    We completed a region-wide vaccination program for the tribe where we work and were recognized by the government here for our work, and we believe vaccines are better than death in a dirty tribal situation. However, we do believe there is something wrong with vaccines produced recently. We believe they are triggering responses in some kids, sometimes severely in children. It overwhelms their immune system and triggers an automimmune response. We do not know the reason, though. We suspect it is the additives, the animal proteins sometimes found in some vaccines, or, perhaps, the genetic info found in some vaccines.

    We do think that in 20 years we will know more. And I believe the anti-vaxxers will be somewhat vindicated, though they look crazy to many people right now.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  17. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    and again:

    "Could genomic insertion of the aborted fetal DNA, found in some of our childhood vaccines since 1979, be an environmental trigger for autism? Could the fact that genes critical for nerve synapse formation and nervous system development are found on the X chromosome provide some explanation of why autism is predominantly a disease found in boys? Could the “hot spots” identified in these autism-associated genes be sites for insertion of contaminating aborted fetal DNA?

    These questions must be answered, and quickly. Recent literature suggests that autism spectrum disorder may now impact one out of every 100 children. The pharmaceutical industry is also currently moving to replace more animal-produced vaccines with aborted-fetal-cell production and also to produce biologic drugs using aborted fetal cells.

    The practice of using aborted fetal cells for vaccine and drug production creates wrenching moral dilemmas for parents and consumers, ignores informed consent rights, and exposes our children and ourselves to contaminants lacking safety evaluations. We cannot ignore this issue in good conscience, and we cannot afford to wait."


    http://www.whale.to/vaccine/is_aborted_fetal_dna.html
     
  18. Nate

    Nate Puritan Board Junior

    You are not missing anything if your point is to simply state that vaccines are produced using a human cell line that was developed from an abortion.

    My point was that it is incorrect to claim that vaccines are produced using cells or tissues that were actually from an abortion; i.e., a mass of tissue or cells were taken from an aborted child, and it is now those cells that are used to produce vaccines. The mass of cells from that abortion are long gone. The WI-38 cell line in question was built from those cells, but are not the same physical stuff as those cells.
     
  19. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    This is where I am lost on this topic because trace amounts can be found within vaccines of WI-38. So quick question.. If we tested the vaccine would the DNA (if this is even possible) show that its from the aborted fetus, or would it be something completely different?
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  20. RobertPGH1981

    RobertPGH1981 Puritan Board Freshman

    Thanks for the recommendation. I just purchased the book. My wife has always been very health conscience and goes to great lengths to eat organic foods while avoiding GMO. I have noticed a parallel between Anti-Vaxers and Vegan/Vegitarians who avoid perservatives, eat organic ect... I avoid them as well but I am not as strict as she is when it comes to diet. With my wife and I expecting our first child in a month this has been front and center on my mind.

    Have you noticed a similar parallel?
     
  21. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    I have, which only gives me more pause to embracing the anti-vaccine world.

    Occupationally I am very familiar with the non-GMO and “Organic”:rolleyes: Foods. Trust when i say it mostly consist of marketing schemes vs. the supposed health benefits which the camps of people buy hook-line-Sinker because of a label or online web article. It is a complete different story when you actually see the differences in how the food is grown and made.

    P.S. I will keep my opinions about vegetarians to myself or else I will get the meat sweats.:eek:
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2019
  22. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    Organic foods are healthier overall (a little better nutrition and a LOT less contaminants):

    Mayo clinic affirms this here: https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-...thy-eating/in-depth/organic-food/art-20043880

    The only drawback is that organic foods go bad faster and you need to check it more. E-coli is lettuce has killed more people suddenly than Twinkies, but that doesn't mean you should eat Twinkies.

    Also:
    "The organic foods, such as fruits and vegetables, were 30 percent less likely to contain detectable levels of pesticide residues. Two studies found higher levels of pesticide traces in the urine of children who ate non-organic foods. However, no more than 6 percent of the foods covered in the studies exceeded allowable limits of pesticide residues." Here: https://universityhealthnews.com/daily/nutrition/benefits-of-organic-food/

    The fact that pesticde traces are even found in the urine of ouer children is distressing. I would think 0.0 levels of that is desired.

    Also, "the researchers found a 30 percent lower rate of detectable contamination in organically-grown produce.." That is HUUUGE. That is enough for me to pay more for my children's food.

    The US government has given us bad diet advice for years. They've lost all credibility. They've told us for years that eggs and milk and butter were bad and are now telling us that eggs and real butter might be better for you.... you can't trust the gov't. They'll tell you black is white and white is black...and that butter and bacon is bad for you!
     
  23. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    Perg,

    Science changes. This occurs in more places than the government. When you say the government is untrustworthy are you aware that there are Christians that work for the US government that are trustworthy. Or are you giving blanket conclusions based on past valid evidence (this is what I assume you are doing). Would it be equally valid for me to blanket missionaries as being untrustworthy because of documented missionary examples of abuse? I would not do this of course, but that appears to be the logic expressed. Are there untrustworthy people in the government? Absolutely! Are there trustworthy, diligent, Christian employees that strive to work with honesty and integrity that fall under your label of government? Absolutely!

    P.S. Your government is one that establishes what meets the definiton of what can be legally labeled as “Organic”, but I guess you DO trust that.:D
     
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2019
  24. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

  25. Pergamum

    Pergamum Ordinary Guy (TM)

    The USDA should not be giving diet advice. They've consistently have gotten it wrong for decades: We’re All Guinea Pigs in a Failed Decades-Long Diet Experiment

    They've promoted low fat even when high sugar and high carbs were involved. They've ignored the impact of white sugar and targeted fat. They've promoted highly processed grains over steak and eggs and butter.

    They've demonized eggs and butter. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/21/opinion/when-the-government-tells-you-what-to-eat.html

    They've told us to reduce salt intake. The Food Pyramid is a farce. In school lunches pizzas are listed as a vegetable. It is insane.

    https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/n...sts-government-should-not-give-dietary-advice

    https://www.nationalgeographic.com/people-and-culture/food/the-plate/2015/02/19/ok-cholesterol/

    https://cei.org/blog/bad-science-cdc-forced-reverse-its-recommendations-salt

    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/usda-dietary-guidelines-diabetes_n_5635554

    Sure, there might be Christians who work for the USDA, but if so, they ought to hang their heads in shame over their stupidity.

    Seeing the incompetence of the USDA about diet, and seeing how the US Gov't covered up Agent Orange and the use of LSD on its own citizens, among other things, it is not hard to see the US gov't getting it wrong also (or outright lying) when they deny that vaccines cause autism.

    Trust in the gov't is a foolish venture.
     
  26. Grant Jones

    Grant Jones Puritan Board Junior

    Wow.
     
  27. Nate

    Nate Puritan Board Junior

    It's a bit difficult to follow your statements and question as they contain phrases that suggest a misunderstanding of what vaccines and WI-38 cells actually are. But I think the main point is this: WI-38 cells are a cell line. A cell line is definitely still a group of cells, but it is not the same group of cells that were taken from their organism of origin (in the case of WI-38, the organism of origin was an aborted child). The individual cells that constitute a cell line are built with biological materials that are purchased from a scientific supply company (or made in-house by individual scientists).

    To produce a cell line, cells from the organism of origin are isolated, and then scientists add the other biological materials to the isolated cells. The isolated cells then use these materials to build new cells that essentially preserve the DNA information and general attributes of the isolated cells. Due to the inherent nature of cells, all of the physical material that made up the originally isolated cells is metabolized or degraded within a few generations of new cells being built. In the case of the WI-38 cell line used for vaccine production, these cells are many generations removed from the original cells, and therefore none of the physical material from the original cells that were taken from the aborted child remain. Yes, the DNA sequence of the WI-38 cell line matches that of the aborted child, and IF any of the WI-38 DNA finds it's way into vaccines, that DNA will match that of of the aborted child. However, in the case of cell lines, a DNA match means a match of information (the information simply being ordered sequences of nucleotides) rather than a match of physical material to organism of origin.
     
  28. koenig

    koenig Puritan Board Freshman

    Can someone enlighten me on what difference it makes if it’s not the dead baby’s cells, or if none are present? Seems to my mind that there’s a chain of events between killing a baby and my son receiving the vaccine, even if it’s not the exact same cells or if no cells are present at all.
     
  29. lynnie

    lynnie Puritan Board Graduate

  30. LongWar

    LongWar Puritan Board Freshman

    Heavy topic indeed. I will take the minority position, although I am not fully convinced of it. Since the aborted child was not murdered for the purpose of harvesting cells, I do not believe it is sinful to use those cells to save other lives. I think Grant made a parallel to harvesting organs from a murder victim. It would be different if the aborted child were killed for the purpose of harvesting parts.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page