Vaccines and aborted babies

82-year-old Brian Pinker is the first person in the UK to receive the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine - but was it ethically produced?

82-year-old Brian Pinker is the first person in the UK to receive the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine – but was it ethically produced?

The first person in the UK has now received a dose of the Oxford / AstraZeneca vaccine.

82-year-old Brian Pinker, a dialysis patient, took the jab at Churchill Hospital in Oxford.

But was the vaccine ethically produced?

This could be a good time to look at a claim about vaccines which the media has dismissed as false.

FOETAL TISSUE CLAIM

Last year, The BBC boiled vaccine ‘misinformation claims’ down to four it believed it could refute:

* ‘Altered DNA’ claims,
* Bill Gates and microchip claims,
* Foetal tissue claims,
* Recovery rate claims.

CHRISTIAN RESPONSIBILITY

In the December 2020 Christian Voice newsletter, which our members, that’s those who support this ministry both by their prayers and by their financial contributions, received last month by post, we looked at these claims, together with:

* Concerns about mercury,
* The record of vaccine companies,
* Genuine concerns about safety and
* Why the vaccine has not been licensed as ‘safe and efficacious’,
* Why initial adverse side effects are so common,
* The possibility of coercion, let alone
* Whether the vaccine could become compulsory.

To receive your copy, CLICK HERE, join Christian Voice as a member, and share in our mission to empower believers with the information they need to target their prayer and action, just as the early church in Philippi partnered with the Apostle Paul:

Phil 4:10 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity.

FEMALE INFERTILITY

At the end of last year, we pulled out another issue, that of possible adverse effects from the vaccines on female fertility.

CLICK HERE to view that article.

All we do in this ministry starts from the recognition that Christians have a responsibility to discern truth from fiction, proclaim the truth and raise a prophetic voice to those in power.

Isa 58:1 Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins.

We do not deal in false information here. Christians are bound to be people of objective truth:

Exodus 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
Psalm 85:11 Truth shall spring out of the earth; and righteousness shall look down from heaven.
Matt 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

FOETAL CELLS

As we saw above, the BBC is keen to dismiss any idea that there is a connection between the vaccines and cells of aborted babies. They say: ‘Confusion may have arisen because there is a step in the process of developing a vaccine that uses cells grown in a lab, which are the descendants of embryonic cells that would otherwise have been destroyed. The technique was developed in the 1960s, and no fetuses were aborted for the purposes of this research.’

They go on to say ‘The developers of the vaccine at Oxford University say they worked with cloned cells, but these cells “are not themselves the cells of aborted babies”. The weakened virus is apparently created using these cloned cells before the ‘cellular material is removed when the virus is purified’.

It is true no woman had her baby aborted for the purpose of making vaccines. However, Sciencemag reports: ‘At least five of the candidate COVID-19 vaccines use one of two human fetal cell lines: HEK-293, a kidney cell line widely used in research and industry that comes from a fetus aborted in about 1972; and PER.C6, a proprietary cell line owned by Janssen, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, developed from retinal cells from an 18-week-old fetus aborted in 1985. Both cell lines were developed in the lab of molecular biologist Alex van der Eb at Leiden University.’

The ‘FULL FACT’

An earlier version was the line of MRC-5 cells, originally taken from an aborted baby in 1966.

AstraZeneca / Oxford are using HEK-293 to make their vaccine. Despite that, the selfr-proclaimed ‘checking website’ fullfact.org states: ‘There are no foetal cells in the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine’. That is the fact, probably (see below) but not the full fact.

As it happens they themselves quote the ‘Vaccine Knowledge Project at Oxford University: “Some viruses, such as chickenpox (varicella), grow much better in human cells. After they are grown, the viruses are purified several times to remove the cell culture material. This makes it unlikely that any human material remains in the final vaccine”.’

Fullfact go on: ‘They also say that the foetus from which MRC-5 cells are propagated, was the result of a legal abortion agreed to by the woman, and was not performed for the purpose of vaccine development specifically.

‘The origin of HEK 293 cells are less clear, but came from what was likely to have been a therapeutic abortion in the Netherlands in the 1970s.’

So it is ‘unlikely’ but not impossible that human material grown from aborted babies remains in the vaccine. Moreover, human cells, grown from an aborted baby, have been used in the manufacturing process. Furthermore, it matters not that the various abortions were not performed with the intention of harvesting parts from them. In truth, that makes it worse. The women involved were not made aware their dead babies would subsequently be used for that purpose.

NO MORAL PROBLEM?

For some reason Catholics often appear more concerned about life issues than the majority of Protestants. The faithful in the pew have been raising so many objections, and asking for guidance, that as RT repotrs the Catholic Church in England and Wales has issued a statement.

It says the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales has decided that the Church supports the use of vaccines against Covid-19.

‘Each of us has a duty to protect others from infection with its danger of serious illness, and for some, death. A vaccine is the most effective way to achieve this unless one decides to self-isolate,’ the statement reads.
‘In the Covid-19 pandemic, we judge that this grave reason exists and that one does not sin by receiving the vaccine.’

The bishops conclude there is sufficient ‘moral distance’ between the administration of the vaccine and the ‘original wrongful action.’

Thankfully, they stop short of urging people to be vaccinated and instead advise each Catholic must ‘educate themselves and decide what to do’.

US AND CANADA BISHOPS OBJECT

Their counterparts in the US are not so quick to accept and repeat the government line that vaccines are the only hope.

In the link above, Sciencemag reports that members of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and 20 other religious, medical, and political organizations that oppose abortion wrote to Stephen Hahn, commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in April. ‘It is critically important that Americans have access to a vaccine that is produced ethically: no American should be forced to choose between being vaccinated against this potentially deadly virus and violating his or her conscience,’ they said. ‘Thankfully, other [COVID-19] vaccines … utilize cell lines not connected to unethical procedures and methods.’

Archbishop Richard Gagnon of Winnipeg, Manitoba, president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, is pictured in a file photo. (CNS photo/Paul Haring)

Canadian Catholic bishops were even more forthright.

Archbishop of Winnipeg Richard Gagnon is president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. According to RT, he led ‘17 other antiabortion religious, medical and political groups and individuals in a 21st May letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.’

In the letter, they said: ‘We urge your government to fund the development of vaccines that do not create an ethical dilemma for many Canadians. The … manufacture of vaccines using such ethically-tainted human cell lines demonstrates profound disrespect for the dignity of the human person.’

CONCLUSION

There may well be those in the Christian community who agree with the UK Catholc bishops that there is a necessity and the original abortions were so many steps in the past no moral dilemma remains. I am not among them. Although I am a committed Protestent, on this issue, Bishop Gagnon speaks for me.

Perhaps, if you are over eighty, or have an immune challenge or a pre-existing condition, or if you are obese, which heaven forbid, you may have to make a hard decision.

If you are not any of those, or if you are and you are also pro-life by conviction then don’t have it. You don’t need it. And until at least the normal testing period of two years has passed to discern effects on the present batch of human guinea pigs you simply do not know what it will do to you. In any event:

Isaiah 46:4 And even to your old age I am he; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you.

Use this link to the Parliament website to email your MP and demand the UK can get back to normal.

We appreciate your support – without it we can’t do our research and help inform your prayers.
So click below to join Christian Voice and stand up for the King of kings


Click on the social media links below to share this post:

Share

12 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. I believe that if we are against abortion on the grounds that it is killing people that God has created then we cannot afford to take the vaccine or our voice is silenced and we become complicit in benefiting from the horrific deaths of the pre born baby. If abortion had stopped I would be happy to have the vaccine however it continues at a greater speed now with DIY abortion in lockdown and the Christian voice is largely silent. It is a similar issue as Halal meat and the sale in supermarkets. Now I know that the origin is a child that was killed in the 60’s I am still responsible for my choice before God. I would not knowingly eat Halal meat mainly through the work of this website which brought it to my attention and I would not knowingly have a vaccine that had benefited from abortion.

  2. I covered some ground today that you have also covered today, in a couple of tweets:

    https://twitter.com/John_Allman/status/1346066697699139590

    @LozierInstitute says at https://lozierinstitute.org/update-covid-19-vaccine-candidates-and-abortion-derived-cell-lines/ that the @AstraZeneca/@UniofOxford vaccine was developed using fetus #HEK293 cells.
    @BBCr4Today broadcast this morning that the vaccine was “designed on a computer”.

    WHO IS LYING TO THE PUBLIC?

    and

    https://twitter.com/John_Allman/status/1346112930333528064

    Replying to
    @theweeflea
    Should we care if aborted fetuses were used in the development, manufacture or testing of vaccines? Does this depend if we’d be accepting a vaccine just for selfish reasons? What science-based, altruistic reasons are there for taking a vaccine not proven to reduce transmission?

    As I understand the Roman Catholic argument, when there is a strongly virtuous reason for taking a vaccine, and only a faint link between that vaccine and an abortion in the dim and distant past, the faithful may follow their consciences by weighing the evil means (taking a vaccine brought to the market by using fetal tissue) against the noble end. The problem is that I don’t know why the government wants me to take a vaccine that may increase, reduce, or leave unchanged transmission of the virus. The government hopes it will reduce transmission and intends to gamble on that hypothesis turning out to be right by testing the hypothesis by observing the apparent impact of a mass vaccination programme. But that approach does not comply with the Nuremberg Code, because it enlists the mugs who participate in the experiment without explaining to them the risks, and that it is only an experiment, for which their informed consent is required.

    If the vaccines don’t prevent asymptomatic infection and transmission, but merely prevent infected persons from developing the symptoms that might warn them to avoid other people, then the average effect of mass vaccination will be to increase the spread of the virus. it is obvious that HMG are counting their chickens before they are hatched, if nothing worse than that.

  3. Do you realise RT and Ruptly are Russian state broadcasters who are causing civil unrest in the UK by encouraging people to break lockdown rules and go against police orders? I’ve been studying their tactics for a fair while and those regular viewers are totally brainwashed with idiocy. They, and many others like them, will find the right psychological buttons to press to get groups of people to oppose saving their lives, and the lives of their friends and relatives.

    I have seen so much nonsense about this virus I have become intrigued by the motives of the ones doing it. It seems to be enemies of the country. Remember Russia was found out the other day to be the country that sanctions nerve agent poisonings of those who are politically inconvenient . I feel a lot of the time you are being hoodwinked into coming to the most irrational and dangerous conclusions by people of ill-will.

    I do have a theological argument though of my own. God gave us a rational brain for a good reason. We should use it. Those who develop these advanced medicines are the pinnacle of that creation. You won’t get any other species developing vaccines.

    1. Actually, I find RT reports truth more often than the BBC, ITV, Sky et al.

      1. Ah but the propaganda is highly sophisticated. What is meant by truth? You will often find it works on more than one level. On the logical factual level it is feeding your rational mind what it checks out to be true, and then through clever photography and manipulation of images it is programming your primitive mind with all sorts, and you don’t even know this is happening because your logical mind gave it the OK.

        Russians have a long history in matters of psychology and deception. Indeed the truth is often counter-intuitive, in that if you suddenly find someone ultra-believable, the chances are they are a con artist, and highly practised. We have many in this area so I am pretty practised at spotting them. Their chink in their armour is they all use the same standard tricks, no matter what the subject matter, because the way they do it is the way the human brain operates. You may want to do some reading on the likes of the Cambridge Four. Russians have infiltrated and fooled us for a long time. Tension now seems to be on the rise again after it seemed to improve somewhat after the soviet union fell.

        The BBC in my view is pretty good on the science of this. They have improved a great deal from the start where they had not really been briefed properly. I completely distrust their balance on political and many social issues, but just on this one topic they have had access to some of the top scientists. Yes many scientists were wrong in the beginning, especially regarding masks, but they seem to have done their homework now. Also more empirical data has been collected. Mask wearing was initially a theoretical piece of guesswork.

        ITV, Sky etc are your number readers, and pretty lazy. Parrots of the press releases and the “we’re not exactly sure what is happening here”.

        1. So your world is divided between those clever enough to realise everything on RT is highly sophisticated propaganda and those who are so dumb they are fooled into believing the station tells the truth more than the BBC and reports stories which never make it past Auntie’s censors.
          Agreed, the BBC is pretty good on the science of propaganda. They know exactly what they are doing when they put out all their Covid shock-horror stories and parrot the UK Government’s line. Now and again, the BBC puts out actual real news. The rest of the time it’s just self-promotion, gossip or propaganda.
          Folk will make up their own mind which station to trust.

          1. Perhaps you might like to read this article.
            https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/89204
            It’s taking a look at the people behind the likes of Sunetra Gupta, who has produced fake science. She has not even got it peer-reviewed, but I’m coming to the view the government could well have been initially misled by these people. She is after all connected to Oxford and also from Imperial College.

            They are outright liars as the article demonstrates. The funding can be traced back to Charles Koch. Here is his wiki page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Koch It is very disturbing indeed and it could be why Professor Neil Ferguson got so much heat that he did not deserve. We are in a dire emergency now thanks to these people. This new strain is just too infectious for our country to handle. Measures will either have to be drastic or the deaths are going to shoot up to horrific levels. Much can not be avoided now because it is too late.

            • Stephen
            • Stephen on 14 January 2021 at 12:53
              Author

            Aside from the obvious bias from the editors of medpage, there does not seem to be an awful lot they can actually find flat-out wrong with the GBD doctors and what they have said. And as for who funded it, so what? Or is ‘a right-wing billionaire’ suddenly the epitome of all evil in your eyes?
            The bottom line is this. No government, for whatever high-sounding reason, has the right to prevent what God has instituted in creation, the duty and right of men to work and earn a living and enjoy the fruits of their labour. It is, says Ecclesiastes, ‘the gift of God’! How dare they do that?
            When you realise the UK Government is not doing restrictions for the public health, but to save face over what the public might see as the inadequacies of the NHS, then the wickedness of lockdowns and restrictions is compounded.

  4. Well it looks like the aborted cells are included as ingredients: https://www.cga.ct.gov/2020/PHdata/Tmy/2020HB-05044-R000219-Wrinn%2015,%20Chris-TMY.PDF

    I don’t believe it’s possible to remove all traces of this DNA. And I don’t believe anyone should have this vaccine. It’s experimental and people have already died after having it.

  5. It seems to me that the consequences of accepting the available vaccines should be compared with the consequences of widespread refusal to accept the vaccines. Please detail the latter.

  6. “Aside from the obvious bias from the editors of medpage, there does not seem to be an awful lot they can actually find flat-out wrong with the GBD doctors and what they have said. ” – Stephen

    Gupta and some colleagues wrote and preprinted a paper which vastly over-estimated the proportion of non-symptomatic cases, and from that incorrectly deduced that vastly more had already been infected and hence provide herd immunity. The calculation was so out that it must have been an intentional lie. However it was the kind of lie disguised in a load of maths which was wrong (blinded by maths!), and if you go to the publication you will see what people from the profession do say about it. It is therefore most likely why it was never published in a journal with any reputation, not your homeopathic remedies type publications.

    This is what I find absolutely unacceptable. She lied, it was on the web and quoted by the mainstream everywhere. However the place she was working at was Oxford, so it had the reputation, and I’m quite taken aback that they ever allowed her in the place in the first place.

    Anyway, that’s my beef with it. The cloned cells issue is real and they are indeed cloned cells, but I think they are talking about stem cells which are very useful in medicine. They can be used to save and improve the lives of people, and I believe it is taking things too far to ban them. They are not the actual cells taken from the foetus. It sounds more like superstition. Perhaps refuse treatment in hospitals which do abortions? How far can you go? Some Christians have services without taking precaution in the belief that God will protect them, but some people will say absolutely anything to anyone to increase the covid death-rate. In fact I think some are possessed by demons.

    1. We need to think very carefully as we go through life before we accuse people of lying.
      Prov 3:30 Strive not with a man without cause, if he have done thee no harm. 

Leave a Reply