Un creștin (ortodox), dacă acceptă vaccinurile anti-Covid (și nu numai) ÎȘI PUNE ÎN PERICOL MÂNTUIREA!!!

În acest articol este prezentat numai unul din asprectele pentru care un creștin, dacă ar accepta vaccinurile moderne și-ar pune în pericol mântuirea.

Din acest punct de vedere, (pseudo)ierarhii BOR sunt ca și inexistenți!

Foto – activenews.ro

Vaccinuri pe bază de țesuturi fetale: 12 presupuneri greșite

În contextul pandemiei și al dezbaterii aprinse privind vaccinurile COVID-19, se ridică o problemă importantă de etică privind testarea, producerea și distribuirea largă, atât la nivel administrativ, cât și la nivelul acceptării acestor practici, mai ales în mediul creștin. O discuție care trebuie purtată deschis, obiectiv și cu unica dorință de a acționa corect.

Articolul original a fost publicat în engleză de Thomas Seidler pe site-ul Life Site și tradus în limba română de Marius Bodnariu și David Achim – sursa AICI

Ca și vaccinul ROR [1] vaccinul Covid-19 Oxford/AstraZeneca și Johnson & Johnson este produs în linii celulare derivate din avorturi [2] — prin contrast vaccinurile Moderna si Pfizer le-au folosit la testare. [3]

Fundații Eronate

Dezbaterea din jurul moralității vaccinurilor dezvoltate în țesuturi fetale, are în miezul ei în mod frecvent trei convingeri:

  1. Prin primirea vaccinului noi nu ne facem părtași răului din trecut;
  2. Prin primirea vaccinului noi nu contribuim vreunui rău prezent sau viitor
  3. Aproape că nu este nici o legătură între vaccin și bebelușul ucis.

Aceste convingeri sunt greșite pentru că se bazează pe presupuneri greșite, astfel încât de oricare parte ați fi, merită să luăm în considerare pe cele mai frecvente.

  1. „Numai câțiva bebeluși au fost folosiți”

Deși fiecare linie celulară conține celule de la un singur copil, mulți bebeluși avortați sunt folosiți în procesul de obținere a unei linii celulare. [4] De exemplu, sub jurământ, omul de știință Stanley Plotkin a recunoscut că au fost folosiți 76 de bebeluși avortați pentru studiul a doar unui singur vaccin. [5] Mai mult, se cunoaște faptul că linia WI-25 conține al 25-lea specimen din al 19-lea bebeluș. [6]

Cele două tulpini celulare folosite de vaccinurile Covid sunt numite HEK293 și PERC6. [7] Numele HEK(REU) 293 reprezintă Rinichi Embrionar Uman provenit din al 293-lea experiment [8] — putem fi siguri că mai mulți bebeluși au precedat pe acela folosit pentru HEK293. [9]

  1. „Bebelușii proveneau dintr-o perioadă de gestație foarte timpurie”

Majoritatea bebelușilor ai căror țesuturi au format baza diferitor linii celulare pentru vaccinuri, aveau peste 3 luni când au fost avortați. [10] De exemplu, sub jurământ, omul de știință Stanley Plotkin a recunoscut că toți cei 76 de bebeluși nenăscuți folosiți în studiu aveau vârsta de 3 luni sau mai mari. [11]

La 3 luni, un bebeluș este complet format: „ea a început să înghită și să lovească cu piciorușul… mușchii faciali sunt antrenați când micile ei trăsături formează o expresie după alta…”. [12]

  1. „A fost acordat consimțământul, deci folosirea acestuia este etică”

Părtașii unei crime nu pot în mod etic dona trupul victimei lor pentru cercetare. Asta înseamnă că nu exista un consimțământ în adevăratul sens al cuvântului. (Deși mamele implicate, sunt adesea ele însele victime, în grade variabile)

  1. „Bebelușul era mort când țesutul a fost prelevat”

În cercetarea țesuturilor fetale, moartea celulară face ca țesutul să devină inutilizabil pentru scopul pentru care a fost recoltat: recoltarea țesuturilor și a organelor trebuie efectuată „în primele 5 minute” [13,14] și câteodată aceasta se întâmplă în timp ce inima bebelușului încă bate [15,16] — acest lucru a fost de asemenea dezvăluit în fața instanței într-un proces Planned Parenthood. [17,18]

Astfel, recoltarea de organe poate fi considerată un fel de tortură, [19] peste procedura normală de avort. Deși nu avem o dovadă clară că pentru producerea liniilor celulare pentru vaccinuri s-a recurs la recoltări pe viu, din moment ce procedura „nu este o raritate” [20,21,22,23] există motive legitime de îngrijorare. [24]

  1. „Unii proveneau din sarcini pierdute”

„Necesitatea ‘prospețimii’ a multor țesuturi fetale umane” [25] înseamnă că este extrem de improbabil ca acestea să provină din sarcini pierdute. [26] „Pentru obținerea celulelor embrionare, embrionii proveniți din avorturi spontane nu pot fi folosiți…” [27]

  1. „Utilizarea unui trup neînsuflețit se distinge de avort”

Unii își închipuie că cei implicați în producția liniilor celulare nu au nimic de-a face cu avortul în sine. Cu toate acestea, înainte de avortul unui făt al cărui țesuturi vor fi folosite în cercetare, există un număr de pași care au loc. Aceștia includ: obținerea consimțământului, efectuarea screeningului genetic, [28] selectarea metodei de avort [29] și alți pași pentru o recoltare optimă [30] — toți acești pași au un impact asupra conduitei persoanei care avortează, creând o interacțiune considerabilă cu agentul care solicită material uman, care astfel “devine într-o oarecare măsură complice”. [31] Exista un paralelism cu Saul la uciderea lui Ștefan [32] — Saul nu a aruncat nici măcar o piatră, dar ca și spectator consimțitor nu a fost lipsit de vinovăție morală. [33] În cazul prelevării de țesut viu, cercetarea este cu atât mai direct legată de fapta de omor.

  1. „Nimeni nu profită acum din avort”

Companiile care dezvolta liniile celulare continua să fie răsplătite prin folosirea acestora, inclusiv în vaccinuri. [34] Astfel, beneficii directe se acumulează agenților complici la fapta inițială de omor.

  1. „Vaccinurile nu conțin celulele reale ale copilului”

Vaccinurile produse în linii celulare conțin fragmente [35] din ADNul copilului – un studiu a găsit chiar „un genom individual complet” [36] al copilei avortate. Celulele divizate în care vaccinul a crescut ar fi fost ale copilei pe măsură ce ea ar fi crescut. [37,38]

  1. „Nu mai sunt necesare alte avorturi”

În ciuda afirmațiilor contrare, tulpini normale de celule „sunt de fapt ‘muritoare’” [39], supuse „Limitei Hayflick” [40] de aproximativ 50 de diviziuni celulare. Din moment ce HEK293 devine canceros după o perioadă de timp, [41] va trebui înlocuit – la fel cum au făcut și alte tulpini celulare timpurii. [42] Utilizarea vaccinurilor creează în cele din urmă nevoia de alte avorturi pentru înlocuirea stocurilor ce se epuizează.

  1. „Avorturile au fost de acum zeci de ani”

Chiar dacă majoritatea avorturilor pentru vaccinuri au avut loc înaintea anilor 80, [43,44] timpul nu poate justifica moral crima. Mai mult, o nouă linie celulară chinezească, WALVAX-2 a fost creată în 2015, [45] și după cum a fost explicat deja, mai multe vor fi necesare.

  1. „Drept rezultat, alți copii nu mai au de suferit”

Pe măsură ce vaccinurile pe bază de țesut fetal au devenit acceptate la scară largă, acest fapt a condus la legitimizarea recoltării fetale, aceasta nemaiputând fi interzisă prin lege [46,47,48] — deci de fapt această practică s-a dezvoltat în loc să se oprească, ducând la suferința a și mai multor copii.

De exemplu, în 1982, în SUA, a fost găsit un container cu 16.500 de fetuși la domiciliul unui fost proprietar de laborator. [49] În 2003, compania olandeză din spatele HEK293 a căutat bebeluși avortați până și în țări depărtate precum Noua Zeelandă [50] și Australia. [51] Articole de revistă discută „economia țesuturilor fetale” în Marea Britanie. [52] În 2019, 2.200 de fetuși au fost găsiți la reședința unei persoane care se ocupă de avort [53] și mărturiile de la tribunal ale personalului Planned Parenthood [54] au arătat că recoltarea continuă la scară largă.

Mai mult, atât sondajele de opinie [55,56,57] (cât și unele praxisuri [58]) ne arată că părinții sunt mult mai dispuși să aleagă avortul dacă „utilizarea medicală” a fătului este posibilă. Astfel, dacă opțiunea de a folosi bebelușii în scopuri medicale nu ar fi disponibilă, mai puțini viitori copii ar avea de suferit și ar fi avortați.

Dacă un anumit procent din cele 2-3 miliarde de susținători nominali [59] pro-viață ar respinge astfel de vaccinuri, s-ar găsi alternative morale și o întreagă industrie „etic, moral și biblic greșită” [60] ar putea înceta.

  1. „‘Mai bine’-le surclasează îngrijorările”

A consimți răul făcut împotriva unei victime inocente, fără voința ei, în scopul binecuvântării colective, pătrunde în ape întunecate – istoric, toate sacrificiile de copii aveau la bază această premisă. „Cu toate acestea, s-ar putea susține că altfel, aceste părți ale trupului bebelușului ar fi irosite, aruncate. Nu numai că aceasta ar justifica avortul, ci este și utilitarism pur, care afirmă că mai orice este justificat cât timp scopul este (potențial) bun. În știința medicală bună, scopul nu scuză mijloacele”. [61]

Concluzie

Dintr-o perspectivă iudeo-creștină, Dumnezeul Vechiului și al Noului Testament este deosebit prin faptul că nu cere ca întâiul născut al omului să moară pentru ca alții să trăiască – ci Își dă propriul întâi născut în locul omului. Se pare ca exista un potențial conflict între împărtășirea cu trupul și sângele Domnului și trupul unui copilaș „frânt pentru tine” – vaccinurile pe bază de țesut fetal poate că poartă o pângărire morală mult peste cea a cărnii jertfite idolilor.

Tribuna.US

 

Note de subsol:

[1] For an excellent summary of all U.S. and Canadian vaccines with fetal tissue see Children of God for Life’s vaccine list. In the U.K., it is possibly only the MMR vaccine that contains them, and there are two brands: MMRVaxPro and Priorix. Priorix appears on the U.S. & Canada chart: It’s the Rubella component that is troubling (though you might not guess from the Patient Information Leaflet — it appears “amino acids” is the euphemistic term used). In the U.S., Children of God for Life successfully introduced legislation for fair labeling so parents could be properly informed. Fortunately, the MMRVaxPro Patient Information Leaflet in section 6 describes the “contents of the pack” and there lists production dependencies/ingredients (WI-38 & RA27/3 are both explicitly listed — i.e. fetal tissue cell lines).

[2] 2020-11-11; Prentice, David; Charlotte Lozier Institute; Update: COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates and Abortion-Dervived Cell Lines; https://lozierinstitute.org/update-covid-19-vaccine-candidates-and-abortion-derived-cell-lines/

[3] Moderna Development: Moderna Covid-19 Vaccine – Facts – Not Fiction; See also: Moderna Does Not Use HEK-293 Fetal Cell Line in Ongoing Quality Control or Lot Testing; 2021-01-07; Trasancos, Stacy; Children of God for Life; COVID-19 Vaccine and HEK293: Testing and Production are Ethically Equal.

[4] Retrieved 2020-09-08; Vinnedge, Debra; Children of God for Life; Aborted Fetal Cell Lines; https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/AbortedFetalCellLines.pdf

[5] 2018-01-11; Plotkin, Stanley; Court Deposition; Excerpt answering the question: “In your work related to vaccines, how many fetuses have been part of that work?”; https://youtu.be/DFTsd042M3o?t=27787. This figure concerns the 1966 study by Plotkin et al, Cytological and Chromosomal Studies of Cell Strains from Aborted Human Fetuses, Exp Biology, Vol 122. There is some confusion regarding the number, whether 74 (from the results section) or 76 (in the summary) — co-author Plotkin’s statement under oath clarifies by indicating 76 embryos were used.

[6] See table on page 591 of this study: 1961-05-15; Hayflick, L & Moorhead, P; Experimental Cell Research; The Serial Cultivation of Human Diploid Cell Strains; https://cogforlife.org/Hayflick1961ExpCell.pdf

[7] Retrieved 2020-10-27; Children of God for Life; https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/CovidCompareMoralImmoral.pdf

[8] Retrieved 2020-10-29; HEK293 Cells: Applications and Advantages; https://www.news-medical.net/life-sciences/HEK293-Cells-Applications-and-Advantages.aspx

[9] “If [Frank] Graham wasn’t just working on fetal cell lines during his time at the University of Leiden, it may not have been hundreds of abortions [in the development for HEK293],” [Pamela Acker] added, “but we would need to see his notebooks to know.” 2021-02-19; Baklinski, Pete; LifeSiteNews; Babies were aborted alive, placed in fridge to harvest cell lines used in some vaccines: researcher

[10] See the gestational ages: https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/AbortedFetalCellLines.pdf

[11] 2018-01-11; Plotkin, Stanley; Court Deposition; Excerpt answering the question: “In your work related to vaccines, how many fetuses have been part of that work?”; https://youtu.be/DFTsd042M3o?t=27787

[12] ‘Fetal Ultra-Sound: 3 months’; https://www.babycenter.com.my/3-months-pregnant

[13] ‘In order to sustain 95% of the cells, the live tissue would need to be preserved within 5 minutes of the abortion. Within an hour the cells would continue to deteriorate, rendering the specimens useless.’
Dr. C. Ward Kischer, Embryologist and Emeritus Professor of Anatomy; Specialist in Human Embryology, University of Arizona College of Medicine (Tucson, Arizona) Personal interview with Debra Vinnedge 7-02, ALL Conference

[14] “Fetal tissue for transplantation must be ‘harvested’ within a few minutes of delivery… Drugs which reduce fetal physiological activity need to be avoided. The fetus is therefore in as alive and aware a state as possible when being opened.” 1988-03; Alderson, Priscilla; Journal of Medical Ethics; Review: The Foetus as Transplant Donor: Scientific, Social and Ethical Perspectives; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/25178659_The_Foetus_as_Transplant

[15] “Human embryos of two and one-half to five months gestation were obtained… They were placed in a sterile container and promptly transported to the virus laboratory of the adjacent Hospital for Sick Children. No macerated specimens were used and in many of the embryos the heart was still beating at the time of receipt in the virus laboratory.” 1952-06; Thicke et al; Cultivation of Poliomyelitis Virus in Tissue Culture; Growth of the Lansing Strain in Human Embryonic Tissue, Canadian Journal of Medical Science, Vol. 30, p231-245; https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/cjms52-031
or more recently: https://youtu.be/FzMAycMMXp8?t=256

[16] “In 1974 the great English gyneacologist Dr Ian Donald, who ‘invented’ ultrasound, told me of witnessing modern experiments at Sweden’s Karolinska Institute on large, living aborted babies, cringing with pain.” 1988; Marx, Paul; Confessions of a Pro-Life Missionary; Human Life International

[17] 2019-04-12; Larton, Perri; Court Deposition Planned Parenthood; Intact babies cut by procurement officer; https://youtu.be/lHh5IFXao-4?t=276

[18] “I can see hearts that are beating in a POC that is not intact that are beating independently…”
2019-04-12; Larton, Perrin; Court Deposition Planned Parenthood; https://youtu.be/lHh5IFXao-4?t=373

[19] It is now suspected that unborn babies feel pain from as early as 3 months
2019-07-11; Derbyshire, Stuart & Brockmann, John; BMJ: Journal of Medical Ethics; Reconsidering fetal pain; https://jme.bmj.com/content/46/1/3

[20] “The first part of this chapter addressed the question of live birth or pre-viable foetuses after the use of different techniques of termination and suggested that this is no rare event.”
1987; McCullagh, Peter; Wiley & Sons; The Foetus as Transplant Donor: Scientific, Social and Ethical Perspectives, p115-116. https://books.google.co.uk/books?redir_esc=y&id=rVpsAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=no+rare+event

[21] ‘Obstetricians and gynaecologists are well aware of the increasing number of fetuses which are born alive, because of the increased use of prostaglandins’ 1976-10; Nathanson, Bernard; Hastings Center Report, pp. 11-12.

[22] “The experience of one large American hospital was that 9% of second trimester deliveries induced by prostaglandin alone resulted in live births.” 1979; Pahl, R & Lundy, L; Obstetrics & Gynecology, 53, p587-591; Experience with mid-trimester abortions.

[23] More than 50% of babies removed by hysterotomy (i.e. caesarean section) were born alive: “23 out of 44”. 1961; Kullander, S & Sunden, B; Journal of Endocrinology, 23, 69-77; On the survival and metabolism of normal and hypothermic pre-viable human foetuses.

[24] For more mature reading on this matter, please see our ongoing project to collate the material here: fetaltissue.org/live-harvesting

[25] 1987; McCullagh, Peter; Wiley & Sons; The Foetus as Transplant Donor: Scientific, Social and Ethical Perspectives, p17.

[26] Re: HEK293, miscarriage is highly unlikely for various reasons — please see “How was it obtained?” (page 2): “in all probability the cells were obtained from the embryo of a wilfully induced abortion.” 2006 Autumn; Wong, Alvin; National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly; The ethics of HEK 293; https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/65a7/5696bb1e03a46cba9f0c976da2b50916dec2.pdf

[27] 1986-04-26; Herranz, Gonzalo; Il Sabato, no.15; A reply to a previous article in the same journal by Paolo Cucchiarelli and Marina Ricci. Professor Herranz was, at the time, President of the Committee of Medical Ethics of Spanish Doctors and Vice-President of the Permanent Committee of Medical Ethics of the European Community. Source: 1999; Pietro Croce, ‘Vivisection or Science’, p86, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119364/

[28] “the fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well… There were no familial diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families.” 1969-08; Gamma Globulin Prophylaxis; Inactivated Rubella Virus; Production and Biologics Control of Live Attenuated Rubella Virus Vaccines: Discussion on Session V. Am J Dis Child. 118(2):372–381. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/503195

[29] See the comments here on the unethical complicity between doctors and researches for WALVAX-2. This is widespread, I just use WALVAX-2 as a clear recent example. 2015-04; Ma et al; Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics; Characteristics & viral propagation properties of a new human diploid cell line; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4526020/

[30] “Both cell lines [HEK293 & PERC6 — the two used by Covid vaccines] were made in my lab, and also the cells, the starting material, was prepared by myself at the University of Leiden [i.e. he was on hand at the hospital where the abortions occurred].” 2001-05-16; Meeting transcript; USA FDA: Center for Biologics Evaluation & Research; https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/20170404095417/https:/www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/transcripts/3750t1_01.pdf

[31] “[The] proposition to be discussed holds that individuals embarking on utilization of the aborted foetus for tissue transplantation may do so without incurring any moral opprobrium generated by the abortion. In addressing this proposition it is necessary to differentiate between the morality of the manipulations involved in harvesting transplantable organs or tissues from the aborted fetus and the moral status of the operator undertaking this task. In any sequence of two activities, the opportunity for the second of which is totally dependent on the occurrence of the first, the morality of the second agent’s participation is not necessarily neutral or positive merely because the contents of the second action, assessed in isolation, may be so. Evaluation of the second agent’s position requires information on the extent of any association with the first agent in addition to knowledge about the actual content of the second action … I would submit that the demonstration of association of the second agent with the first event, even at a level that falls substantially short of incurring any culpability for it, may suffice to vitiate claims for complete independence from it. Specifically, on the occasion of fetal utilization as a transplant donor, it is common practice for mutual agreement on the timing of initiation of termination procedures to be pre-arranged in order to ensure that those harvesting and utilizing the tissue from the foetus will be prepared. A specific example of the form of interaction that may appear in the course of collaboration to obtain foetal tissues in optimal condition concerns the selection and modification of termination procedures to achieve this end. The existence of such interactions between those performing the termination and those harvesting and transplanting tissue from the fetus is inconsistent with the contention that the second agent enters the situation as one completely free from any association with preceding events. This lack of a total separation is one (of many) ways in which collection of foetal organs differs from the collection of organs from road accident victims. Given that some influence relating either to a specific case (for example the timing of termination) or to that class of cases (such as the termination procedure) will indubitably be exerted on the first individual’s activities by the second, the latter becomes to some extent an accessory.” 1987; McCullagh, Peter; Wiley & Sons; The Foetus as Transplant Donor: Scientific, Social and Ethical Perspectives, p17-18, 178, 179-180.

[32] “And when the blood of your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.” The Acts of the Apostles, chapter 22, verse 20

[33] “…moral complicity is best conceptualized as conduct that expressively aligns one with another agent’s wrongdoing. Expressive alignment occurs as a result of one agent expressing a positive desire, attitude, or belief toward another agent’s (a primary agent’s) wrongdoing.” 2003; Parker, Joseph; Rice University; Moral complicity: An expressivist account; https://hdl.handle.net/1911/18558

[34] “I realize that this sounds a bit commercial, but PER.C6 were made for that particular purpose [the pharmaceutical industry]. Also, as far as I know, more than 50 different companies have taken license for PER.C6.” 2001-05-16; Meeting transcript; USA FDA: Center for Biologics Evaluation & Research; https://web.archive.org/web/20170516050447/https://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/transcripts/3750t1_01.pdf

[35] Retrieved 2020-10-30; Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia; https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/vaccine-ingredients/dna

[36] 2020-04-27; Corvelva; VaccineGate: Priorix Tetra human genome and MRC-5 cell line – comparative study; https://www.corvelva.it/en/speciale-corvelva/vaccinegate-en/priorix-tetra-human-genome-and-mrc-5-cell-line-comparative-study.html

[37] “Human diploid cells undergo a number of population doublings inversely proportional to donor age.” 1997-08-01; Hayflick, Leonard; University of California, San Francisco; Mortality and Immortality at the Cellular Level: A review; http://www.protein.bio.msu.ru/biokhimiya/contents/v62/full/62111380.html

[38] Perhaps, for this reason, Leonard Hayflick, the developer of an early cell line used by 2 billion people, has consistently claimed that “the WI-38 embryo’s estate” was a legitimate stakeholder: “a good case could be made for title to WI-38 to be vested in the parents or estate of the embryo from which WI-38 was derived”. 1998-01; Hayflick, Leonard; Experimental Gerontology; A novel technique for transforming the theft of mortal human cells into praiseworthy federal policy; https://www.researchgate.net/publication/13762615; 2018-05-31; Hayflick, Leonard; The Biomedical Scientist; A Controversial Life: Interview with George Wister; https://thebiomedicalscientist.net/science/controversial-life

[39] 1965-03; Hayflick, Leonard, Elsevier: Experimental Cell Research; The limited in vitro lifetime of human diploid cell strains; https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0014482765902119

[40] 2014-07-20; Bartlett, Zane; The Embryo Project Encyclopedia; Leonard Hayflick (1928- ); https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/leonard-hayflick-1928. Or in summary from wikipedia pages: “[Leonard] Hayflick found that only cancer cells are immortal and that normal cells have a mechanism for remembering what replication level they are at. He interpreted his finding that normal cells are mortal, to be an indication of aging at the cellular level.” Leonard Hayflick — Again: “Hayflick was the first to report that only cancer cells are immortal. This could not have been demonstrated until he had demonstrated that normal cells are mortal.” Hayflick Limit

[41] “HEK293 is not a model for normal human cells; these cells are immortalized already by known oncogene but not malignant yet.” 2011-05-23; Kavsan, Iershov & Balynska; BMC Cell Biology; Immortalised cells & one oncogene in malignant transformation, “the tumorigenicity of the HEK 293 cell line reached 100% when the passage exceeded 65, whereas using low-passage (<52) HEK 293 cell line no tumor could be induced under the same condition… more attention should be paid to the passage level of the HEK 293 cell line, especially for vaccine production but the low-passage HEK 293 cell line should be acceptable to regulatory authorities for recombinant virus vector, vaccines, and gene therapy. Meanwhile, we also find that high-passage HEK 293 can be employed as a highly malignant tumor model as its tumorigenicity increases significantly.” 2008-04-18; Shen et al; Elsevier; The tumorigenicity diversification in human embryonic kidney 293 cell line cultured in vitrohttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18378163/

[42] “in the early 70’s, the [National Institute of Health] stock of low passage WI-38 cells had become seriously depleted… IMR-90 was developed [to enable] replacing WI-38 within ongoing laboratory programs.” 2004; Coriell; Cell Collections; https://www.coriell.org/0/PDF/IPBIR/CCRNews.pdf_4.pdf

[43] 1983-10; Nichols, Warren; PubMed: In Vitro; Characterization of a new human diploid cell line—IMR-91; https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6629383/

[44] Retrieved 2020-10-22; Creative Biolabs; PER.C6 Cell Lines; https://www.gmp-creativebiolabs.com/per-c6-cell-lines_74.htm

[45] 2015-04; Ma et al; Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics; Characteristics & viral propagation properties of a new human diploid cell line; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4526020/

[46] “During the Senate sub-committee hearings on Embryonic Stem Cell Research [ESCR], Senator Harry Reid compared the possible benefits of ESCR to the polio vaccine, which used aborted fetal tissue, stating the public had no moral problem with that.” 2000-04-28; Senate subcommittee hearings; Washington DC

[47] In a letter co-signed by 80 Nobel laureates to President Bush, urging federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, one paragraph noted: “For the past 35 years many of the common human virus vaccines — such as measles, rubella, hepatitis A, rabies and poliovirus — have been produced in cells derived from a human fetus to the benefit of tens of millions of Americans. Thus precedent has been established for the use of fetal tissue that would otherwise be discarded.” 2001-02-21; Nobel laureates’ letter to President Bush; Washington Post

[48] President Bush justified his decision in favor of Embryonic Stem Cell Research funding thus: “There is a precedent. The only licensed live chickenpox vaccine used in the United States was developed, in part, from cells derived from research involving human embryos. Researchers first grew the virus in embryonic lung cells, which were later cloned and grown in two previously existing cell lines. Many ethical and religious leaders agree that even if the history of this vaccine raises ethical questions, its current use does not.” 2001-08-12; Bush, George; The New York Times; Stem Cell Science & the Preservation of Life; https://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/12/opinion/stem-cell-science-and-the-preservation-of-life.html

[49] 1985-08-29; The New York Times; 16,500 Fetuses to get burial after long fight on funeral; https://www.nytimes.com/1985/08/29/us/16500-fetuses-to-get-burial-after-long-fight-on-funeral.html

[50] 2003-05-24; Bingham, Eugene; The New Zealand Herald; Government asked to sanction foetus sale; https://web.archive.org/web/20030710230811/http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?storyID=3503775&thesection=news&thesubsection=general

[51] 2003-06-10; Wall, Tony; Herald Sun; Foetal tissue for overseas sale; https://cogforlife.org/2003/06/10/crucell-nv-hunts-down-fresh-aborted-fetuses-for-vaccines/

[52] 2008-12; Kent, Julie; The fetal tissue economy: From abortion clinic to the stem cell laboratory; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.027

[53] 2019-09-14; Taylor, Derrick; New York Times; More Than 2,200 Preserve Fetuses Found at Property of Dead Doctor, Officials Say; https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/us/dr-ulrich-klopfer-fetal-remains.html

[54] ‘Fetal Trafficking Under Oath’, https://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/fetal-trafficking-under-oath/https://www.centerformedicalprogress.org/2020/06/sworn-video-testimony-describes-infanticide-in-fetal-organ-harvesting-and-planned-parenthood-clinics/

[55] 2001-02-23; Does Aborted Fetal Tissue Research Influence a Woman’s Decision to Have An Abortion?; https://web.archive.org/web/20040910003058/http://www.nebcathcon.org/fetal_tissue.htm#Does

[56] 1995-09-01; Martin et al; Canadian Medical Association Journal; Fetal tissue transplantation and abortion decisions: a survey of urban women; https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/1487409

[57] 1991-06-17; Morrow, Lance; Time; When One Body Can Save Another; http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,973182,00.html

[58] 2015-03-26; Pickles, Kate; Daily Mail; Family’s anguish as woman aborts unborn child so she can donate bone marrow to sister battling leukaemia – only to find out they don’t have enough money for transplant; https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/peoplesdaily/article-3011404/Family.html

[59] Wikipedia suggests Christianity has 2.4bn adherents and Islam 1.9bn — though Islamic views diverge, they are broadly pro-life. Even a 10% to 20% loss of distribution might have a profound impact on the commercial and pragmatic viability for fetal tissue vaccines — thus pressuring the industry to switch to ethical production of vaccines.

[60] “I had a previous 18-year career in biomedical research and can attest that the majority of biomedical research is ethically sound. However, basing bioethics on the truths of the Bible, abortion and the associated harvesting and selling of body parts from aborted babies is ethically, morally and biblically wrong.” 2015-07-14; Patrick, Charles; Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary; Modern Day Molech; https://web.archive.org/web/20191012113917/https://swbts.edu/news/releases/modern-day-molech/

[61] 2015-10-15; Taylor, Philippa; The Conservative Woman; Ground-breaking medical research can still be ethical; https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/philippa-taylor-ground-breaking-medical-research-can-still-be-ethical

Sursa: tribuna.us