Can this be true?:Some vaccinations cells contain arobrted babies cells????

[BellaClaudia]

Could someone tell me this is not true?

Someone who I do not even know told me yesterday that some of the vaccinations actually contain cells obtained from the babies that are conceived, and infected in-utero and subsequently aborted just for the purpose of manufacturing vaccines?

The same person told me that Church being anti abortion and all approves the use of the vaccines made this way?

Please tell me this is not true this does not seem true, someone would say something before, I would hear it from somwhere since I read about vaccines for few years and I have never heard abuot such a atrocity.
That just can't be .. can it?????

I am pretty sure this person must get something wrong.

[Iucounu]

I've never heard of it, but I am tagging this thread out of interest.

[Bokonon]

Yes, there are aborted fetal cells used to make some vaccines, but not the way this person described it:
http://www.immunizationinfo.org/issu...-some-vaccines

" * "

[caned & able]

The Catholic Church does not object to the use of this vaccine for its parishners.

http://www.cogforlife.org/vaticanresponse.htm

My personal experience is that most Catholics do not know anything about this.

[BellaClaudia]

[karika]

The first time I heard vaccines were made with cells from an aborted baby (which they aren't exactly- to be factual), it floored me also. I didn't believe it. I thought anyone that didn't vaccinate their baby was foolish and uneducated. Now I know that is not true in most cases, the people choosing not to vaccinate are highly intelligent and educated.

I read all the ingredients and scientific info, then I actually even wrote to the CDC. I wish I had kept the letter. The cell line they use to produce the vaccines are originally from aborted fetuses as an earlier pp posted much facts. Add to that the fact that vaccines contain aluminum, thimerasol, polysorbate 80, bits of animal DNA, other chemicals, and virus dna in a structure not found in nature... add to that some are produced in chicken eggs, and now insect eggs and now there is even genetically modified tobacco plants growing a vaccine.....

The more you learn and read and research and learn, the more it sounds like it is straight from a science fiction plot... I wondered why more people didn't know. How could it be that this is all true and yet, no one knew.

So I am vocal (well, online, I know hardly no one IRL). I try to help others learn the truth about mainstream medicine in general, and definitely about the extremely unnatural thing called vaccines (and other pharmaceutical substances). There is power in knowledge and numbers. Spread the word, but make sure it is the facts or else it makes non vaxxers look unintelligent. If you can, thank your friend for planting a seed for you but then give them the real facts about the cell line.

[LessTraveledBy]

There is a document about by the Catholic Church somewhere online... I saw it years ago. I am sure you can find it if you google. While the Church says it is ok to use these, plenty of Catholics are personally not comfortable with that. I also remember thinking that the person responding to the question did not seem to be very well aware of the whole debate around vaccines, in general. (And I suppose he did not need to be, speaking strictly from the moral point... but still.)

[jellybeanmumma]

I've read this before but can't remember where.. here are a few links though

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar.../03/vaccine-to

http://www.rtl.org/prolife_issues/Li...talTissue.html
..This one actually lists which ones are from human cell lines..

I wish I could remember the source as it was about contamination in the WI 38 line from Plotkin's Lab. Really was like reading science fiction. It may have been towards the end of this article..it's really really long and I was reading it at night while DS slept. It's more about the theory that HIV was a result of Polio vaccines but I think at the end it went into cell lines etc

http://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/disse...DS/Cribb96.pdf

I'm not religious but the more I read about this stuff the more I think scientists just aren't quite ready to play God!

[Delicateflower]

Originally Posted by karika

I wondered why more people didn't know. How could it be that this is all true and yet, no one knew.

That's odd. Everyone IRL I've discussed vaccines with knows all of this. But I've never discussed it with a non-vaxer IRL, because I don't know any. Maybe my social circle, being college educated middle class is just more informed generally?

[HRJ]

My mom's friend (who is very practicing Catholic and prolife) sent my mom about 6 links this summer about vaccines and aborted fetal cells.

This is one of them:

http://www.rtl.org/prolife_issues/Li...talTissue.html

[karika]

Originally Posted by Delicateflower

That's odd. Everyone IRL I've discussed vaccines with knows all of this. But I've never discussed it with a non-vaxer IRL, because I don't know any. Maybe my social circle, being college educated middle class is just more informed generally?

It sounds as though you are saying the people in your social circle know about the cell line and the other toxic ingredients, and yet still do vaccines. This would mean they did their research and came to a different conclusion, which happens a lot in a free society with people that have free will. I respect the fact that this can happen, though truthfully for me the conclusion is that injecting toxins is not a pathway to health. I would like for there to be independent research that is not swayed by money (hidden or blatant) and ideological agendas so people can be informed.

When I first heard about not vaccinating, it was on the large EC group. I assumed the poster was a backwards, uneducated, mountain folk type person. Turned out she and the others that were vocal had masters and doctorate degrees and lived everywhere in the US, quite a few in large urban areas like NY. A few were published authors. That was when I crawled out of my judgmental hole and thought, well maybe there is something I don't know, the knowing of which would change everything.

For me, it was finding out how the vaccines were made- using a cell line generated by an aborted fetus. This does not fit in with my beliefs because I do not believe it is safe or advantageous to humans to inject cells from another being into our blood directly.

To find out about using chicken eggs was another eye opener. These are not organic eggs, or eggs from well treated chickens- these are eggs from the worst of the battery cage type farms. So supporting vaccines supports horrible animal cruelty. These types of egg suppliers are the ones that just let the male chicks go down the line to fall off the end and suffocate in a pile of empty egg shells and other male chicks, and they keep their laying hens in cages so small they cannot even spread their wings, never seeing the sun or feeling a breeze. I can't go on anymore about it, it is unbearably cruel. I didn't know any of this before a casual comment online made me question myself and the world and begin investigating.

I am educated and at the time of my dd1's birth, I was middle class. I didn't know about vaccines at her birth, and had just begun my research at the time of a 2 mo check up. The pediatrician strongarmed us into receiving those shots. He couldn't even tell me the ingredients (and he has a really big degree). He wouldn't show me the package insert. It was her father that gave in to the tactics and said we were going to let them stick her. It affected her and changed her IMO. I have not allowed a vaccine since, and will not. nak

[caned & able]

OMG!

How can people not know?

This vaccine has been in use for over forty years!

If people would only read the ingredients on the insert to the vaccine, everyone would know!

...This does not fit in with my beliefs because I do not believe it is safe or advantageous to humans to inject cells from another being into our blood directly. ...

A bit off topic, but, OTOH, what do you think an organ transplant is?

[karika]

Originally Posted by caned & able

OMG!

How can people not know?

This vaccine has been in use for over forty years!

If people would only read the ingredients on the insert to the vaccine, everyone would know!



A bit off topic, but, OTOH, what do you think an organ transplant is?

Most people are not privy to the insert information at a normal office visit where a vaccine is administered. Most people just blindly believe the system and their chosen 'health' professional. I had vaccines administered and was never given an insert or received one to read. What people are given is the extremely dumbed down cartoon 'information' packet about a vaccine, if anything. Even if you do read the package inserts via a website online, or have someone that is willing to show it to you, there is no mention of the fact that "propagated in WI-38 human diploid lung
fibroblasts." means - from an aborted fetus cell line (the quote is from the package insert from Merck, for the MMRII. http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_.../mmr_ii_pi.pdf

This page
http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package...o%20Monovalent has links to package inserts.

from the mmrii page...

"supplemented with fetal bovine serum"

"the Jeryl Lynn** (B level) strain
of mumps virus propagated in chick embryo cell culture;"

YUCK! and as I said, the average Joe is not given a package insert upon vaccination, and in fact, the ped at my dd1's 2 month visit refused to produce it for me to read.

As for an organ transplant. That is a procedure that is done in response to a damage that already exists... ie- fixing a problem. Vaccines are a supposed 'preventative' measure (according to those that believe in them, which I do not, so to me they are not preventative but in fact create problems in every system in which they are administered, but for the sake of comparing as you want to...) not to fix a problem, but to try to prevent one later... as if our bodies are not made perfect. Are there people going out to get organ transplants in a preventative fashion nowadays? No, they are told there is a problem with your kidney....

anyway, the evidence of 'rejection' when speaking of an organ transplant exemplifies and illustrates the point that a body does not readily, if ever, accept a foreign body within itself.... I wonder what the rejection rates for transplants are... and they are screened and matched ahead of time, then sometimes rejection still occurs.

But when we get to the mechanics of transplants and vaccines, that is really apples to oranges as they are different things entirely, but the large scale scope of one is a supposed preventative and the other is a way of fixing something that has already occurred.....

[Delicateflower]

Originally Posted by karika

For me, it was finding out how the vaccines were made- using a cell line generated by an aborted fetus. This does not fit in with my beliefs because I do not believe it is safe or advantageous to humans to inject cells from another being into our blood directly.

Oh goodness! No wonder you're freaked out, if we were putting foreign cells into our bloodstreams we'd be dying like flies from incompatibilities! Just look at all the type matching that has to happen for a blood transfusion.

Part of the vaccine is grown in human cells, then it's purified so that no part of the cells remain. And then it's injected into either muscle or just under the skin.

Has the same thing happened with the 'toxins'? The word formaldehyde is scary, but your body is making formaldehyde right at this moment, as is mine, and we're not harmed by it.

[heathergirl67]

"Toxin" is a mystery word to me. Something that could be toxic? Couldn't everything be toxic? Or is it something that could be toxic from just a small amount? Isn't that called a poison? Is there a difference between the two? Is there proof that every "toxin", no matter how diluted, is always harmful? Even if it's to a small degree? Where's the science behind this strong word?

[karika]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

"Toxin" is a mystery word to me. Something that could be toxic? Couldn't everything be toxic? Or is it something that could be toxic from just a small amount? Isn't that called a poison? Is there a difference between the two? Is there proof that every "toxin", no matter how diluted, is always harmful? Even if it's to a small degree? Where's the science behind this strong word?

IME using the word poison on MDC results in a UA violation, so I tend to avoid it. If I put a piece of rat poop in a cup, then fill the cup with water, maybe stir it up, let it sit for a day, then strain out the piece (or pieces ) of rat poop, is the water untainted?

I suppose lots of things could be toxic... you can even die from drinking too much water.. but the difference for me is things that are swallowed or breathed go through the bodies natural defenses, the stomach, the nose, the lungs.... but things injected directly into the veins do not..

for instance, we breathe air, but to inject it into a vein would kill you... a person may drink an antacid, but to inject it would not be the same thing.... it is one thing to encounter aluminum in ingesting, but quite another intravenously.

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by karika

IME using the word poison on MDC results in a UA violation, so I tend to avoid it. If I put a piece of rat poop in a cup, then fill the cup with water, maybe stir it up, let it sit for a day, then strain out the piece (or pieces ) of rat poop, is the water untainted?

I suppose lots of things could be toxic... you can even die from drinking too much water.. but the difference for me is things that are swallowed or breathed go through the bodies natural defenses, the stomach, the nose, the lungs.... but things injected directly into the veins do not..

for instance, we breathe air, but to inject it into a vein would kill you... a person may drink an antacid, but to inject it would not be the same thing.... it is one thing to encounter aluminum in ingesting, but quite another intravenously.

Uh-huh. But that doesn't help to define "toxic" at all. For example, if you breathe in anthrax it goes through your body's natural defenses. So anthrax wouldn't be classified as "toxic"?

[karika]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

Uh-huh. But that doesn't help to define "toxic" at all. For example, if you breathe in anthrax it goes through your body's natural defenses. So anthrax wouldn't be classified as "toxic"?

the definition of toxic is easily found in the dictionary online, here it is from the free online dictionary

"toxic [ˈtɒksɪk]
adj
1. of, relating to, or caused by a toxin or poison; poisonous
2. (Medicine / Pathology) harmful or deadly
[from medical Latin toxicus, from Latin toxicum poison, from Greek toxikon (pharmakon) (poison) used on arrows, from toxon arrow]
toxically adv"

I am not really sure what this has to do with the OP however. This thread is about finding out about the aborted fetus cell line being used to produce vaccines. I know the mods appreciate it when we stay on thread... if you want to start a new thread to talk about the other *toxic* {IMO} ingredients I am sure many of us will chime in there also...

for now, I am hoping to sleep for a few hours.... g night

[heathergirl67]

Originally Posted by karika

the definition of toxic is easily found in the dictionary online, here it is from the free online dictionary

"toxic [ˈtɒksɪk]
adj
1. of, relating to, or caused by a toxin or poison; poisonous
2. (Medicine / Pathology) harmful or deadly
[from medical Latin toxicus, from Latin toxicum poison, from Greek toxikon (pharmakon) (poison) used on arrows, from toxon arrow]
toxically adv"

I am not really sure what this has to do with the OP however. This thread is about finding out about the aborted fetus cell line being used to produce vaccines. I know the mods appreciate it when we stay on thread... if you want to start a new thread to talk about the other *toxic* {IMO} ingredients I am sure many of us will chime in there also...

for now, I am hoping to sleep for a few hours.... g night

Thanks. However, I've found that the definitions vary significantly from dictionary to dictionary. Some say that it's anything poisonous. Some say that it's strictly a potentially harmful substance normally produced by one's own body. Some say it's a zoological term only. I have a doctor friend who says it's not a real medical term because it's an imaginary cover-all word. And even when a term does have a strict meaning, it's use in everyday language can stray from that meaning. It can (and seemingly does) mean different things to different people.

Although the UA here is incredibly strict, the mods seem comfortable allowing a topic to evolve naturally, as long as it stays on the topic of vaccinations. But I'm sure they appreciate your concern.

[Delicateflower]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

"Toxin" is a mystery word to me. Something that could be toxic? Couldn't everything be toxic? Or is it something that could be toxic from just a small amount? Isn't that called a poison? Is there a difference between the two? Is there proof that every "toxin", no matter how diluted, is always harmful? Even if it's to a small degree? Where's the science behind this strong word?

Toxin has a very specific definition:
A toxic or poisonous substance produced by biological processes by biological organisms

Botox, for example, is a toxin produced by Clostridium botulinum. Tetanus produces a toxin, as does B. pertussis (the whooping cough bug).