or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › stem cell research?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

stem cell research? - Page 2

post #21 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillyMom View Post
Residual cell parts or DNA is very different from saying "Whole cells or tissues", although you did not say those exact terms as others have.
It might be "very different" scientifically, but morally it doesn't matter. Not to me anyway. I know many people that feel the same too.
post #22 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by cloak View Post
It might be "very different" scientifically, but morally it doesn't matter. Not to me anyway. I know many people that feel the same too.
Yes, I agree.
post #23 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillyMom View Post
Again, the viruses are purified from the cell culture. Vaccines DO NOT contain whole cells from culture. If they do not contain cells how do they contain human DNA?
Your above (bolded) statement is completely erroneous. It's not even up for debate.

Vaccines have to be cultured, that is "grown," in a whole cell medium. Vaccines are made from either animal cell (chick, bovine, porcine) or human cell medium. If it is a human cell medium, the human cells (yes, the whole cell) come only from aborted human fetuses. This is the way the cell culture technology works.

The way it works is all explained right there in the article (by an M.D., no less) that I posted.

Furthermore, there will be, in a few short years, no alternatives to vaccines made with aborted human fetal tissue, as ALL pharma companies are switching to that platform for vaccines as well as many other applications.

You should probably take the time to read it.

Relevant excerpt regarding cell culture technology to produce vaccines:

Quote:
"..why is it necessary? Unlike bacteria, which are complete, unicellular organisms which can be grown in "nutrient broths" - soups, essentially, made up to the liking of the bacteria in question - viruses are "incomplete organisms." They consist of only genetic material, DNA or RNA, encased in a protein coat. Although they have their genetic identity, they lack the cellular machinery to reproduce themselves, the cellular machinery that bacteria and all living cells more complicated than bacteria, up to and including ourselves, possess. So, a virus cannot, in general, grow and eventually reproduce itself by simply being "fed" the way a bacteria or a baby can. They need to usurp the machinery of some cell. And that's exactly what they do: the virus attaches itself to the wall or membrane of a cell (different viruses have preferences for different kinds of cells, just as different bacteria have preferences for different nutrient broths, and my children have preference for peanut butter and jelly to the exclusion of everything else) and literally injects its own genetic material into the cell. That genetic material usurps the cell's machinery to manufacture copies of itself, and, when the number of virus copies gets large enough, they pop the cell like an overblown balloon and the now liberated virus particles float around to latch on to another cell and start the whole process again. Thus, viruses, unlike bacteria, must be grown in cell cultures.


If you look at the package insert for the varicella (chickenpox) vaccine your child received, you find that this product also used the "WI-38 human diploid cell culture" as well as another human diploid cell culture, "MRC-5," to grow the virus used in the vaccine. The moral issue is as follows: the WI-38 and MRC-5 human diploid cell lines used for viral culture in the rubella and varicella vaccines, as well as the RA 27/3 rubella viral strain which is the virus cultured for the rubella vaccine, are derived from babies aborted decades ago.

And this regarding the future of the use of aborted fetal tissue cell lines - the PER C6 line, in particular:

Quote:
"The abortion was performed, cells were procured from the aborted child's retina, frozen, and ten years later thawed for development as the PER C6 line. The researcher from University of Leiden who oversaw the project noted in his discussion of the line's development,

"[a]nd then the pharmaceutical industry standard. I realize this sounds a bit commercial, but PER C6 were (sic) made for that particular purpose. Also, as far as I know, more than 50 different companies have taken license for PER C6."

The PER C6 cell line has been expanded onto a commercial scale by the Dutch biotechnology company Crucell NV as one of the company's two "broadly applicable human technology platforms" for developing pharmaceuticals.

PER C6, according to Crucell NV, will be used as a manufacturing system on which a wide range of biopharmaceuticals can be developed and manufactured, such as vaccines, antibodies, therapeutic proteins and gene therapy products.
post #24 of 32
the question is:

Would we have this vaccine had the abortion not been performed?
post #25 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post
the question is:

Would we have this vaccine had the abortion not been performed?
The question is, further, Do the ends justify the means?

Although, I have heard before that Japan has a rubella vaccine which was manufactured without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. I'd have to do more research to dig up where I found that, though.

I am not a big believer in the whole the ends justify the means philosophy, personally, so, even if it WAS impossible to have that vaccine w/o the aborted fetal cell line, I'd still not be OK with it.
post #26 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by applejuice View Post
Would we have this vaccine had the abortion not been performed?
As the previous poster said, the Japanese were able to make a rubella vaccine w/o it so I imagine you could make all the others a different way too. The Japanese swapped the cheek of an infected adult to get the virus instead of aborting 27 babies, finally finding an infected baby on the 27th try.

Also as the previous poster said, I don't see how that matters. The ends don't justify the means.
post #27 of 32
StacyL,
Yes, the cells are used in the propagation of the viruses, then the viruses are purified from the cells. And as Cloak pointed out from an insert some residual cellular fragments may be in the final product.
post #28 of 32
I did NOT KNOW until I was reading these boards that human embryonic cells were involved in any way with making vaccines.

Now that I know, it presents a real moral dilemma. I would suspect that the vast majority of "pro-lifers" that do vaccinate have either no clue, or they have made the decision that the benefit of the vaccine to their child outweighs the cost to another child that died 40+ years ago.
post #29 of 32
Sorry, I don't split hairs. Regardless if the whole tissue is used, cultured, whatever, the end is the same.
post #30 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamalluv View Post
I did NOT KNOW until I was reading these boards that human embryonic cells were involved in any way with making vaccines.

Now that I know, it presents a real moral dilemma. I would suspect that the vast majority of "pro-lifers" that do vaccinate have either no clue, or they have made the decision that the benefit of the vaccine to their child outweighs the cost to another child that died 40+ years ago.
Trust me, they have no clue. If they have heard of this, they often deny it.
post #31 of 32
I am pro choice but still appalled at this practice. Regardless if the cells or genetic material is found in the final vaccine or not, they were still used in the production of the vaccine which I feel is reprehensible - especially if the abortions were done for the sole purpose of harvesting the cells and without the knowledge/consent of the parents.
post #32 of 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowflower View Post
My DH and I were wondering why the 'Right to life' ers that are opposed to stem cell research aren't up in arms about the vaccines that have aborted fetal tissue in them? I'm sure some are- but I would think they'd make a louder stink about it. We've never heard anything about it. Just wondering what your thoughts are.....
I don't know where the article is, though I know I recently saw it in my apartment, but I kept an article from my local paper from several years ago. A military man, Army I believe, from a local base, was being faced with being forced out of the military, because he refused to allow the chickenpox vaccine for any of his family. He and his family were profoundly religious, and were very vocal about why they were refusing it.

It was a very good write-up, if I recall correctly, but I never saw a follow-up, so I don't know how the story ended for that family.

But I wanted to let you know that there are the occasional stories of families having problems with vaccines for that reason.




Frankly, even though my thoughts on life/choice are so incredibly complicated I can barely explain them to myself, and though they are NOT based on religion, finding out about the cells and where they come from made me even stronger in my conviction to not vaccinate (I had learned about not vaxing in chiropractic school for reasons of keeping a normal immune system, but this added a new dimension). And I think until around now I had kept some myth that that was the only one...but I'm going to be doing some reading from the links in this thread and learning some good info!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Vaccinations
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Baby Health › Vaccinations › stem cell research?