If you only have a few seconds, read these lines about vaccines not having DNA:
- There is no truth to the claim that vaccines “contain fragments of fetal DNA” or “pieces of dead fetuses” being inserted into children.
- While some vaccine research uses cell lines obtained from aborted fetuses, the cells currently used have never been part of a fetus.
- The US National Catholic Center for Bioethics recommends alternative options when available, but emphasizes the importance of vaccination for public health and child well-being.
Factchequeado’s WhatsApp chatbot (+1 (646) 873-6087) received a tweet claiming that vaccines are spiritually poisoning humanity by inserting fragments of fetal DNA into the bodies of babies. However, none of these statements are true.
Why are vaccines linked to abortions? To understand this, we must first grasp the process of vaccine production and the concept of immortalized cell lines. Several cell lines, derived from cells extracted during the analysis of aborted fetuses, have been used in vaccine research for diseases like polio, rubella, and chickenpox.
It is important to note that vaccines approved in the United States do not use “aborted fetal cells” in their development. However, the cell lines used in their research and development originated from abortions. Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine is the only one that utilizes a cell line of this origin, while Moderna and Pfizer’s vaccines do not require these cell lines for manufacturing, although they were used in the experimentation phase. The Novavax vaccine has not used these types of cells in its development.
The US National Catholic Center for Bioethics advises replacing these vaccines with alternatives whenever possible. However, if no alternatives are available, they stress the importance of vaccination for public health and child welfare, prioritizing these factors over the potential conflict with the origin of the vaccines.
Cells to ‘Grow’ Viruses: How a Vaccine is Produced
Vaccines strengthen the immune system by exposing it to weakened disease-causing agents, known as pathogens. These pathogens, often viruses, are cultivated using cells as a culture medium. In the early 19th century, live animal cells were used for vaccine research, hence the name “vaccine” derived from cows and calves.
However, using live animals in scientific research has drawbacks in terms of cost, logistics, and result contamination. The most efficient option for vaccine production is the use of cell cultures, which are cultivated in controlled artificial environments. These cultures can be of animal or human origin, depending on their characteristics.
How are Cell Lines Obtained?
Cell cultures begin with cells extracted from a living organism. Tissue samples are taken from organs, such as human or animal lungs, containing various types of cells. Through refinement and selection processes, specific cells of interest for research are obtained.
Once the desired subculture is obtained, these resulting cells, which are descendants of the original cells but were never part of the organism, can be reproduced to create a cell line. This allows for continued research even after the original cells have died.
While most cells have limited reproductive capacity, some undergo mutation and become immortalized cell lines, capable of reproducing beyond the usual limit. These cell lines have increased potential for scientific use.
Immortalized Cell Lines and Vaccine Research
Several immortalized cell lines used in vaccine development originate from tissues extracted from embryos or fetuses resulting from abortions. Examples include WI-38, MRC-5, HEK-293, PER.C6, WI-26, and Walvax-2. These cell lines have been associated with human abortions.
WI-38, developed from lung tissue of a fetus aborted at 3 months of gestation in 1963, was used to study the rubella virus and develop rubella and other vaccines. MRC-5, derived from a fetus aborted at week 14 for medical reasons in 1966, has been used in vaccines for diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, chickenpox, and polio.
HEK-293, a widely used cell line, originates from a human embryonic kidney isolated in 1973. The reasons for the abortion are unknown. PER.C6, derived from retinal cells of a human embryo aborted at week 18 of gestation in 1985, has been used in the development of Ebola vaccines, gene therapies, and therapeutic proteins.
It is important to clarify that vaccines contain inactivated viruses, not human cells. While the final product may contain traces of DNA from the cell lines, these DNA fragments are not from the original fetuses. Therefore, the claim that vaccines contain DNA from fetuses is false.
COVID-19 Vaccines and Cell Lines
Three FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines have used a cell line associated with a human abortion at some point in their research or development. However, this does not mean that vaccines insert “pieces of dead fetuses” into children, as claimed in the tweet.
The messenger RNA vaccines (Pfizer and Moderna) conducted experiments with the HEK-293 cell line to confirm their effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2. These experiments served as a proof of concept.
Cell Lines and COVID-19 Vaccines
In the world of research, cell lines are used to test the feasibility of various technologies or ideas in controlled environments. However, it’s important to note that these cell lines are not utilized in the production of current vaccines.
The Johnson & Johnson Vaccine
The Johnson & Johnson vaccine utilizes the PER.C6 cell line to manufacture its product. This vaccine uses a modified adenovirus, which carries a gene that produces the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2. The spike protein is responsible for the virus entering the body. The modified adenoviruses are cultivated using the cell line, but the vaccine itself does not contain any cells from the fetus. The extracted and filtered cells are used solely for cultivation purposes, as explained by National Geographic.
Other Vaccine Candidates and Cell Lines
A magazine article published in Science in June 2020 highlights other vaccine candidates that have utilized cell lines related to abortions at some point in their research or development. Examples include the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine, CanSino Biologics, and vaccine projects from the University of Pittsburgh and ImmunityBio.
The Novavax Vaccine
The development, production, and testing of the Novavax vaccine did not involve the use of fetal cell lines, according to the Los Angeles County Department of Health.
Ethics and Vaccination
Cell lines derived from abortions have played a crucial role in various biomedical research and the development of vaccines, saving millions of lives worldwide.
However, the use of these cell lines raises ethical and scientific debates, often intertwined with religious considerations. The National Catholic Center for Bioethics advises Catholics to consult with their doctors regarding alternative vaccine options. If no alternatives are available, the importance of getting vaccinated to protect public health and child welfare should take precedence over potential conflicts with the origin of these vaccines.
The Vatican has stated that it is morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process, especially when ethically irreproachable vaccines are not available.
The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health provides additional information on ethical perspectives of COVID-19 vaccination, including the use of cell lines from abortions in FDA-approved vaccines such as Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson. Various religious organizations have expressed their positions on this matter, with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops emphasizing the act of charity in receiving the vaccine and the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission stating that receiving vaccines requiring fetal cell lines is morally acceptable.
Factchecked
Factchecked is a Spanish-speaking community dedicated to countering disinformation in the United States. Join us and send the contents you receive to our WhatsApp at +16468736087 or visit factchecked.com/whatsapp.
Read more:
– What has Court Judge Clarence Thomas said (and what not) about the link between vaccines and abortions and why it is not true that vaccines have ‘abortion cells’
– Five misinformation about the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines against the coronavirus
MADE IN USA SHOOTING
events
The Hickman’s Family Farms Case
MS-13: “You Join or You Die”
Policy
Rep. Tricia Cotham Leaves the Democratic Party to Join the Republican
National
In Florida, Legislation Aims to Restrict Journalists and Media Outlets
Florida is currently considering a controversial law that specifically targets journalists and the media, raising concerns about press freedom and First Amendment rights. The proposed legislation, if passed, could have far-reaching implications for the state’s media landscape.
A Threat to Press Freedom
The law, which has sparked intense debate, seeks to impose stricter regulations on journalists and media organizations operating in Florida. Critics argue that it is an attempt to suppress the press and limit their ability to hold those in power accountable.
Chilling Effect on Journalism
If enacted, the law could create a chilling effect on journalism, discouraging investigative reporting and hindering the free flow of information. Journalists may fear legal repercussions and self-censor their work, ultimately undermining the public’s right to know.
Implications for First Amendment Rights
Legal experts argue that the proposed law raises serious concerns about First Amendment rights, which protect freedom of speech and the press. By targeting journalists and media outlets, the legislation could infringe upon these fundamental constitutional rights.
Public Outcry and Opposition
The proposed law has faced significant public outcry and opposition from various quarters. Press freedom advocates, civil rights organizations, and journalism associations have voiced their concerns, emphasizing the importance of a free and independent press in a democratic society.
The Future of Journalism in Florida
As the debate continues, the future of journalism in Florida hangs in the balance. The outcome of this legislation could have lasting effects on the state’s media landscape and the ability of journalists to fulfill their crucial role as watchdogs of democracy.
Ine is the only one among the three FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines that uses a cell line associated with a human abortion in its production. However, it is important to clarify that the vaccine does not contain DNA from a fetus and does not insert “pieces of dead fetuses” into children’s bodies as claimed in a tweet received by Factchequeado’s WhatsApp chatbot. The use of cell lines in vaccine production is a common practice, but it is crucial to emphasize that vaccines approved in the United States, including the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, do not use “aborted fetal cells” in their development. These cell lines were used in the experimentation phase and not in the manufacturing of the vaccines. The US National Catholic Center for Bioethics recommends exploring alternative options whenever possible, but highlights the importance of vaccination for public health and child welfare, prioritizing these factors over the potential conflict with the origin of the vaccines.
What is the stance of the US National Catholic Center for Bioethics on using vaccines that use cell lines associated with human abortion in their production
I’m sorry, but I don’t have access to up-to-date information on specific organizations’ stances. The US National Catholic Center for Bioethics is an organization that addresses ethical issues in bioethics from a Catholic perspective. Their stance on using vaccines that use cell lines associated with human abortion in their production may vary depending on the specific context and circumstances. It would be best to refer to the official documents, statements, or publications from the organization to obtain accurate and current information on their stance regarding this specific topic.
How does the use of cell lines during vaccine production differ between Ine and other FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines?
The use of cell lines during vaccine production is similar between Ine and other FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines. Cell lines are commonly used in the production of vaccines to grow a large quantity of the virus or viral components needed for the vaccine.
Cell lines are derived from human, animal, or insect cells and serve as a continuous source of cells that can be cultured in the laboratory. These cells are used to propagate the virus or express specific viral proteins that are necessary for the vaccine. The viruses or viral components are then harvested from the cell cultures and purified to create the final vaccine product.
In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, different types of cell lines have been used. For example, the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines use mRNA technology and do not require the use of cell lines for viral propagation. However, cell lines may be utilized for other steps in the manufacturing process, such as expressing viral proteins required for antigen production.
On the other hand, viral vector-based vaccines like the Johnson & Johnson vaccine use a harmless virus (vector) to deliver genetic material from the SARS-CoV-2 virus into cells. These vectors are usually propagated in cell lines to generate a sufficient quantity for vaccine production.
It is important to note that the specific cell lines used may vary between different vaccine manufacturers. Cell lines that are commonly used in vaccine production include Vero cells (monkey kidney cells), HEK293 cells (human embryonic kidney cells), and CHO cells (Chinese hamster ovary cells).
Overall, while there may be some differences in the particular cell lines used, the general use of cell lines for vaccine production is consistent among FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines, including Ine.
Great article! Really appreciate the clear and concise explanation debunking the misconceptions surrounding vaccines and fetal DNA. A must-read for anyone seeking factual information on this topic.