Oklahoma state Sen. Ralph Shortey has introduced a bill to the Oklahoma Legislature that has caused quite a stir. S.B. 1418 says it would ban any product for human “consumption” that contains aborted human fetal tissue or where the research or development of any of the ingredients required the use of aborted fetal tissue.
Now, currently, there are no aborted fetuses in any food products. But some pundits interpret “consumption” in this bill to mean not just food products, but any product humans “consume,” like drugs, vaccines, treatments or even beauty products.
In the national response to S.B. 1418, the jokes about Soylent Green abound, and those from all political persuasions mocked Shortey as an idiot with nothing better to do than invent problems and waste taxpayer money.
When Shortey suggested that his bill was not simply about aborted fetuses in the food supply, but about companies using cells and tissues from aborted human beings to test or develop various chemicals, drugs or therapies, one angry commenter on the Huffington Post retorted, “What companies? Name them. If you can’t, then this is the rantings of a paranoid delusional.”
Well ...
There is Neuralstem, a Maryland company, which, according to a Bloomberg press release, has a stem-cell line that came from “fetal tissue donated by a woman who underwent an elective abortion at 8 weeks.” In 2010, Neuralstem announced that it injected these stem cells from an aborted fetus directly into the spinal cord of a man with amyotrophic lateral sclerosi (ALS), which is better known as Lou Gehrig’s disease.
A few weeks ago, Neuralstem announced it discovered a possible new drug to treat depression. It tested several compounds using its stem-cell line to see which chemical showed promise in increasing the size of the hippocampus, a part of the brain that is shrunken in those who suffer from depression. Neuralstem did not disclose if the stem-cell line it used to develop this new drug came from an electively aborted fetus. But in academic publications listed on its website, the stem cells are described as “fetal.” The Food and Drug Administration has given Neuralstem the go-ahead to test the new drug in depressed patients.
There is also ReNeuron, an English company that has applied for clinical trials in the United States. ReNeuron wants to use stem cells from aborted fetuses to treat stroke victims. In an interview with Innovaro Pharmalicensing, the managing director of ReNeuron explained where the company gets its stem cells. He said, “We access human fetal-brain material from terminated pregnancies. They’re typically about 8-to-10-week fetuses.”
There is also Neocutis, a San Francisco company, which is selling cosmetic and dermatological products that have come from aborted fetal tissue. Neocutis openly admits that its PSP (Processed Skin Cell Proteins) products are derived from the cells of an electively aborted fetus. These PSP products are being marketed to treat “around-the-eye wrinkles and puffiness, to reduce fine lines and wrinkles, and provide long-lasting hydration for luminous skin.”
Then there are the vaccine makers like Merck and GlaxoSmithKline. Cell lines MRC-5 and WI-38 are common cell lines used by these companies to produce vaccines for rubella, polio, hepatitis A and chicken pox. MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus that was electively aborted in 1966. The WI-38 line was derived from a female fetus that was aborted in 1964.
And there is Senomyx, the San Diego company that likely set Sen. Shortey in motion. Senomyx uses the cell line HEK 293 to test chemicals as possible flavor enhancers. Cell line HEK 293 was derived from the kidney tissue of a boy aborted in the 1970s. HEK stands for “Human Embryonic Kidney.” The HEK 293 line was subsequently genetically engineered with viral DNA and is now available for sale from a common chemical-supply company called SigmaAldrich. Senomyx is reported to have contracts with giants like PepsiCo, Kraft and Nestle to test flavor enhancers for their products.
It seems Shortey may not be as delusional or paranoid as some believe.
Now, many would argue that is it morally acceptable to use these cells originally procured from elective abortion because the embryo or fetus was going to die anyway. Why not use their cells to advance technology and make our lives better?
Catholics reject this argument. If an organism must be intentionally killed to harvest cells, then the cells are morally tainted. If these cells had come from a natural miscarriage, then it would be morally permissible for parents to donate them to research.
The morality of fetal-cell use is analogous to that of organ donation. If the patient died of natural causes or a traumatic event, then it is morally permissible to use his organs for the benefit of others. It is not morally permissible to intentionally and prematurely end a person’s life and then take his organs for donation. Using cells or tissue from aborted fetuses is analogous to using organs from death-row inmates or victims of euthanasia.
All of these companies had the choice to use tissue donated from a miscarriage or other cells not derived from an elective abortion. Instead, they chose to morally taint their products and discoveries by using cells from the intentional ending of an innocent human life.
Yet, some of these products, like drugs or vaccines, can be life-saving. The question then becomes: Can Catholics use these life-saving products that were developed using aborted fetal tissue in good conscience?
Many of them, like the vaccines for rubella and polio, are developed or produced in cell lines that came from abortions that occurred decades ago, and no new abortions or destruction of life are required to produce those vaccines.
The guidance given by the Church on the use of vaccines may be the best guide for other life-saving products as well. In the case of vaccines produced in aborted fetal-stem cell lines like MRC-5 and WI-38, where the abortion occurred decades ago, parents must ask their health-care provider for an alternative vaccine that was grown in cells not procured by illicit means. If there are no alternatives, then they must voice their objection. Bishop Robert Vasa wrote the following on the use of vaccines to prevent disease:
“Thus my reading of [Dignitas Personae] inclines me to conclude that parents may use these vaccines derived from cell lines of illicit origin, but they should inquire about the availability of a more ethical alternative; and they must make their objections known to the physician, to the health-care system and to the FDA. Clearly, the use of these vaccines, while morally permissible, is not entirely morally neutral.”
In reality, if everyone did this, then one of two things would happen: The pharmaceutical companies would stop making the vaccine, or they would begin to look seriously for alternatives that are not tied to abortion. Without our protest, however, these companies have no incentive to change their ways. They will continue to do evil that good may come from it; we will continue to receive the “good” they produce, and we will thus give moral and financial support to their heinous practices.
But for Catholics to object to any product, life-saving or otherwise, developed using aborted fetal tissue, first we must know about it. Unlike Neocutis, many companies that use these cell lines are not so upfront about where they get their “raw materials.”
This is the future: well-meaning pro-lifers using drugs and other medical breakthroughs or food and beauty products with no knowledge of the unethical practices that brought them to market.
This is another disastrous legacy of Roe v. Wade. A fetus is now considered no more than just tissue, and, therefore, companies do not feel obligated to let consumers know that their product was made possible by ripping a fetus from a mother’s womb — a fact that would matter greatly to a great many people. If only we knew about it.
Full disclosure is needed. The health conscious are crying for labels identifying genetically modified food. Animal-rights activists successfully lobbied companies for labels and disclaimers that products are not tested on animals.
It is time Catholics and pro-lifers demand disclosure for any drug, treatment, vaccine, food or any other product that has used cells from an elective abortion in its development or production. And then we need to object and demand companies use alternatives.
Without our loud and continuous pressure, the use of aborted fetal tissue to bring products to market will not only continue, it will expand.
We live in a culture of death — a reality that means we truly do need labels that warn consumers: “This product was made possible by the killing of innocent human life.”
Rebecca Taylor is a clinical
laboratory specialist
in molecular biology.
She writes about bioethics on her blog Mary Meets Dolly
(MaryMeetsDolly.com/blog/).
Mark Brumley: Aren't You Ashamed?
Matthew Warner: Ask Fr. Barron: What to say to Catholics who struggle with Church teaching?
Comments
Post a Comment
I enjoyed your article, but I might suggest removing the Pepsi company logos from this article - you could have legal action against you for what it insinuates.
Thank You for this article! We all need to be more aware and to let others know that this is going on. We have the right to know that these products were brought about by the death of these innocent babies!
Is there a website where we can find out the names of such products? I panick to think my face cream may have come from such origins.
“...this new drug came from an electively aborted fetus.” Electively aborted fetus, really? So, how did the mother and abortionist get the fetus’ elective consent?
More babble from the “pro-choice” words don’t matter crowd.
Come, Holy Spirit, fill the hearts…
The MRC5 cell line does not come from an elective abortion. The abortion took place in the UK in 1964, at a time abortion could only be performed for medical reasons.
If our socity keeps on going the way it is, we will see the day when our government will start to pay women to abort their children. Everything and everyone one will be for sale.
Savior of man kind, save us!
Your article shows us another legitimizing and supporting reason to abort human pre-born children from the ‘culture of death’ - “Think of all the great stuff we can make to save us!”. I can see genetically modified ‘farms’ of selected humans incentivized to ‘grow specially needed fetal material’ to be ‘harvested’ to further save us all. It will be cheaper than the synthetic version, because so many poor will be presented with the incentives as ‘an option’ and ‘a way to contribute to humanity’. I think you’re right. This is ‘the future’, the future is now, and we must make our voices heard. We may think this type of technology can ‘save us’, but what will we become? I certainly don’t want to be drinking it.
MRC-5 was developed from lung cells from a 14-week-old male fetus that was electively aborted in 1966. The WI-38 line was derived from a female fetus that was aborted in 1964.
I thought that prior to Roe V Wade in 1973 elective abortion was illegal?
Additionally disturbing is that there must be people who are aware of the illicit origins of these life saving vaccinations for children. So, until today, no one was raising concern or promulgating this information? Both of my children were born in Catholic Hospitals and receive all of their care from Catholic Hospitals and Clinics, yet there was never any mention of this aborted tissue brought to my attention.
It makes my stomach turn knowing that Catholic Leaders have been aware of this information and there somehow has been this, well, there is nothing better at this time, so we will just go along with it until something comes up that we can raise more awareness mentality. Absolutely disturbing. Are there other things that the not so smart lay people like myself should be aware of? Or will the Church in her wisdom, only release information on a need to know basis?
Additionally, I believe that we should re-think the organ donation stipulation. Natural Causes, such as depriving a person of food and or water, (hospice care) and Traumatic events, (murder). Hospice deaths are considered natural causes. Starvation and dehydration sound like un-natural and immoral deaths. Murder is a traumatic event, but it is also an immoral act.
I was not aware of the connection between abortion and vaccines. It’s horrifying to think about! Thank you for this. It. Rings up many questions - besides the deadened virus in the vaccine, what else may have been unwittingly shared through that injection? There may be no way of knowing.
I am aghast that using the cells from a miscarried child is acceptable practice. Yes, we are ‘dust and to dust we shall return.’ However, picking over the body of one of these little ones to see what is useful to the living adults who remain behind is no different than the centurions who cast lots for Jesus’ clothes. There is a reason that scene is highlighted in the bible: it should offend our conscience. The companies using the cells from an aborted child are emboldened by the practice of using cells from a miscarried child. They know that there is no effective difference between the two. Both are the desecration of the bodies of these holy innocents. If we have to use complex technical arguments to justify our conduct, then chances we are doing exactly that: trying to justify our conduct against what our hearts know is wrong. This kind of research should be limited to tissue from the bodies of consenting adults, and even that makes me uneasy.
Wow. This is really horrifying.
Hear hear!
We do need to voice our concerns as stated to let other know our view that the destruction of any life for a perceived good is not the way. The end does not justify the means.
Surely, God has provided ethical alternatives to procure the needed treatment for diseases. He would not have an evil way be the only way!
But also, treating depression and other disorders need most often a spiritual remedy as this is the root cause of a lot of depression ie. being cut off from our only source of Joy and Happiness by sin!
God Bless you all.
Horrifying, because if products such as these increase in popularity & “consumption,” companies are going to need a lot more fetal stem cells than what the current lines are already producing to meet consumer demand. And where do you suppose they’re going to get those stem cells?
It is a good idea to politely email each company, especially PepsiCo, Kraft and Nestle, through their investor relations contact email. Should you own the stock directly or in a mutual fund, then let them know. If any of this is confirmed independently, then a boycott can be considered if the manufacturers do not come to their senses. Of course if this is confirmed, any faithful Catholic should sell the stock and/or mutual fund[s] as not to participate in such heinous use of aborted children.
The British Heart Foundation are testing on embryonic stem cells because they argue that they need to understand how cells develop, and so from doing this they believe that they will be better equipped to preventing heart disease.
Nazi Dr. Mengele used human skin from exterminated Jews for lampshades. The material was durable, and translucent, and provided the added satisfaction that Jews were finally somehow useful to Nazis. With the beauty products described in this article, women of the culture of death can take satisfaction that dirty mewling little suckers finally can enhance the quality of life of American princesses, as is their right. And men of the culture of death can be relieved of a financial burden, finally having figured out that since the kid’s art wouldn’t sell anyway, might as well make a little scratch out of their dead bodies…. Birds of a feather….
Being a prolifer, I would agree that the use of aborted fetuses is morally ambiguous but I believe the arguement used here is one-sided. If we are to tell parents that they are committing an evil in using these life saving products because of their origin, then we need to promote an alternative rather than simply tell the parent it is their moral obligation to find one. Doctors are doing amazing work with stem cell, just look at the list of deseases that are mentioned in this article. Why then do we not DEMAND that all miscarried fetuses be immediately turned over to the medical profession so that these tragic losses can still serve others. These researchers are being ham-strung in trying to do their good work by a community that only wants good. There is a reason that the fetal tissue that you mention in this article is 40 to 50 years old. It is because of the pressure put on politicians to stop the use of these cells and the cells in use were grandfathered so not subject to the laws created after their use. It seems that we prevent those people trying to do good in an effort to stop those doing evil. It seemes to me that those women who have no problem killing their children couldn’t care less about the plight that we put on research. If we walk in lock step with these companies trying to help, we become strong in the fight for good.
Does anyone remember the movie “Soilent Green?” A harbinger?
Science and faith parted company long ago! Now that the “State” has just about succeded in killing God there will be no more petty moral restraints to block advancements in “science”. Dr. Mengela(sp) would be proud of these modern scientists!
How about Johnson & Johnson? They used to call themselves the “Baby Company”, but, they tried to hide their own research building that uses aborted babies for WHAT? Sen. Shorty should be publicly thanked for this bill, which, we can be sure, won’t go anyplace fast without our help. Thank you Rebecca for bring this to our attention. +JMJ+
Sen. Shortey is to be commended for his proposed bill because he is bringing to awareness what is happening and (possibly more importantly) showing how future immoral acts will follow and expand once the line has been crossed. It is only in the last year that in a related area, writers in the medical field noted that some organ transplants must come from living beings and other ethicists are now admitting that to deny this i.e. live donors, was a ruse in order to by-pass the ‘yuck factor’ which has held voluntary donations back. More recent articles have even suggested that those even close to dying should be readied for harvesting since they are so close to being dead or as referred to by some of those treating said patients, “they are swirling the drain” (heard in a CBC radio interview with interns, here in Canada).Ps.It was explained that this term was not used in an offensive manner but helped the staff from being overwhelmed by the many deaths encountered during this training period.
This is an important revelation, but I wonder why the Pepsi logo was used in the margin, but not referenced in the article itself. Seems to me that is unfair to PepsiCo.
If I’m not mistaking, many of the inoculations that youngsters get are recombinant DNA made from fetal cell lines. Insulin and some artificial heparin also share the same recombinant DNA lines.
What are the names of the cosmetic products?
Without a doubt, the perpetrators of abortion (called infanticide) will find ways to FURTHER profit from their wickedness - the German Nazis were famous for making lampshades out of the skin of the Concentration Camp victims!!! They took all their teeth etc. that were filled with gold or silver etc. The way the liberal PROGRESSIVES in this country are going we could end up with worse - National Socialism (Nazism under Hitler) is still alive and well under the Demoratic “regime” - the Republicans are not far behind - In the past 40 years none of our elected leaders have done much to stop the taking of innocent life or to put morality back into our school systems. Just note what Ric Santorum had to put up with in Oklahoma this past weekend - those protestors are the real NAZIS!!!
@Jim Jongers, I believe that its not ambiguous at all, but clearly wrong. There is not telling where finding good uses for evil will lead. And there is no reason why drug companies cannot use other cell lines for vaccines except money. No one wants to spend money to invest in a vaccine that already has a patent; however, if we disseminate this information, they will see that there is a very large audience for a new vaccine. And doctors have done nothing with infant stem cell research. I believe anything positive done in this has been with adult stem cell research. and @Patrick, the article refences Senomyx which has ties with food giants such as Pepsi. See this regarding a PepsiCo boycott http://www.cogforlife.org/pepsiboycott.htm
It reminds me great achievement of German Nazi chemical industry making soaps from people, Jewish, and not only, killed in concentration camps. I these ‘irritated’ people would not mind using this soap - it was from people who would die anyway, right?
Horrendous. I have never seen in my life such a quick fall of morals and destruction of conscience!!! Lord, what are you up to? I am sure it will lead to a good thing, but it is so bothersome!!!
Thank you for this article and bringing this abomination to the light of day. From now on when we hear them say “stem cell” we will know it means “little people.” Now when you read Revelation, Chapter 18, verses 10 and 11 you can be absoletly certain that the “great city, Babylon” is the United States today! And when you read chapter 17:4-6 and chapters 17-22, you know that the Woman represents the sins of the women of America, and the name of the city “Baby"lon because of what she has done to her offspring.
Pepsico is a registered trademark and has no direct connection with this article. The image has been appropriated, and it should be removed. The trademark name and image appear to have been used simply to draw the reader into the article. Also ... Erroneous “facts”: 1. The polio vaccine was developed in/before 1954, not 1964 or 1966 as the article implies. 2. Neocutis: “products do not directly use the originally donated tissue [from a “medically” necessary terminated pregnancy] in any way ... only use proteins derived from cultured skin cells (grown from a dedicated cell bank). These were not embryonic stem cells.”—http://www.neocutis.com/categories.php?catid=90
Jennifer. I didn’t post the article nor can I remove the Pepsico logo, but I certainly see that it is relevent. Dedicated cell banks do use the cells cultivated from aborted fetus’...that is just as morally reprehensible. We are sick and tired of being talked around issues. Jennifer, I don’t know what your connection is to Pepsi, but the fact of the matter is two weeks ago I had no idea that aborted fetal cells had anything to do with snack food…or immunizations…or autism. I am not a scientist. I am just a homeschooling mom with 11 kids. But I can read and learn. And what I am learning horrifies me…not just from a moral and religious viewpoint. But from a human dignity and trust viewpoint. I am a woman who has lived with MS for the last 25 years. The pharmaceutical industry, agribusiness, and packaged food industry—PEPSI, have deceived us for too long. Frankly, we are more than a little pissed. Take your logo and go…
I knew about Pepsi. Thanks for the heads up on the others. I just want to bring up something that I recently became aware of dealing with organ transplants. They no longer wait for the patient to be dead. They’ve expanded their definition of brain dead to harvest organs sooner. Most organ donors are alive enough to experience pain still when organs are removed so they place the donor under anesthesia before they start to harvest organs.
I have stopped going in any restaurants that serve pepsi products, and I understand there are many more out there and this is disgusting!
I’m glad pepsi is being exposed for this, I believe the other companies are Nestle and Kraft.
Reading this article was like reading what the Germans did with the remains of the Jewish people during the Holocaust. May Jesus, all the Saints and Angels surround and protect the unborn.
@ Mr Villalobos: your words “Additionally, I believe that we should re-think the organ donation stipulation. Natural Causes, such as depriving a person of food and or water, (hospice care) and Traumatic events, (murder). Hospice deaths are considered natural causes. Starvation and dehydration sound like un-natural and immoral deaths”
I am a nurse who cares for people at the end of life and I implore you to not insinuate that hospice deaths are deaths by deprivation. I cant speak to whatever situations you may have been told of that gave you this impression,but as a person who does NOT believe in deprivation or euthenasia, I still know that in the course of natural death, there is a shut-down process and allowing that to proceed is not a moral offense.
Go ahead and stay vigilant to any abuses you may encounter, but it is an offense against moral ethical healthcare workers to speak of all end of life practitioners as killers, it simply isnt true.
the person was not “intentionally killed to harvest the cell” as u state. the baby was aborted because the mother made that decision. I may be wrong but I thought it best to be sure
@ Tammy, Teri Schiavo is the case I think most people remember. She of course could not live without her feeding tube. I am sure there are many like her today suffering. I think that because our society doesn’t want to deal with the trouble of “sick” people, we can just put them in Hospice. Since it is a painful death to dehydrate and starve, we apply morphine or other potent narcotics to the skin to absorb and “make the person more comfortable.”
I belive that there may situations when Hospice care is necessary, and I am sure that you are employed in an ethical establishment, however, the number of people who are in Hospice care have jumped exponetially. Twenty-five years ago, hospice care in the United States was hardly known. Today, it seems like the place to process our sickest patients, withhold treatment and medication while getting them higher than a kite with medication that can cause them to stop breathing. That doesn’t sound like it hastens death to me. Oh wait, it does.
Those condoning this mad science should be ashamed of themselves! Will the poor benefit, when they start being used for parts by those who don’t find them useful enough to exist? People are already thinking it and, if government permits it, many’ll think that somehow gives them a moral imperative to enact those thoughts on such “useless eaters.”
For those who have no knowledge of this prior to reading this article, please visit our website at http://www.cogforlife.org There is a great deal of misinformation in the comments - regrettably and I believe you will find all the answers you need - including that MRC-5 was indeed from an elective abortion in the UK - because abortion was perfectly legal for “health of the mother” - and that includes mental health. Its documented on our website with references. Children of God for Life has been working on this for the past 12 years - the Pepsi/Senomyx problemn for the past year. We are more than happy to answer your questions.
Rebecca, I just heard you on EWTN radio…the week after I read your first article on fb I got into an argument with my sons doctor when he couldn’t answer my questions. I ended up getting him his vaccination because I was just not equipped to even know what to ask. My son, at 16 knows that well, moms know nothing and I was just an embarrassment and his doctor said that was just something silly I must have read on the internet. I was picking my son up tonight while I was listening to you…he yelled at the kids in the back and asked them “nicely” to quiet down so he could hear. Thank-you…
Oh dear. “the culture of death” appears to be the invention of a logician promoting barbarism as a cure to pollution. The same logic that applies to accusing something like a vaccine company or a flavoring company of using aborted fetuses also applies to a seat belt company that produced a better child seat after noting failures. Be careful what you wish for.
Is there a site with a frequently updated list of companies and products that use human ingredients?
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.