“The evil of using aborted fetal cell lines involves not just the original murder, but the ongoing commercialization of the child’s body, as well as the ultimate refusal to bury his desecrated remains. We cannot sit back as the use of aborted human babies in medical research is gradually normalized as an ‘unfortunate’” part of modern-day medicine. – Statement in a letter by eighty-six Catholic women from 25 countries opposing what they called “abortion-tainted” COVID-19 vaccines

“Destruction of the embryo in the Mother’s womb is a violation of the right to live which God has bestowed upon this nascent life and that is nothing but murder.” –  Dietrich Bonhoeffer (On April 9, 1945, Lutheran pastor and theologian. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was hanged at Flossenburg Concentration Camp, only days before the American liberation of the POW camp. The last words of the brilliant and courageous 39-year-old opponent of Nazism were “This is the end—for me, the beginning of life.”)

“Always, vaccinations were given with greatest enthusiasm to children and the elderly – the most immunologically vulnerable and the easiest to damage with vaccines.” – Dr. Vernon Coleman

Many commonly used vaccines, especially those for children, have their origin in cell lines that were originally developed from an aborted baby. If we stand against abortion and the murder of the unborn, the use of baby’s bodies for science creates a serious moral dilemma for believers. May a believer in our Creator use vaccines derived from aborted materials or should we refuse them?  And should parents refuse to allow these types of vaccinations for their children?  Before submitting ourselves or our children to government vaccines, we need to be aware of what they contain and answer these personal questions.

Vaccines for common childhood ailments are available today, but what is in them may be more damaging than suffering from the ailment.  As a child, I had the measles and chicken pox within the same two weeks.  I remember the itching, the Calamine lotion and baking soda baths.  My poor mother was distraught trying to keep me from scratching and creating scars.  Back then we had parties so that these childhood diseases would spread through all the school children and finally be over.  Now we have vaccines.

Vaccine Contents

It is astonishing to me how many vaccines contain cells from aborted babies. Normal vaccines are grown from a weakened strain of a known virus in a culture.  When this is injected into our bodies, it creates antibodies to that disease allowing the body to fight off the infection.

These are not the deadly Pfizer, ModeRNA, and AstraZeneca vaccines promoted by Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates and our government that install a kind of “operating system” into the human body, hijacking the body’s cells to produce alien proteins via an mRNA “software code” that isn’t even human.

No, these cell lines are taken from electively aborted fetuses and used to manufacture vaccines including MMR lII (measles, mumps, rubella), chickenpox, shingles, Hepatitis A, hepatitis A & B, polio vax, and rabies.

Aborted baby cells were originally used because viruses tend to grow better in cells from humans than from animals. Fetal cells do not divide as many times as other cell types, so they can be used longer.

In addition, because of the ability to maintain these cells at very low temperatures, such as in liquid nitrogen, scientists are able to continue using the same fetal cell lines that were originally isolated in the 1960s.

Therefore, when inoculating children with these vaccines, we are also injecting them with residual aborted fetal DNA and cellular debris, although some deny there is DNA involved. These contaminants put children at risk for autoimmune disease, gene insertion and mutations. Today’s children are routinely vaccinated by pediatricians performing what they believe to be “preventative” medicine.  By age six, most children have been exposed to more than 100 viral strains.  Commercial markets are created by abortion and are profiting from the fetal distribution chain.

In 2019, President Trump tried to end the use of aborted baby’s bodies for scientific research at the National Institutes of Health who spent about $100 million in 2018 on fetal tissue research.  Use of aborted baby’s tissues in vaccines, pharmaceutical and medical research obscures the value of all human life.

The human cell lines used to grow these kinds of vaccination strains are derived from the lung tissue of aborted babies.  MRC-5 and WI-38 are two of these cell lines used in normal vaccines.  The German measles vaccine (Meruvax) is sold by Merck and Co., Inc., and uses the WI-38 cell line.  The chicken pox vaccine is called Varivax and uses both MRC-5 and WI-38 cell lines.  This is what we’re putting in our children’s bodies.  Havrix, which guards against scarlet fever, rheumatic fever, hepatitis A infections and kidney inflammation, is a vaccine offered by SmithKline Beecham and it too uses MRC-5.

Janssen/Johnson and Johnson, one of the largest companies in America catering to baby needs, is also ironically one of the leading corporate sponsors of abortion.  Their Covid-19 vaccine contains aborted baby cells.  Fetal retinal cells are used in the making of the Covid-19 Johnson and Johnson vaccine.

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans urged its parishioners to avoid the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, calling it “morally compromised” because it was developed and tested using cells derived from aborted baby tissue.  Nevertheless, the Vatican, said in December that it was “morally acceptable” for Roman Catholics to receive any COVID-19 vaccine, even one based on research that originally used cells derived from aborted fetuses.  Where is the rest of the clergy?

I believe we’re facing a carnage, not only the murder of nearly 65 million unborn babies since 1973, but also the travesty and evil of selling their little bodies for scientific and medical use and the atrocity of using their cells in vaccines, food, drinks and cosmetics.  (The Culture of Death – 2012)

Operation Warp Speed

The deaths and adverse reactions from the untested mRNA vaccines, which were rushed to the public via “Operation Warp Speed,” are killing many recipients today.  Animal testing was bypassed for the Covid-19 vaccines, but in previous mRNA testing, all the animals died, not from the vaccine, but because the vaccine created hyper immune system changes in the animals’ bodies.  When another virus exploded on the scene, they died of sepsis and cardiac failure.  This is likely a binary poison…part one is the vaccine and part two is a new virus that overwhelms the system.

AstraZeneca has now been banned from 20 countries because of blood clots…Austria, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Romania, Denmark, Norway, Iceland, the Netherlands, Ireland, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Slovenia, Cyprus, and Sweden. Bulgaria and Thailand have also stopped the jab.  While the AstraZeneca vaccine hasn’t been authorized for use in America just yet, White House Chief Medical Officer Dr. Anthony Fauci told lawmakers that there will likely be enough safety and efficacy data to grant the vaccine authorization in April.

Governments and pharma companies have rushed this new experimental RNA technology into use for the first time in history. Prior to the Covid injection, all attempts to force approval of RNA tech had failed; dangerous and deadly over-reaction of the immune system was the reason.

Fauci and his communist collaborator, Dr. Zhong, are now pushing a new lie. They are saying your children shouldn’t play together until they’re fully vaccinated. I thought the science proved that Covid wasn’t a danger to children? What changed?

Zhong, who is often called “China’s Fauci,” is a pulmonary specialist and a long-time Communist Party member. He’s Fauci’s communist pal. He and Fauci just appeared together on a Covid panel and both expressed hopes that Covid restrictions and mass vaccinations worldwide would continue well into the future, “It will take about two-or three-years’ time with global collaboration.” Their plan is to make Covid panic and enslavement the new normal, for a virus that 99.75 percent of the people recover from.

Oh yes, go get your vaccine and once you’ve had both injections, Krispy Kreme will give you a free donut every day when you show your vaccine papers.

Dr. Stanley Plotkin’s Rubella Vaccine

My paternal grandmother and actress Gene Tierney were great friends; they met when both of their husbands were stationed at Ft. Riley, Kansas in 1943.  Gene’s first child with legendary designer Oleg Cassini was a daughter named Daria who was born with birth defects. Tierney contracted rubella during a World War II USO appearance at the Hollywood Canteen because a female marine with the illness had sneaked out of quarantine to meet her favorite star.

Years later, the woman saw Gene again and told her she had broken quarantine and asked if she had contracted German measles from her.  Gene turned and walked away.  The disabilities of Gene’s first child Daria, had a devastating lifelong effect on Tierney even though her second daughter with husband, Oleg Cassini, was fine.

Had it been 1965 and Gene had received the rubella vaccine, her baby would have been born without disabilities.  Rubella was devastating, and the vaccine has saved many unborn babies from defects, but there’s a dark side to the injection.

Dr. Stanley Plotkin, pediatrician and vaccinologist, developed vaccines in the United States during the mid to late twentieth century. He began his research career at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where he studied the rubella virus. (Wistar focused solely on biomedical research.)  This 20-minute film on Plotkin and Wistar shows their pioneering use of aborted baby’s cells to make the rubella vaccine.

In pregnant women, the rubella virus caused congenital rubella syndrome in the baby, which led to various malformations and birth defects. Using WI-38 cells, a line of cells that originated from tissues of aborted fetuses, Plotkin successfully created RA27/3, a weakened strain of the rubella virus, which he then used to develop a rubella vaccine. Plotkin’s rubella vaccine has prevented birth defects due to congenital rubella in developing babies and newborns.  Rubella is the “R” in today’s Measles, Mumps and Rubella vaccine (MMR).

Under oath for a deposition in January of 2018, Dr. Stanley Plotkin admitted to using 76 normally developing aborted babies to develop human cell lines to make vaccines. They harvested pituitary glands, hearts, lungs, kidneys, skin, and spleens to develop vaccines.  I hate that word harvested…it’s not like picking corn or threshing wheat.  Dear Lord what euphemisms are given for pure ungodly evil.  Plotkin ends by stating he is an atheist and does not believe in religious exemptions from vaccines.  The seven-minute video eliminates the opening legalities. In another longer video, Plotkin states the aborted babies were three months or older, but that researchers had nothing to do with the abortions.

Dr. Plotkin stated, “From my personal point of view, having seen the suffering of families with Congenital Rubella Syndrome infants, I consider that what was done is 100% moral.”  His research contributed to the development of multiple vaccines, including those for rubella, rabies, rotavirus, polio, and varicella. He also worked on cytomegalovirus (chicken pox and mono) and HIV vaccine development. Both of which have proven elusive and remain unsolved.

A rubella vaccine was first licensed in 1969. It is on the World Health Organization’s List of Essential Medicines. As of 2009, more than 130 countries included it in their routine vaccinations.

Stanley Plotkin’s conflicts of interest were discussed when he was questioned by US lawyer Aaron Siri during the same deposition. Details of the extent of his industry conflicts of interest were elicited from him by Mr. Siri, e.g., Plotkin’s consultancy work for Sanofi, Merck, Glaxo and Pfizer, and his association with Dynavax Technologies, MyMetics, Inovio, CureVac AG, SynVaccine, GeoVax Labs, GlycoVaxyn AG, Adjuvance Technologies, BioNet-Asia, Abcombi Biosciences, and Hookipa Biotech.

Your Papers Please!

Starting April 2nd, 2021, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo will require New Yorkers to show “vaccine passports,” proof that they have received the COVID-19 vaccine in order to re-enter society.

The illegitimate Biden administration is set to launch a Covid-19 passport that Americans must have to engage in commerce and would track Americans who took the vaccine.

Statistics prove that 99.75 percent of Americans recover from this virus; yet the goal is for all Americans to take the untested jab.

How can a “vaccine passport” be legal when our medical records are private and there are HIPAA laws?  And forced vaccines?  What about the Nuremberg Code?  It addresses experimentation and that is exactly what these vaccines are!

Conclusion

Most states have mandatory vaccinations especially prior to children entering school.  As early as 1905, the US Supreme Court ruled that parents do not have a constitutional right not to vaccinate their children, regardless of the reason, since these laws are justified in order to protect the general public health.

One out of five American children now have “special needs.”  These include learning disabilities, attention-deficit disorders and behavioral issues, all of which create a whole new market for certain kinds of prescription drugs.

Polio was on its way out in the late 50s yet children and adults in the early 1960s were given the polio vaccine.  The vaccine was grown on Simian monkey kidneys which caused SV40 contamination and soft tissue cancers not only in the recipients but also in their descendants.  It is genetically passed.

The government has used Americans as guinea pigs for decades.  Bill Gates and his buddy, Dr. Anthony Fauci are UN Agenda 21 proponents of depopulation wherein the earth accommodates only 500 million people. They have strong monetary ties to the untested mRNA vaccines as well as the vaccines that are grown via aborted baby cells. Gates says we can eliminate population through vaccines.

America vaccinates more than any other country.  The reality is that vaccinations have never, in all of history, diminished the incidence of disease.

Please research states with non-medical exemptions for vaccines and write your legislators to pass bills protecting your medical freedom.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

Science decided that love means staying away, masking up and awaiting the vaccine.

From the very outset of the Covid-19 lockdowns — a year ago now — something odd, if not sinister seemed afoot. How quickly the repetitive messaging came from all quarters to quarantine the healthy: “because we’re all in this together”!

A minority, perhaps, wondered: is all this a planned operation, or a spontaneous collection of self-interested responses constantly reinforced by the provoked panic of the masses? Maybe these are not mutually exclusive explanations.

One hypothesis is that there is a larger plan (a “Great Reset”), in which population reduction is one explicit goal. Such talk is dismissed as baseless, though powerful figures have long discussed it openly. And curiously, there has been little scrutiny of the major lapses in judgment that account for a large share of the lives lost during this whole ordeal.

It may be hard to weigh in definitively on any larger agendas, but one thing is clear: so many of our big decisions have wound up costing rather than saving lives — predictably and sometimes deliberately.

First, there were the fiascoes in which Covid patients were directed into nursing homes, knowingly threatening their frail and vulnerable residents. This was not an isolated error but a death-dealing pattern.

There are also ongoing reports that nursing homes in the UK are imposing blanket DNR orders for handicapped residents diagnosed with Covid. Detect a touch of the Lebensunwertes Leben (life unworthy of life) mentality on this front?

Then there was the persistent suppression and vilification of safe and marvelously effective prophylactic and treatment options. Ivermectin, Hydroxycloroquine (with zinc), and Vitamin D sufficiency may not have been known, life-saving remedies right at the outset, but their promise – and demonstrated utility in practice – soon became apparent. These simple, inexpensive measures succeeded when tried elsewhere but were shunned here in the US by medical authorities and the media alike, which surely accounts for a great number of our preventable deaths.

Such egregious callousness is prima facie evidence that saving lives is not what this past year has been about.

This alone would seem sufficient to shatter trust — without even taking into account the radical lockdowns that in myriad ways promise to keep doing more harm than good. Stanford’s Dr Jay Bhattacharya considers them to be the “biggest public health mistake we’ve ever made”, having produced “devastating effects on short and long-term public health.”

What about the vaccines? Are they mainly about protecting lives? That sounds unconvincing when other simpler and sensible protective measures were not endorsed or even pursued; the blunders of this past year hardly invite confidence in the overall strategy — rushed, novel vaccines included.

But could they also pose a threat? It’s a fair question — even though it is necessarily a speculative one. Because we simply do not know what the intermediate and long term effects of this vaccine may or may not be.

There are a couple areas of concern. First, there is talk that these vaccines could result in infertility. This has not been proven — but it hasn’t been disproven either. “Fact-checkers” dismiss it outright, which all too often suggests the truth may be hovering nearby. This may admittedly sound far-fetched, but when a former VP for Pfizer, Dr Michael Yeadon, voices this concern, should it be so readily dismissed?

The mechanism is said to go like this: the spike protein that the mRNA vaccine triggers in order to induce an immune response includes a protein needed to develop a placenta. A vaccinated woman would therefore develop antibodies that could also attack that protein, rendering her unable to form a placenta, i.e. infertile.  Yeadon insists this possibility be ruled out before going any further, which seems reasonable.

Another way these vaccines could lead to loss of life is through a phenomenon called Antibody-Dependent Enhancement (ADE) or “pathogenic priming” — which in a nutshell means that vaccinated persons could actually be at greater risk once they come into contact with the real virus, due to a potentially fatal autoimmune response such as the dreaded “cytokine storm”.

This has been a longstanding problem in previous, unsuccessful attempts to develop a coronavirus vaccine. Cats, for example, tolerated the vaccine reasonably well in several studies. But when they were challenged with (i.e. exposed to) the actual coronavirus, they had an extreme overreaction of the immune system.  All of the cats ended up dying. The vaccines rolling out now never underwent any animal trials; those were passed over due to the emergency.

Yet the very case for “emergency use authorisation” of the vaccines (which is not FDA approval) collapses if the authorities had recognised — as they should have — that viable treatments already do exist, as mentioned above. As long as suitable alternatives are available, no emergency authorisation should be given. But science had already decided that love means staying away, masking up and awaiting the vaccine.

The risk that these vaccines could lead to a worsened outcome should be prominently featured in the process of obtaining informed consent, particularly considering it isn’t even on most people’s radar. Instead, we are veering towards various forms of coercion, even without official vaccine mandates.

People who decline to take an unnecessary vaccine, German Chancellor Angela Merkel recently threatened, “might not be able to do certain things” (think vaccine passports and the like). That sounds like a blatant repudiation of the Nuremberg Code, which insists upon voluntary consent — absolutely free from any kind of duress, force, overreach or deceit.

UNESCO has also declared that such consent is required for any “preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention” (e.g. masks, meaningless PCR tests, and vaccines), while further stipulating that anyone may withdraw said consent “at any time and for any reason”.

Private employers and service-providers (e.g. airlines, restaurants) seem poised to go along with the flouting of these safeguards. So do journalists and religious entities, which in saner times we might expect to defend the unthreatening individual (against the patently unfounded presumption that everyone poses a risk to everyone else), demand truth, and castigate the pandemic of lies that have ushered in these dystopian days.

Finally, too few are aware the mRNA vaccines are not technically vaccines but are actually more akin to gene therapy. Vaccines by definition enable you to be exposed to a pathogen without becoming infected, or further transmitting it. No one insists the mRNA “vaccines” do that – only that they can lessen the severity of symptoms.

They do not necessarily create immunity or “stop the spread”, and apparently do not obviate the supposed need to maintain mask mandates and other suffocating restrictions. The logical disconnect here is astonishing: we are being sold, and are buying, the line that these vaccines are — but also kind of aren’t — the solution that will get us back to normal.

This is an acute example of just how much the use of reason — along with genuine esteem for man — has atrophied in our post-Christian, irreligious age.

Hopefully we avoid any worst-case scenarios, and all presently reasonable concerns will prove unfounded. But it is anything but crazy to notice that harms have been visited upon us in the name of health and that inhumanity has been advancing in the name of humanity.

Scientists acknowledge the ethical problems — and then ignore them.

Another step in “an explosion of new techniques and ideas for studying early development” of human embryos came last week from Israel. Researchers there have successfully grown mouse embryos for 12 days, which is about half the animal’s natural gestation period.

The rough equivalent for a human would be a first-trimestre baby. They published an article in Nature last week.

The news was crowded out by another big announced about human embryos: that separate research teams have created artificial embryo-like structures. Both pose threats to human dignity, but of the two, the Israeli research may be more dangerous.

It seems that ectogenesis is coming closer – the Brave New World vision of hatcheries where artificially conceived babies are gestated in gigantic vats.

The lead author, Jacob Hanna, of the Weizmann Institute of Science, was interviewed about his work in MIT Technology Review. He acknowledges that there are ethical issues.

“I do understand the difficulties. I understand. You are entering the domain of abortions,” says Hanna. However, he says that researchers are already experimenting on and destroying surplus embryos from IVF clinics. Using the same logic, ectogenesis is not really a big deal.

At the moment, there’s effectively a global ban, amongst reputable scientists, to stop investigating embryos at the 14th day of development. But many bioethicists and researchers want to extend this to some unspecified time span. Hanna is one of them. “I would advocate growing it until day 40 and then disposing of it,” Hanna says. “Instead of getting tissue from abortions, let’s take a blastocyst and grow it.”

At the moment, the mouse embryos only develop if they have been attached to the uterus wall, at least briefly. But Hanna says that his team would like to grow the embryo entirely in vitro.

And if the 14-day limit is scrapped, he looks forward to doing similar research on human embryos.

“Once the guidelines are updated, I can apply, and it will be approved. It’s a very important experiment,” says Hanna. “We need to see human embryos gastrulate and form organs and start perturbing it. The benefit of growing human embryos to week three, week four, week five is invaluable. I think those experiments should at least be considered. If we can get to an advanced human embryo, we can learn so much.”

Eventually it might even be possible to grow embryos for their organs, according to William Hurlbut, a doctor and bioethicist at Stanford University. “I don’t think that organ harvesting is so far-fetched. It could eventually get there. But it’s very fraught, because one person’s boundary is not another person’s boundary.”

And in the other big development last week, as mentioned above, four lab groups almost simultaneously published research showing that it is possible to create structures which are nearly identical to human embryos.

According to Nature, “Two teams published their results in Nature on 17 March; last week, two other groups reported similar results on the bioRxiv preprint server that have not been peer reviewed. These experiments offer a window into a crucial time in human development, and an opportunity to better understand pregnancy loss and infertility without experimenting on human embryos.”

Most of what scientists know about the early development comes from studying human embryos up to 14 days – the legal limit in most countries. The research groups have created structures they call blastoids or iBlastoids which could bypass the need for stopping research at 14 days.

Two of the scientists involved in an Australia-based study explain in The Conversation that: “While iBlastoids and blastoids both seem to be structurally and functionally similar to real blastocysts, it is not yet clear exactly how closely they resemble true embryos formed by a sperm and an egg. While the models were shown to share gene patterns and respond in culture in ways characteristic of actual embryos, researchers also saw significant anomalies, such as unsynchronised growth and cells that are not usually present in an embryo.”

“I’m sure it makes anyone who is morally serious nervous when people start creating structures in a petri dish that are this close to being early human beings,” Daniel Sulmasy, a bioethicist at Georgetown University, told NPR. “They’re not quite there yet, and so that’s good. But the more they press the envelope, the more nervous I think anybody would get that people are trying to sort of create human beings in a test tube.”

These developments, linked to pressures from bioethicists to scrap the 14-day rule, suggest that a Second Great Stem Cell War is just over the horizon. The first began when scientists demanded around 2001 that they be allowed to experiment on human embryos but it subsided after 2007 with the discovery of induced pluripotent stem cells. At the time, it seemed impossible to grow embryos in labs beyond 14 days. Now that it looks feasible, there will be another push to grow embryos in Petri dishes up to a new limit.

To invoke Aldous Huxley’s prescient 1932 science fiction novel Brave New World is the oldest, biggest and stalest cliché in bioethics. But, when confronted with this news and with this ethical indifference, imagination fails me.

Folks, we’re heading towards Brave New World.