Can there be a clear list of which Covid vaccines are derived from abortions among the various companies that are trying to produce them?

thank-you again Bishop Schneider for being so clear and faithful

Yes. Search Sound Pharmaceuticals or Children of God for Life websites. They both maintain lists of how vaccines are produced.

Go to the National Catholic Bioethics Center-they have, by far, the greatest expertise on hand for such questions. Fr Tadeusz Pacholczyk has a PhD in neuroscience and has done, IIRC, (ethical) postdoctoral work on cloning cells. He has been in the past a leader in Catholic efforts to combat unethical scientific work on fetal stem cells- and b/c of his background could not be dismissed by those seeking to skirt the issues. If you think back to the 2004 presidential campaign there was a sustained effort by Kerry & Edwards to push embryonic stem cell work & disingenuous scientists engaged in semantics to try to aid them-but having Catholics with backgrounds like Fr Tad made that difficult.

That's exactly right. That's exactly how this whole controversy started. Initially, it was designed as a wedge issue to make conservative Catholics look like evil retrogrades that didn't want Christopher Reeves to walk again.
The reality is a lot more revealing.
Clinton initially (and rightly) banned all federal funding for ESC's. Bush2 allowed them, but only if they were existing cell lines.
Then KerryEdwards, decided to use that as a campaign issue. This combined with the criminally quacky wakefield paper and has left a lot of confusion. Many states built and funded stem cell research facilities, which produced after 20 years of research, <surpires-surpirse> no effective cures for any of the things they promised.

Yes-“elect us and Superman will walk again!”- complete bunk. Also, Michael Fox campaign for them hoping for a cure for Parkinson’s disease- yet the little fetal stem cell work on such diseases has mostly caused bad cancers in the recipients.

This says it all in the first 4 minutes. Don't take it even if it is free of abortion products---
https://ugetube.com/watch/w...

... and for Catholics in Australia ...
"The Catholic Medical Association of Australia also welcomed the “promising developments” from Pfizer. “While acknowledging the necessity of vaccines, the association echoes calls that these should be developed using ethical means that respects both the dignity of human life, and the consciences of those who would benefit from them,” said spokesperson Fr Paschal M. Corby OFM Conv.
https://www.catholicweekly....
and ...
"The [Australian] Federal Government has announced agreements with two groups working on promising vaccine candidates in the final stages of clinical trials.

"They are the Oxford University-AstraZeneca alliance and the University of Queensland-CSL Limited partnership.
Archbishop Comensoli said while the Oxford vaccine is being developed using aborted foetal cell lines,
“it is our understanding that the V451 project [the Queensland vaccine project] does NOT use cell lines taken from an aborted child but uses a human ovarian cell line.
“For this reason, it appears to be an ethically acceptable option.”
https://www.catholicweekly....

Go to this page from Children of God for Life. Then, under the 4th title down (CoG for Life) click the PDF link from Mary Anne. That lists all vaccines. You have to click on the PDF link under the Covid line to get the full list of Wuhan Virus vaccines. This is the list you're looking for. If you're not familiar with the download of a PDF they don't just pop-up. Look for a blue arrow on your display or something to that effect. May need to search YOUR computer for "downloads."

https://cogforlife.org/2020...

yes, thank-you for these web sites. Already signed up for Children of God for Life's new letter.

Thank you for sharing this information.

Vaccines in general or this Covid vaccine.

This would be EXTREMELY helpful to Catholics so it will probably not be available. <sarcasm> After all, why would ever need facts when we have the lamestream media to tell us what's true? </sarcasm>

Here is the list:
https://cogforlife.org/wp-c...

Thank you

The best I've found. Seems to be updated regularly. Seems to have a complete list, with explanations. It's the source for Fr. Pacholczyk's data table: https://lozierinstitute.org...

That is my source too. Been using their abortion related research for years.

There are clean vaccines, but my understanding at the moment is that there are no vaccines that did not utilize HEK-293 during testing procedures. If the Biden administration believes a significant number of Christians are avoiding vaccination for the reason stated in this article, they will put all their emphasis on making available clean vaccines.

But if I am correct that all vaccines used HEK-293 in the testing phase, then none of the current vaccines are acceptable, "clean" or not.

Don't expect the Biden administration to seek out alternative vaccines. The Biden administration will force Catholics to accept it through punitive restrictions and taxes.

Absolutely. The entire Batflu project is designed to squash everything opposed to the culture of death and the Satanic enterprise writ large. This is, primarily, a showdown with Christ and His Church, its primary adversary. The goal will be, and has always been, to harvest as many souls as possible, in this case by scaring them into cooperation with evil.

It is Schneider who is putting the church on the side of evil.

How is that exactly?

They definitely won't seek out alternative vaccines. In fact, if Biden knew of a vaccine that was clean and did not utilize HEK-293 he would not seek funding for it. It's the same playbook Obama used when he yanked all the federal funding developed during the Bush admin for adult stem cells, even though most all the advances in medical research have come through adult stem cells. Whether they know it or not they are agents of evil.

Having a clean vaccine that used HEK-293 is perfect politics from the devil's perspective. It is an opportunity to frame Christians as having death wishes, as not caring about the millions of people who have or will die, etc.

There have been absolutely NO benefits derived from fetal stem cells. As you stated, adult stem cells have produced medical advancements, but not ONE benefit has been derived from fetal cells.

That is my understanding based on the available information as well. The Pheizer and Moderna vaccines, though not derived from illicit lines, both employed these lines in the testing phase.

One point of consideration...most of what Joe Carter writes here is not convincing to me. His argument is strongest here:

Formal cooperation happens when a person cooperates with the immoral action of another person, sharing in the latter’s evil intention, while material cooperation occurs when the person cooperates with the immoral action of another person, without sharing the evil intention. While formal cooperation is always evil, making a determination on material cooperation depends on other additional factors.

For example, if the abortion was conducted in order to harvest tissues that were to be used for the purpose of creating a cell line, then it would clearly be immoral. But in the case of HEK293T, even if an abortion occurred it was not carried out for that reason, and the tissue was acquired for the purpose of medical research only after the death of the child occurred for other reasons. This has significant consequences for determining whether such research is either licit or immoral.

But consider the videos earlier this year we saw of abortion clinics selling baby parts to medical research facilities. The abortions from which those parts were harvested did not occur because of the medical research. But the medical researchers helped created a new market for abortion facilties. And it wouldn't matter if the clinics handed away the body parts for free.

Another person responding to my comment makes the point that it is not certain that the HEK-293 came from an abortion. I have two responses to that:

1. This uncertainty is based on the fact that the Netherlands has reported that the documentation on the cell line was lost and so they just don't know. I am very skeptical when medical researchers just misplace the documentation that could sink their research. Also, I am skeptical that no one is around who read that research and who doesn't know what it said. I am so skeptical that I would place my bet that this is from an abortion.

2. Is it morally acceptable in the eyes of the church to use a cell line from a miscarried fetus? I don't know the answer to that. I would not want to rely on my own reasoning, drawn from my own selfish reasoning, to answer that question.

> 2. Is it morally acceptable in the eyes of the church to use a cell line from a miscarried fetus?

Based on this article, written by a Catholic doctor, the answer is yes, it is licit: "Utilization of fetal tissue from spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) is licit" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.go...

"Is it morally acceptable in the eyes of the church to use a cell line from a miscarried fetus?"

Why should this differ from using parts from any other cadaver? No one has suggested that a local authority charged with the disposal of a dead body should not exercise its powers under the Anatomy Acts to give it to a medical school. Indeed, it is their failing or neglecting to do so that has been the subject of complaint.

Would different considerations apply, if the body was that of a penniless tramp, who had been murdered? No one would suggest there was any sort of concert between the murderer on the one hand and the local authority or HM Inspector of Anatomy, on the other, so no question of complicity arises.

You'll notice that I did not argue one way or the other. I said I would refer to church teaching to answer that question, rather than rely on my own "well I think" conclusions.

As to your second paragraph, if the medical establishment was in the business of murdering tramps and then using the body parts of the murdered for their own medical research, I am certain the church would have a problem with that.

Of course, I am assuming there is no concert between the murder and the local authority.

Probably no topic has been debated at greater length by Moral Theologians than "remote, material co-operation" and "directing one's intention."

The Church permits tissue transplants from a dead person. So I can see no problem in using a cell line from a miscarried fetus. Whether organ donors are actually dead at the time their organs are removed is a separate, hotly debated issue.

It's there something amiss about indefinitely keeping alive and growing tissues from a dead person ? These are parts of a person, made in the image of God, and we treat them as lab rat material. That seems immoral.

The Church permits us to donate our bodies for medical research. Parts of our bodies (skin cells) are discarded throughout life like autumn leaves. Parts of our bodies, such as blood, are routinely extracted for laboratory tests. I cannot see anything immoral in cultivating cells.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Organ Donors don't get paid for THEIR Organ Donations.
Blood & Plasma Donors don't get paid for THEIR Donations.
What right do Abortionist have in Profiting from the SALE of Fetal Tissues...???

Blood donors in America certainly used to be paid. I have given blood for free both in Michigan (I think that was via the Red Cross) and in England.

But money certainly changes hands somewhere to cover the essential costs of storage and handling and the pay of skilled staff. It might come from the taxpayer, an insurance company or the patient himself. So it is perfectly legitimate to pay people fir preserving and chemically treating cells - if the cells were obtained ethically.

Actually, it is not certain the HEK-293 cell line is from an abortion.
https://www.thepublicdiscou...

Interesting. Thanks.

Fr. Tad Pacholczyk, Director of Education and Staff Ethicist at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, is in to talk about the ethics of the COVID vaccine. He explained that the AstraZenica vaccine has been directly using aborted fetal cell lines; that particular one should be avoided if there are alternatives that are just as effective. He explained that the Pzifer and Modena vaccines do not have direct use of aborted fetal cell lines, but mRNA technology was involved, so this takes away some of the remote cooperation. However, none of these vaccines are ideal. Fr. Tad said the Church allows one to take the vaccines, (from Pzifer and Moderna,) since direct involvement of aborted fetal cell lines were not involved. He then went on to say that we should write a letter in protest…asking for a completely pure development of a vaccine next time. If there are no effective alternatives on the same efficacy level, he adds that the AstraZenica vaccine would still be permissible

The real question is, why would ANYONE take a "vaccine" that has NOT, nor could have possible been, tested for long-term health effects? It takes a LOT more time that 6 months to determine long-term effects. No "vaccine for me & mine. If you think it will protect YOU, it's still a somewhat free country. But if it protects YOU, then you don't need ME to get it. I will not get a "vaccine" for what is simply a FLU, mandate or not.

tomonthepay is a retired p-harmacist who worships all things pharma.

Apparently, I'm not the only one who disagrees with you. But yes, it's JUST a flu. Do your homework, like I make my kids do, I've already done mine.

Sorry, Tom, try again.

According to the CDC, a FULL 6-8% of deaths portrayed as "China flu" deaths are actually CAUSED by the China flu, but nowhere near the amount that is "officially" stated. Hospitals make more money off WuFlu deaths, even when someone wraps his motorcycle around a tree, but tests "positive" for WuFlu. Actual cause of death - accident. Follow the money. A FULL 40% of deaths attributed to WuFlu were caused by forcing the infected into nursing homes with the elderly, most of whom had underlying conditions. A FULL 75-80% of so-called WuFlu deaths are among those who are over 70, & with an average of 2 underlying co-morbidity issues. I personally know 3 people who "died" of WuFlu - but guess what? They were ALL over 80 & ALL had at least 2 underlying health conditions - diabetes, recent heart surgery, & Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. WuFlu didn't kill them, but their death certificates say it did. It's all lies. Try again...

I absolutely stand (or sit - as I type) corrected on the 6% figure. You're right on that statistic.

However, after additional research from several sources, I DO stand by the statement that 39-42% of ALL WuFlu-related deaths occurred in nursing homes, many of which had infected people sent into them by several state mandates. That was gross mismanagement, mostly by democratic state governors.

I also stand by my statement that, since this flu seems to "target" older people, especially with co-morbidity issues (as many illnesses do), approximately 150,000 WuFlu deaths occurred in those aged 75+. Those under the age of 75 stand a much better chance of surviving it.

It has also been proven that the early use of ventilators actually contributed to more deaths than necessary, while the "banning" of hydroxychloriquine in some areas - which is KNOWN to be an effective treatment, along with azithromycin, Vitamin D & zinc also played a strong contributing factor to the number of deaths. How many states actually LOWERED their count of China flu deaths by thousands after they began to classify them correctly?

I maintain that, despite my initial mistake (thanks for pointing that out, btw) on the numbers, the rest of what I said backs up the inescapable fact that this is really not much worse than what occurs in a medium-bad flu season.

Adding to the distrust of the "experts" is the state of PA, who, as you know, employs a tranny "health secretary". This is someone who doesn't know his own gender (he goes by "Rachel"), & yet is dispensing medical advice. Very ironic. That same person took his own mother out of her nursing home once Wolf mandated that infected people be placed into them with the elderly, many of whom already had issues.

There have been absolutely way too many flip-flops by many "experts" to trust anything they say at this point. It's still a flu.

But the actual results of those who have used these treatments HAS supported their use. And I note that you don't contradict my other 2 statements. Yet you resort to a subtle form of name-calling. Have a Blessed Christmas.

Major error here on your part. The vast majority of the tests and trials did not use the full cocktail of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin (or doxycycline as a substitute), and zinc on the vast majority of people who could benefit from such. Instead, they tested only hydro by itself, or hcq plus zinc, or hcq plus azithromycin, and often they conducted bogus tests like the ones involving the VA patients who suffered from many comorbidities and so could not benefit or hardly benefit from the use of hcq.

Trials/tests that have included azithromycin with hcq, like the one done in Detroit, did show more favorable results, but all tests/trials done by others USING THE FULL COCKTAIL show the greatest beneficial results for the vast majority of people, yet such are not fully tested in more parts of the US as they should have been, which is unconscionable. Front-line doctors and others have made it clear that A+B+C is what's needed, and to properly and honestly test their claims, more tests/trials involving the full cocktail should have been done, but such was not the case, and for no good medical reason.

As such, weak thinking people look at the incomplete tests/trials and declare that all claims involving hcq are nonsense. This is a classic straw man fallacy that costs lives, and you both fall for it and perpetuate it.

Proper trials/tests involving the COMPLETE COCKTAIL HAVE indeed supported its use and efficacy. For more on this, among many solid articles, a good start would be the following:

"Study finds 84% fewer hospitalizations for patients treated with controversial drug hydroxychloroquine." This was published about a month ago in late November, and it can be found at
https://www.washingtonexami...

The one approved and the one about to be approved are not "derived" from abortions".

"This week, the Archdiocese of Denver announced that the Bishops of Colorado affirm that the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines are morally acceptable, noting that both vaccines do not use aborted fetal cells."
https://kdvr.com/news/coron...