Vaccine Production to Use New Fetal Cell Line from Live Abortion Fetuses
Scientists develop new vaccination using aborted babies
Scientists have developed a new aborted fetal cell line that will be used for all viral vaccine production.
The development of WALVAX 2 has come in response to the dwindling capacity for existing aborted fetal cell lines to self-replicate.
The process involves extracting the cells from a fetus during a live abortion where the baby is kept alive until the organs are harvested.
The cell lines, MRC-5 and WI-38 are currently used in MMR, Varicella, Hepatitis-A, Shingles, Influenza, some rabies, and some polio vaccines.
A huge increase in demand for vaccines for large pharmaceutical companies in the West has added growing pressure to vaccination development.
The scientists noted how they followed specific guidelines to mimic WI-38 and MRC-5 in selecting the aborted babies, ranging from 2-4 months gestation.
They further noted how they induced labor using a “water bag” abortion to shorten the delivery time and prevent the death of the fetus to ensure live intact organs which were immediately sent to the labs for cell preparation.
According to the studies published earlier this year in the NIH Pub Med, scientists noted that Walvax-2 cells replicated more rapidly than MRC-5 cells, attained greater population doubling and performed better or equal to the existing cell lines for culturing viruses.
In 1964 Leonard Hayflick introduced what is known as the “Hayflick limit” – how all normal cells have a finite lifespan and limited capacity to replicate before going into senescence and eventually, become unstable and form tumors. (L. Hayflick, The Limited In Vitro Lifetime of Human Diploid Cell Strains, Experimental Cell Research, Vol 37, 1964)
Attempts to immortalize these cells to extend their lifespan have likewise introduced problems with tumor formations, as in aborted fetal cell line PER C6, introduced into the US in 2001.
Such seems to be the case with the introduction of WALVAX 2 to replace Hayflick’s WI-38 and Medical Research Council’s MRC-5.
But instead of choosing from several WHO and FDA approved moral cell line to replace them, they are using a new aborted fetal source.
“This is exactly what we have been saying for years,” stated Debi Vinnedge, Executive Director for Children of God for Life an organization that has been monitoring the use of aborted fetal materials in vaccines and other consumer products.
“The pharmaceutical industry is not going to change their use of aborted fetal cells when they have tacit approval from our moral and medical leaders.”
For decades both the pharmaceutical companies and even some ethicists have insisted that the abortions to produce the cell lines used in vaccines were not done with that intention, that it was only a couple of abortions from the past and that no further abortions would be needed “now or in the future” to produce vaccines.
“This may be the biggest lie ever told to the American public and the world at large,” said Mrs. Vinnedge.
“Not only have there been hundreds of abortions directly involved with vaccine research – specifically for that purpose where they altered abortion methods to obtain intact fetal organs, but we are now seeing more and more abortions for fetal research and new cell lines emerging for viral vaccine cultivation.”
While Children of God for Life has been trying to expose these truths for the past 15 years , those warnings are now ringing startling accurate as evidenced with the recent Planned Parenthood videos that have emerged through the Center for Medical Progress, (CMP) showing how live, fully intact fetuses have been harvested for aborted fetal research.
Canadian physician Dr. Andrew Moulden provided clear scientific evidence to prove that every dose of vaccine given to a child or an adult produces harm.
The truth that he uncovered was rejected by the conventional medical system and the pharmaceutical industry.
Nevertheless, his warning and his message to America remain as a solid legacy of the man who stood up against big pharma and their program to vaccinate every person on the Earth.
Dr. Moulden died unexpectedly in November of 2013 at age 49.
Because of the strong opposition from big pharma concerning Dr. Moulden’s research, we became concerned that the name of this brilliant researcher and his life’s work had nearly been deleted from the internet.
His reputation was being disparaged, and his message of warning and hope was being distorted and buried without a tombstone.
One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”
However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate.
Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.
The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.
Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position in the medical field.
In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position.
Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.
Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule.
Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.
These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.