Interesting read.....
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- A controversial study into the possible link between the use of cells form babies victimized by abortions in vaccines and an increase in autism rates was presented late last month to the International Meeting for Autism Research in Philadelphia.
Dr. Theresa Deisher, the founder and lead scientist of the Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI), which conducted the study, presented the paper touching on the apparent link found in childhood immunizations with Autism and Austim Spectrum Disorder.
The study, which Deisher said was "met with both shock and gratitude," focused on "improper integration of the residual DNA as a possible contributor to autism, particularly in genetically susceptible infants."
"It is known from gene therapy studies that injected naked DNA can be transported to the brain, that improperly integrated therapeutic DNA has caused cancer in young children, and that shorter DNA fragments have a higher probability of entering the nucleus," Deisher said.
Deisher, along with physicist Marissa LaMadrid, PhD, authored the paper investigating whether improper insertion of DNA into the vaccine recipient cells can cause autism.
"Changepoint analysis of autism disorder demonstrates a temporal correlation with events associated with human DNA residuals in vaccines. The levels of residual DNA are well over FDA-recommended limits", stated Dr. Deisher.
While research has been conducted in the past on a possible link between thimerosal and autism, no one has ever looked at the contaminating DNA, something requested for years by Children of God for Life, a pro-life watchdog focused on the use of aborted fetal material in vaccines, medicines and other consumer products.
"Until the advent of AVM Biotechnology and their non-profit arm SCPI we had little hope that anyone would invest the time and money to do this study", stated Children of God for Life's founder, Debi Vinnedge.
A separate study published by the Environmental Protection Agency in February in the publication Environmental Science & Technology, confirms 1988 as a “change point” in the rise of Autism Disorder rate.
"Although the debate about the nature of increasing autism continues, the potential for this increase to be real and involve exogenous environmental stressors exists," the study says.
The 1988 date is significant because SCPI indicates that's when the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices added a second dose of the MMR vaccine, containing fetal cells from aborted babies, to its recommendations.
The study found two other change point dates: 1981, two years after MMRII was approved in the United States with fetal cells, and 1995, when SCPI says the chickenpox vaccine using aborted cells was approved.
Two pro-life advocates seized on that study and said it shows a correlation between the use of cells from babies in abortions in vaccines and an increase in autism rates.
But the study's author, Mike McDonald, and others, questioned that claim.
McDonald responded to an email from the Opposing Views web site, and said the claims "incorrectly represent, and far overreach, our study findings."
And Rev. Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco, an Assistant Professor of Biology at Providence College, told LifeNews.com the study "suggests a link between exogenous environmental stressors and autism" but "does not say that this stressor was the vaccine."
Thanks so much for putting this on your blog, Debi. Those correlations are very interesting. Aaron and I have horrible misgivings about the vaccines made from aborted fetal stem-cells. It just appalls us. It is a slippery slope to say the least just from a moral standpoint, not to mention the links to autism, etc. We currently are delaying the vaccines from the aborted cell-lines for our children (among others). Tough, tough decisions to make when you're a parent. I thought vaccines were a no-brainer before having kids...funny how your perspective changes...
ReplyDeleteMonica, you are right, it's a very tough decision! It's something that only a parent can decide for their child. Don and I have chosen not to vaccinate for several reasons, but I believe that to that to willingly participate in using aborted children to protect our own children goes against God's law.....no matter what the "benefits". I am saddened by our diocese's lack of concern on the issue.
ReplyDeleteI am too, Debi. It makes for some tough decisions in the future if we intend to send our kids to Catholic schools, and I hate the feeling of being "forced" into vaccinating for no other reason than to appease a policy that isn't founded in research or even moral soundness for that matter. You are right, it is something each and every parent should have the right (and responsibility, because believe me, we haven't taken this lightly) to decide for their own children without external pressure from the government, schools, etc.
ReplyDeleteWe are certainly blessed to have Erika spearheading a petition, I pray that our voices will be heard and God's will be done. Hopefully you won't be forced into anything. I think the policy in and of itself was a rash document. Don't worry....your children are wrapped in Mary's mantle.
ReplyDeleteGod Bless!
Just shocking and so very sad. I hadn't researched vaccinations enough and Matilda had her MMR vaccine when she was 13 months and we've always wondered if this contributed to her having so many austistic traits (we don't have a diagnosis yet). If God blesses us with any more children I won't be so easily led and will study the situation more. Thanks for posting this xxx
ReplyDelete:) I was able to include some of those findings but it is good it is now public news too!
ReplyDeleteSo is there a list somewhere of the vaccines that include stuff from aborted fetuses? My grandma would have died without the polio vaccine, so I'm really torn by this. I also read something written by JPII, in which he said if we had nothing to do with the abortions being put into the vaccines, it is not a moral obligation to refuse them. It was not our doing, so we are not responsible. I do understand the concern with the link to autism, though.
ReplyDeleteAmanda, here is a list:
ReplyDeleteMMR II (Rubella component) Pasteur Merieux MSD (RA27/3 strain) WI-38
Meales Mumps Rubella (Priorix) SmithKline Beecham MRC5
Rubella (Ervevax) Smithkline Beecham MRC5
Rabies (HDCV) (Imovax) Pasteur Merieux MRC5
Hepatitis A (Havarix) SmithKline Beecham MRC5
Hepatitis A (Avaxim) Pasteur Merieux MRC5
This was taken from
http://www.dgwsoft.co.uk/homepages/vaccines/alternatives.htm
There is a list of alternatives to these vaccines on this site as well.
Amanda, your Grandma wasn't vaccinated with a fetal derived serum, this is a more recent practice. Vaccines have come a long way....and unfortunately not for the better.
My moral take ....It's like saying.."I disagree with abortion in theory, but as long as it benefits someone it's ok." Where does it stop?? I believe we do have a moral obligation to protest and change this. I don't think anyone who has had their child vaccinated has done anything wrong just as Pope John Paul II has said, but I do believe we have a moral obligation to change something that clearly goes against God's law.
One more point that Don made, "they" are just looking for another "positive" reason to keep abortion legal or to justify it...just like with fetal stem cell research it's been proven that adult stem cell research has been more effective...but fetal stem cell research continues....
ReplyDeleteDid anyone see the Oprah episode with Michael J. Fox and Dr. Oz telling them that adult stem cell research will more likely bring about a cure(Parkinson's Disease) than fetal stem cell research...poor Michael and Oprah their jaws dropped.
I believe the varicella and shingles vaccines also are derived from aborted stem cell lines. Here is a chart from the Children of God for Life website with the info, it was updated Nov2009 so pretty current.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cogforlife.org/vaxbrochure1109.pdf
It also talks a bit about the morality (or lack there of) behind using stem cell lines for vaccines/medicines. I found it a very informative read.
Also, polio is essentially eradicated from the western hemisphere currently.
ReplyDeleteDebi, Thank you for posting this information. I wasn't even aware of the Children of God for Life organization - what a great resource. I am actually meeting with a doctor tomorrow to visit about vaccines and (hopefully) get a medical exemption signed for my 5 year old son who is enrolled at SEAS for Kindergarten. He is not fully vaccinated and I don't want to vaccinate him with MMR or varicella, among others. This is good information to have as I go in tomorrow's discussion. Thank you! I also liked the article about the snacks :)
ReplyDeletePS. I met you at Elizabeth Stockemer's pizza party!
Thanks for the info. I realize that polio is pretty much "gone", and that the vaccine my grandma received was not made the same as they supposedly are today... but my point was that vaccines save lives. I would hate to have a child die from a disease I knew I could have prevented. My fear is for the children who don't receive them, as those numbers are growing... and what's to stop an outbreak of the diseases if so many people are not preventing them?
ReplyDeleteI have a dear friend who has refused vaccines for a number reasons, and this was one of them, yet not at the top of her list. I know there are many reasons to refuse them, so it would be sad to think that this is the ONLY reason many people refuse them. As the Vatican and JPII have said, the decision to refuse should weigh heavier in the other direction, as we have more of a moral obligation to protect our society and the rest of the world through prevention.
You may also find this helpful: http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0504240.htm
It was actually written just after the one sited in the Children of God for Life's brochure (they quoted something from the Pontifical Academy for Life from June of 2005, and this is from July of 2005). I like how the Catholic Church is not making a statement, and don't think it fair to ask that of them. If there were to be an outbreak after they "ok"ed refusing vaccines in schools, those effects would be on their shoulders. In addition, as they state at the end of the article, wide-spread refusal of vaccines could result in MORE abortions. So much to think about!
Amanda, Thank you for the link to this article, I found it very interesting in the varying levels of "cooperation with evil". It makes me think of Adam and Eve's sin and how still centuries later we are born with Original Sin.
ReplyDeleteVaccines are hailed for having erradicated disease but it is a fact that they also cause a fair share of reactions and even death. I know families who have had children with different degrees of reactions to vaccines including 1 family who lost a child.I have read articles about how that at the same time in history that vaccines were invented, handwashing was also discovered to reduce the spread of infection. Here is a link to an article about the importance of handwashing reducing the spread of infectious disease.( http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/articles/071feat2.html)There are many vaccine reactions recorded and many that haven't been.
It is also a fact that many of the outbreaks of diseases such as Measles occured in vaccinated people. "In 1995, there were 309 cases of measles reported in the U.S. Out of 219 cases where vaccination status was known, 123 (56 percent) had been vaccinated with at least one dose. Of 285 measles cases where age was known, 38 percent were under 5 years old and 39% were more than 20 years old."
The disease you are referring to that could cause an increase in abortions is Rubella. If a pregnant woman is exposed to Rubella, her baby could be deformed. Considering there were only 18 cases in the nation in 2002 and only 1 death since 1992, I don't think this a just argument. It reminds me of the weak abortion debate regarding incest.
This is a quote from NVIC regarding private institutions not accepting Religious exemptions such as our diocese has chosen to do. "However, in Catholic canon, there is language which pertains to the duty of every human being to “always obey the certain judgment of his conscience.” If you are Catholic, you may want to discuss this issue with a priest."
Amanda, thank you for your very good points and references, I think in order to seek truth we need to be able to debate these things.
P.S. Monica, thanks for the updated list!!
I wanted to post a response regarding some translation issues with the above article from CNS:
ReplyDeleteVatican Official Clarifies His Position Regarding Vaccine Statements to CNS
For Immediate Release: August 3, 2005
Children of God for Life
Contact: Debi Vinnedge, debi@cogforlife.org
(727) 584-3332
(Largo, FL) Msgr Jacques Suaudeau of the Pontifical Academy for the Family has clarified what was meant by the recent Vatican statement, completely contradicting the July 26, 2005 CNS article, Vatican says refusing vaccines must be weighed against health threats.
After CNS falsely reported and then partially retracted statements that had been allegedly made by Debi Vinnedge, Children of God for Life's Executive Director, the organization decided to check with the Msgr. himself. The article apparently caused the Vatican official much consternation as he rued "the mistake" he had made in speaking with "some English-speaking journalist on the subject" (of the vaccines.)
In an email response to Children of God for Life's Spiritual Advisor, Fr. Anthony Zimmerman, Msgr. Suaudeau noted, "What seems more useful is to read carefully the document, from introduction to conclusion."
"It is also important to keep in mind that this document is not intended only for Children of God [for Life] or for the particular situation of the United States, but considers the question of vaccines in a worldwide perspective," he added.
Msgr. Suaudeau noted that while officials at the Holy See do not provide "official" opinions of Vatican documents to private individuals, his statements were meant to clarify his own position. He made two key observations:
"1) The document as such supports the position of Children of God [for Life]. It denounces the use of "tainted" vaccines, it asks for alternative vaccines; it invites (the document speak about a "duty", which is a pretty strong word) parents (and others) to put pressure on government and companies to offer alternative vaccines. The document speaks clearly about "conscientious objection"(p.7). This was the main point of the document. As such I do think that Children of God [for Life] have there a useful instrument to put pressure on local authorities in order to get exemption of vaccination for their children, in schools. But more important is the lobbying to get the alternative vaccines free entrance in the U.S."
"2) The restriction formula about the possible use of tainted vaccines in conditions "of considerable dangers"(p.7) was needed: in fact we had problems with local (Italian) journals using titles like that: "Vatican forbid vaccinations".
Children of God for Life was grateful for the response. "Msgr. Suaudeau has effectively cited what we have said to those who wish to put their own spin on what the Vatican really stated, " said Debi Vinnedge. "Read the statement for yourself!"
The document can be reviewed in its entirety at www.cogforlife.org/vaticanresponse.pdf
This is always interesting to discuss for sure. My thoughts on vaccines have really come full circle since having children of my own. Even two years ago I never would have dreamt I'd have the views I do now.
ReplyDeleteYour comment about hand-washing is very true, Debi. Likewise, water sanitation in general has stopped the spread of so many diseases (polio and diptheria to name two). Diseases in general tend to ebb and flow in any population, thus even though it would appear vaccines were effective (I'm not making a blanket statement that they're not, so bear with me) when really the disease was just in a natural "recession" for lack of a better term.
Here's my humble opinion. When Adam sinned, it brought hardship upon this world, and with that came the advent of disease throughout the centuries even until today. No disease isn't good, persay, but it's part of life and part of the fallen life we live. And I'm not arguing that all medicine and science is bad, but I really think there's a fine line, and to what expense are we preventing these diseases? The stem cells? The fact that we're injecting innocent children with young undeveloped immune systems with live viruses, with heavy metals, with dangerous chemicals about which there has been little, or shady at best research. And if a parent has discerned this to be their best route, than that is there God-given right and I'm not going to talk down on people who choose to vaccinate after making a well informed decision. But that's just it. It should be the parents' decision, without external pressure from the government, school systems, etc.
As I parent, I feel I am very conscious of my children's health. I breastfeed, I promote healthy eating habits, I try to make sure my children are well rested and develop healthy sleep habits, I keep them home when they are ill, I try my best not to expose them to others who are ill, I avoid the use of pharmaceutical drugs as much as possible in an effort to help my children grow and develop healthy immune systems and response. Why is it, then, that I should have no choice in the matter, as my child's parent, when it comes to vaccines. It just isn't right.
My other angle is this... there is something to be said for letting a child's immune system to develop naturally, deriving natural immunity by having a disease which often isn't life-threatening to a healthy child. This is being seen now in the rise in shingles in the elderly population. Back when kids got chicken pox, they developed an immunity after having the disease, and then this immunity was boosted thru the years as they continued to be exposed as the disease ebbed and flowed in the population. Now, children don't get the disease, and the immunity from the vaccine only lasts so long, so shingles is becoming much more prevalent as a result. Here's an article (from a British journal, but you get the idea) that explains the science behind this, because I feel like I'm starting to babble. http://www.infowars.com/americas-bread-and-circus-society/
This is happening with many diseases, not just chicken pox, that really aren't qualified as "serious" persay.
I don't know, I've become really passionate about this, and sometimes I feel like I'm not able to articulate myself as well as I'd like, but hopefully I've made at least a little sense here.
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss, Debi. God bless!
Well, ladies, I did NOT get the medical exemption I was hoping for this morning. I was under the impression that the doctor I was going to (who happened to be all the way in Andover!) was like-minded on the vaccine issue. I was mistaken! He does not object to parents choosing to delay or refuse vaccines, but he, himself, does support vaccination and was not willing to sign a medical exemption.
ReplyDeleteI left feeling so frustrated because I feel like the "system" is bullying me into doing something I don't want to do! And in this case, the "system" is our Diocese. I could send Noah to a public school and sign a religious exemption and he would be fine. I could send him to virtually any other private school in Wichita with a signed religious exemption... I know lots of people who use the religious exemption. We just can't use it in our Catholic schools and it's making me more and more angry! I am moving on to my "Plan B" for Noah next week as I just don't feel that homeschooling is something that I can do well at this point in my life... maybe later, but not now. I just hope I don't have to make a decision between a Catholic education and what I consider to be the best health interest of my child!
The decision is a tough one... I understand the arguments on both sides and I wrestle with what to do all the time. I have decided to commit it to prayer and hope that I can soon start to feel some peace about this issue.
Thanks for all the links to the articles... I'm planning to read them all! I just got a Vaccine DVD in the mail today from Dr. Jay Gordon... if anyone would like to borrow it after I've watched it, you are welcome to!
Danielle, I echo your sentiments so much. I'd love to chat in person sometime. It just seems so horribly unfair. Unjust.
ReplyDeleteHave you read Dr. Sears vaccine book? It is a very informative, unbiased read. I would highly recommend it.
Here's the amazon link.
http://www.amazon.com/Vaccine-Book-Making-Right-Decision/dp/0316017507/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1276128811&sr=1-1
This thread would be very good for our diocese to see. It's a great representation of both sides of the debate and the frustration parents feel when having to make decisions that go against a moral sense of well being.
ReplyDeleteDanielle, I'm soo soo sorry that didn't work out!! I will keep your family in my prayers. If you decide you have no choice other than vaccinating, you can choose lot numbers that have a low incidence of reaction. Another option to homeschooling is Virtual School, I am enrolling my kids in Lawrence Virtual School which uses the K-12 curriculum(has been recommended on EWTN)It's a public school online that is accredited. This will be our second year using it, I feel it's a really great fit for our family. We also have an AWESOME Catholic home school group here in Wichita that is rapidly growing. Just a thought. I would love to borrow your Vaccine DVD when you are finished with it. Thanks for offering!!
Monica, you ARE very well spoken and I totally agree with your clear logic on this matter.
Debi, thank you for the prayers. I have another appointment on Monday that I hope will bring resolution to the situation... at least for this year! Thank you, also, for the suggestions on the virtual school. Homeschooling is something that I have given much thought to as I have a friend who is active in the Catholic homeschool group in Wichita. If the situation with the vaccines does not change, homeschooling will become even more appealing to me! And I agree that this would make a good thread for the diocese to see. I just wish we had the same rights in our Catholic school as we would have if we chose a public or a private school! I plan to watch the DVD over the weekend in preparation for my appointment on Monday. I will be happy to share it with you when I'm done! Thanks again for the good information and forum for discussion :)
ReplyDeleteSomething occurred to me while at Adoration tonight. The Catholic Church at it's very essence is a Community just as St. Cyprian of Carthage states in chapter 5 of the "Unity of the Catholic Church".
ReplyDelete"This unity we ought to hold firmly and defend, especially we bishops who watch over the Church, that we may prove that also the episcopate itself is one and undivided. Let no one deceive the brotherhood by lying; let no one corrupt the faith by a perfidious prevarication of the truth. The episcopate is one, the parts of which are held together by the individual bishops."
The policy to deprive unvaccinated children a Catholic education itself does not unify our Catholic community, infact it is the antithesis of that, it is exclusive.
Good thoughts, Debi.
ReplyDeleteThe other point my husband has made is this: the Church has always said people (especially when dealing with end-of-life issues) are due ordinary means (food, water, etc.). Vaccines, by no stretch, should be considered ordinary means when it comes to healthcare. Why, then, are our Catholic schools requiring them?
Again, the heart of the issue here is it is the parent's right to choose for his/her child. I understand the statement about looking out for the "common good", but isn't it correct that we look out for what we see fit to be best for ourselves (within reason) first?
So much about which to think.
wow I should have subscribed to this! I just came here to recommend the link for the original Vatican doc on the issue but it looks like you've all already done it. I bet most people just read the first line and don't read the rest.
ReplyDeleteFirst I'd like to say how humbling it is for me and edifying to know that I am not alone. You all give me strength and courage and that's what we need!
If Amanda is still reading I'd like to say that I think she brings up a common point, and in fact, one that our Bishop shares. Most people have been made to believe that an unvaccinated child poses a huge threat to the 'common good'. And they may in fact be afraid of a liability.
There is ample evidence, however, to the contrary. As long as 90% of the community is still vaccinated, they pose no threat. And trust me I'm not just flippantly saying that there is research to prove it.
Also, as some of you have said, many outbreaks that occur actually occur amongst the vaccinated population.
This year at our parish for ex., one boy who was vaccinated for chicken pox still got it. He had to go home of course but the girl in his class who was not vaccinated for it was not able to return the rest of the year. And this is the best part, even though she would have already been exposed to it, they told her that if she got vaxed for it that day she could stay in school. Where's the logic in that?
Like Debi points out, there is a SUBSTANTIAL evidence about adverse reactions, some as seroius as death. In fact if you put the side affects of vaccines up to the side affects for the disease they are made to prevent, they'd be incredibly similar.
The liability goes the other way too. If a parent is coerced into vaccinating and their child dies, the finger would point in the same direction.
Policies are being made based on unsubstantiated fears and OPINIONS.
If people trust in vaccines so much, then what are they so afraid of from those who are unvaxed?
Above all though, this is a parental right. Vaccines are not 100% effective, they are not 100% necessary, and they are not 100% safe. So let the PARENTS decide.
for example some quotes from the PAFL statement most just skim over:
ReplyDelete"It is up to the faithful and citizens of upright conscience (fathers of families, doctors, etc.) to oppose, even by making an objection of conscience, the ever more widespread attacks against life and the "culture of death" which underlies them...[they] should take recourse, if necessary, to the use of conscientious objection 14 with regard to the use of vaccines produced by means of cell lines of aborted human foetal origin. Equally, they should oppose by all means (in writing, through the various associations, mass media, etc.) the vaccines which do not yet have morally acceptable alternatives, creating pressure so that alternative vaccines are prepared, which are not connected with the abortion of a human foetus, and requesting rigorous legal control of the pharmaceutical industry producers...However, the burden of this important battle cannot and must not fall on innocent children...
I'm back again. Wanted to post this, I found it very interesting.
ReplyDeletehttp://catholicexchange.com/2010/06/24/131454
Hey Monica, is there a way to bring this post to the front of my blog?? I think the article you posted is GREAT! I think I will start a new thread with that article. Thanks so much for posting....I think our beloved Bishop needs to read it.
ReplyDelete