“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” – Richard Feynman
Here is some info on fetal cells and how they were used in the development and/or testing of the marketed products in the US. http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/Coronavirus/docs/vaccine/VaccineDevelopment_FetalCellLines.pdf
For the MRNA vaccines, the document states:
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna do not require the use of any fetal cell cultures in order to manufacture (produce) the vaccine.
Early in the development of mRNA vaccine technology, fetal cells were used for “proof of concept” (to demonstrate how a cell could take up mRNA and produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein) or to characterize the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.
The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were found to be ethically uncontroversial by the pro-life policy organization the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Further, the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, a committee within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, has stated: “neither Pfizer nor Moderna used an abortion-derived cell line in the development or production of the vaccine. However, such a cell line was used to test the efficacy of both vaccines. Thus, while neither vaccine is completely free from any use of abortion-derived cell lines, in these two cases the use is very remote from the initial evil of the abortion…one may receive any of the clinically recommended vaccines in good conscience with the assurance that reception of such vaccines does not involve immoral cooperation in abortion.”
And JNJ:
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna do not require the use of any fetal cell cultures in order to manufacture (produce) the vaccine.
Early in the development of mRNA vaccine technology, fetal cells were used for “proof of concept” (to demonstrate how a cell could take up mRNA and produce the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein) or to characterize the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.
The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were found to be ethically uncontroversial by the pro-life policy organization the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Further, the Secretariat of Pro-Life Activities, a committee within the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, has stated: “neither Pfizer nor Moderna used an abortion-derived cell line in the development or production of the vaccine. However, such a cell line was used to test the efficacy of both vaccines. Thus, while neither vaccine is completely free from any use of abortion-derived cell lines, in these two cases the use is very remote from the initial evil of the abortion…one may receive any of the clinically recommended vaccines in good conscience with the assurance that reception of such vaccines does not involve immoral cooperation in abortion.”
There is more in the report, as well as some additional resources.
This is a good resource for globally developmental and/or marketed covid vaccines and information on their use of fetal cell lines. Update: COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates and Abortion-Derived Cell Lines - Lozier Institute
Note the two MRNA products do not use fetal cells in the development or production of the vaccines, but did use HEK293 cells in confirmatory lab tests.
Curevac’s vaccine is likely dead, but even though they did not use HEK293, they did use HeLa cells, which are not without controversy (although of a different type) in their confirmatory lab tests.
For information on Novavax’s vaccine, here are two resources: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/06/15/the-novavax-vaccine-data-and-spike-proteins-in-general and here: https://endpts.com/as-fears-mount-over-jj-and-astrazeneca-novavax-enters-a-shaky-spotlight/
Novavax is expected to file for EUA in Q3, so could be on the market here 4 weeks or so after that filing, assuming the data fulfill EUA requirements.
1 Like
The “hostility” is aimed towards those who use false equivalencies and twist data to actively dissuade others from getting vaccinated. The hostility is because the effect of constantly over-inflating the rare negative side effects is that some people will resist getting vaccinated, to the detriment of OTHERS. One person getting covid leads to others getting covid. My vaccine isn’t contagious, someone else’s covid is. Someone’s choice to not get vaccinated means others will not have a choice as to how they acquire immunity. It’s selfish. Question the vaccine for yourself, but don’t try to make others question it.
Trying to discredit science is harmful to society and weakens what should be trusted, because science is based on research and facts and opinion never comes into it. A fact is a fact.
IMO, it is wrong to latch on to the few cases of myocarditis (whihc is of course serious, but treatble) without acknowledging that far more people died of multiple organ failure, or pneumonia, or diabetic shock, or whatever it might be due to covid.
This study on causes of death in patients with Covid concludes that: “these patients—despite often suffering from severe health conditions—would not have died in the absence of a SARS-CoV-2 infection at the given time point.” Causes of death and comorbidities in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 | Scientific Reports
Given that many people in this country alone have chronic health conditions ranging from obesity to diabetes, I find it hard to comprehend why people continue to take a chance getting covid, but I find it even harder to comprehend why people want others to question getting vaccinated.
If I make a choice that affects only myself, that’s not anyone else’s problem. It’s great to have choices, as long as another person’s choice doesn’t possibly kill me or someone else. That’s the big flaw in the “choice” rationale.
8 Likes
I don’t want to stop it, I want the hostility/derision that often accompanies it to be taken down a few notches. I bring up the possibility that vaccines could have infertility issues. The response is but Covid could too. Covid causes blood clots, but so can the vaccines. Covid causes myocarditis but so can the vaccines. That’s fine. My point was that if we are discussing vaccine reluctance…people who are nervous or concerned about getting the vaccine…is whataboutism helpful in convincing them that the vaccine is better or does it just devolve into tit for tat? Would you rather take your chances with Covid or the vaccine? Perhaps part of the answer lies in your personal experience/sphere. For example, I don’t know anyone personally who was severely ill/hospitalized or died from Covid. I know generally that millions mad millions of people have had and survived Covid and 600,000+ people have died from it. That info was enough to make me want to be vaccinated but not to be first in line for it. Perhaps if I had had Covid I’d feel differently.
1 Like
Science is discredited all the time. The “science” around Covid has changed over time, and is still evolving. Ventilators were the go-to early on, now it’s not so fast.
1 Like
Feynman has a lot of good quotes:
I don’t know what’s the matter with people: they don’t learn by understanding; they learn by some other way - by rote, or something. Their knowledge is so fragile!
The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool.
It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.
https://www.brainyquote.com/authors/richard-p-feynman-quotes
3 Likes
Ah, in both my experience and medical lad’s experience it’s helped convince many people the vaccine is the lesser risk. They hear from their sources - news, anecdotal, or whatever that the vaccines are “dangerous.” What they have not heard is that specifics by specifics (blood clots, myocarditis, menstrual issues, death, etc) is that Covid itself has higher odds to do all that and more. Many times when a doctor explains this to them - as happens in medical lad’s world - the reluctant person understands and is quite willing to select between vaccines (now that selection is possible).
3 Likes
Here’s a little more to chew on this morning.
Overall I’d agree, but do you think that applies uniformly across all age groups? And having a calm discussion with your doctor is different than what’s been occurring in this thread for example. Telling people they’re being stupid, selfish liars because they’re concerned about vaccines isn’t the best way to influence people to do what you want them to do.
4 Likes
Verbage quibble here. Science is improved as we learn more, but no one starts learning at the end. It’s a process. Without the medical advances of 20/50/100 years ago we wouldn’t be where we are now.
For some of us, seeing scientists be able to learn and do more is super exciting. It may not be long before chemo is replaced by mRna vaxes for some cancers. Should chemo never have been used? It was the best they knew about at the time (still is for many types of cancer). May intelligent people continue to delve into science!
6 Likes
It has for him, but he’s not working pediatrics. I know some parents he’s encountered have then gotten their teens vaxed once learning about the odds.
There is a difference between questioning science and ignoring it.
7 Likes
Thanks for the anecdote. I like to know what’s out there when sharing odds with people.
I’m also thankful my healthy 20 something long hauler son who got sick in March 2020 and had symptoms (chest pain with any exercise including walking and talking for longer periods of time, fatigue) for over a year was among the 57% who improved after he received his Moderna shot.
The best suggestion for all is to be watchful if they catch Covid or get vaccinated. Some will draw the short straws (far more with Covid, but some either way). If one sees something, get medical help for best results.
Children’s Health Defense is a known propaganda arm of the antivaxx community.
10 Likes
What’s especially sad about that story is that the kid had already had COVID. There was no need to get the vaccine in light of the risks faced by an otherwise healthy 21-year old who has previously been infected. But his university required it. I find it hard to believe there is legitimate “science” behind that requirement.
1 Like
They are, no doubt, but if anecdotes are out there, one should know about it. The fact that they don’t put all the facts out there - like 57% or so of long haulers seeing their symptoms improve or go away after receiving Moderna vaxes is the problem. There’s one post Covid youngster (probably others) who had the vax and could have ill effects for perhaps up to 6 months vs the oodles of long haulers from Covid who saw improvement.
If people only look at sources like that as their news source they’re missing most of the data points.
An interesting point that was also missed - if the lad had Covid, it was only recommended he get one dose, not two. His data point could help with this. He blames his getting two on the college, but the college itself said they have medical exceptions…
This seems to be directed at me but I didn’t mention that organization in my post and in fact never heard of them.
My screen doesn’t show it directed at you. It shows it directed at Mariar70
It was a reply to Mariar70 who posted the link to the story.
(And, to be clear, I’m not saying it isn’t true, but everyone should be aware of the intense antivaxx bias of a website that regularly and almost exclusively publishes vaccine misinformation)
5 Likes