14 july 2011 – Flabbergasting !

One of the Most Inexcusable Vaccine Revelations of All…(This is so sad, so important, please read.)

Posted By: RumorMail [Send E-Mail]
Date: Thursday, 14-Jul-2011 02:55:05

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/07/10/this-shocking-fact-is-never-disclosed-on-any-vaccine-informed-consent-form.aspx?e_cid=20110710_SNL_Art_N One of the Most Inexcusable Vaccine Revelations of All…

Posted By Dr. Mercola | July 10 2011

Former drug company scientist Helen Ratajczak recently created a firestorm of debate from all sides of the vaccine-autism issue when she published her comprehensive review of autism research. This is a massively important study, for more than one reason. One element brought to light that has managed to stay well below the radar is the use of aborted embryonic cells in vaccine production. CBS News recently reported:

“Ratajczak reports that about the same time vaccine makers took most thimerosal out of most vaccines (with the exception of flu shots which still widely contain thimerosal), they began making some vaccines using human tissue.
Ratajczak says human tissue is currently used in 23 vaccines. She discusses the increase in autism incidences corresponding with the introduction of human DNA to MMR vaccine, and suggests the two could be linked.”

CBS News March 31, 2011

LifeSiteNews April 23, 2010

J Immunotoxicol Jan-Mar 2011


Environ Sci Technol 2010

Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute

National Network for Immunization Information

LifeSiteNews February 7, 2005

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Former drug company scientist Helen Ratajczak recently created a firestorm of debate from all sides of the vaccine-autism issue when she published her comprehensive review of autism research. However, her 79-page review contains one detail that could easily go unnoticed—five words that reveal one of the most shocking secrets Big Pharma has ever kept from you.

"…Grown in human fetal tissue." [bolding added]

The line reads (page 70):

"An additional increased spike in incidence of autism occurred in 1995 when the chicken pox vaccine was grown in human fetal tissue." [bolding added]

If you are struggling to recall how you could have missed this important fact when signing your vaccine consent form, it wasn’t your error — because it wasn’t disclosed on any consent form. Most people are unaware that human cell cultures derived from aborted human fetuses have been used extensively in vaccine production for decades. And vaccine makers are happy that most of the public has remained ignorant of this fact, as awareness of it could blow up in their faces.
Setting aside, for the moment, unknown long-term health consequences of DNA contamination and religious beliefs about use of aborted fetal tissues — the ethics of nondisclosure are reprehensible. Drug companies and vaccine policy-makers should not be allowed to decide whether or not to share this information with you. This is information you should have received PRIOR to making a choice about whether or not to vaccinate.
Which Vaccines Might Be Produced Using Aborted Fetal Cell Lines?

Chicken pox vaccine is not the only vaccine manufactured in this way. According to Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI), the following 24 vaccines are produced using cells from aborted fetuses and/or contain DNA, proteins, or related cellular debris from cell cultures derived from aborted human fetuses:

[Note: The table below 'collapsed' during translation; the 'shot' on the left; the mfgr on the right.]




DT Polio Absorbed

Quadracel (Sanofi)

Measles, Mumps, Rubella


Meruvax II




MMR-V (Merck)


Erolalix (GlaxoSmithKline)

Varicella (Chickenpox and Shingles)




Zostavax (Merck)

Varilix (GlaxoSmithKline)

Hepatitis A

Vaqta (Merck)


Twinrix (GlaxoSmithKine)


Vivaxim (Sanofi)

Epaxal (Crucell/Berna)


Imovax (Sanofi)

SCPI also lists cosmetics that are similarly produced from aborted fetal tissue cell lines, which I’ll discuss a bit later.

The Sordid History of Viral Vaccines

There are two primary cell cultures that have been growing in labs for more than 35 years and have been used to prepare hundreds of millions of doses of vaccines:

WI-38: Originating in the U.S. in 1961, this line came from the lung cells of an intentionally aborted female human fetus of 3 months gestation.

MRC-5: Originating in the U.K. in 1966, this line was derived from the lung cells of an intentionally aborted 14-week-old male human fetus.

The National Network for Immunization Information (NNII) has an article on their website explaining the rationale for using human fetal cells, and the history of how they’ve been used in vaccine production. The article states that these fetuses were not aborted for the purpose of vaccine research or vaccine production, nor did the cell biologists who created the cultures perform the abortions themselves.

The NNII article explains some of the difficulties involved in producing "biological medications," especially when it comes to growing viruses:

"It is far more complex to manufacture biological medications (for example, vaccines, antibodies) than it is to produce chemical medications (for example, penicillin or aspirin). In addition, certain vaccines are more complex to make than others. The bacteria that go into bacterial vaccines can be grown in simple laboratory cultures. In contrast, the growth of viruses requires living cells.

Viruses cannot reproduce on their own. They require a living host in which to grow, such as chicken embryos, and cells from animals that are grown in culture. Vaccine manufacturers currently have few options for viral culture, because of valid pharmaceutical reasons and because of human safety concerns. For example, varicella (chickenpox) virus does not grow well in most cells derived from species other than humans. Also, human cells are preferred because cells derived from animal organs sometimes may carry animal viruses that could harm people."

It may be more difficult, but it IS possible to prepare viral vaccines without the use of human or animal cells, as today’s hepatitis B vaccine proves. The current version of the hepatitis B vaccine, used in the U.S. since 1986, uses yeast cells. Other virus vaccines use chicken embryos or monkey kidney cell lines.

So, why don’t manufacturers avoid using human cells altogether and instead opt for less controversial methods? I suspect there is little incentive for vaccine manufacturers to develop and test new vaccines when they are already profiting from existing ones. Of course, when the truth becomes widely known about how these vaccines are derived, they may begin seeing their profits plunge and be forced to find new methodology.

One Particularly Egregious Example: Rubella Vaccine

The rubella virus used in making rubella vaccine was originally derived from tissues from the aborted fetus of a rubella virus-infected mother. Babies born to rubella-infected mothers are at risk for serious birth defects. [bolding added]

According to Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center:

"The rubella vaccine currently used in the U.S. and in most countries was developed after an American researcher at the Wistar Institute cultured rubella virus from a fetus aborted because the mother was infected with rubella. This vaccine is called RA 27/3 because the rubella virus was isolated from the 27th aborted fetus sent to the Wistar Institute in the 1964 rubella outbreak. Researchers were unable to culture rubella from the tissues of the first 26 fetuses sent to Wistar, which had been aborted by doctors because the mothers had rubella during pregnancy."

A recent study by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has led to a question of whether there is a correlation between the abrupt rise in American autism rates with the introduction of fetal cells for use in vaccines (1988). This correlation has prompted researchers to ask the question about how aborted fetal DNA could be causing, or contributing to, the development of autism disorders in children. Thus far, there have been no proposed theories of a mechanism. However, it’s a significant correlation that should at least be investigated. If you care about what you put into your body, and into your child’s body, and you are outraged by this information, you are not alone.

[ . . . ]

[for more of the article, go to the URL cited at the beginning of this excerpt]



Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: