Posted on 07/21/2009 2:33:29 PM PDT by Maigret
IS ABORTED FETAL DNA LINKED TO AUTISM?
By Theresa A. Deisher, Ph.D.
Just when the pharmaceutical industry thought the vaccine-autism controversy had been resolved, the National Vaccine Advisory Committee has recommended further study of vaccine safety. A perceived fear of the safety of the U.S. vaccination schedule has led increasing numbers of parents to opt out of full compliance. The numbers of children who are not fully vaccinated has now reached a point where “herd” immunity may be compromised, compelling the Centers for Disease Control to hold town-hall meetings and convene a Vaccine Safety Working Subgroup. Despite research ruling out mercury (Thimerosal) or the measles portion of one specific vaccine, autism continues to rise to a level of one in every 64 children in the UK.
The NVAC draft report recommends further study of the potential for vaccines to contribute to autism in children who have underlying mitochondrial disease, a worthwhile study given the clinical history of such children developing autism after vaccinations (see Poling case). What the NVAC has overlooked, however, in their recommendations, is that epidemic regressive autism is associated with the switch from using animal cells to produce vaccines to the use of aborted human fetal cells for vaccine production. Now when we vaccinate our children, some vaccines also deliver contaminating aborted human fetal DNA. The safety of this has never been tested.
Autism and autism spectrum disorder are polygenic diseases, meaning that multiple genes have been shown to be associated with these diseases. Studies have also clearly shown that there is an environmental component, a trigger, that is required. Vaccines are an obvious potential environmental trigger for autism because of the almost universal childhood exposure to vaccines in first world countries. The vaccine-autism connection was first hypothesized following the introduction of a new measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine to the U.S. in 1979, with complete U.S. market share by 1983, and to the UK in 1988. Autism rates began to rise in the U.S. after 1979 and rose dramatically after 1983, and likewise rose in the UK after 1988, leading physicians to suspect a link. Initially, the measles component of this vaccine, MMR II, was suspected to be the culprit. Subsequent studies have also focused on the presence of mercury in vaccines, which incidentally, the MMR II vaccine did not contain.
Those studies have largely ruled out the new measles portion of the MMR II or mercury as the environmental trigger for autism. However, the compelling temporal association between this new MMR vaccine and autism cannot be ignored or explained away. What has been ignored is the fact that this new MMR vaccine introduced the use of aborted fetal cells for vaccine production. At one point, as much as 94 percent of children in the U.S. and 98 percent of children in the UK were given this vaccine.
Today, more than 23 vaccines are contaminated by the use of aborted fetal cells. There is no law that requires that consumers be informed that some vaccines are made using aborted fetal cells and contain residual aborted fetal DNA. While newer vaccines produced using aborted fetal cells do inform consumers, in their package inserts, that the vaccines contain contaminating DNA from the cell used to produce the vaccine, they do not identify the cells as being derived from electively aborted human fetuses. (See the Varivax—chicken pox—package insert for the presence of MRC5 residual DNA.)
In other words, they tell you what is in the vaccine, but they don’t fully inform you where it came from. The earliest aborted fetal cell-produced vaccines such as Meruvax (rubella) and MMR II do not even inform consumers that the vaccines contain contaminating DNA from the cell used to produce them. Furthermore, it is unconscionable that the public-health risk of injecting our children with residual contaminating human aborted fetal DNA has been ignored.
How could the contaminating aborted fetal DNA create problems? It creates the potential for autoimmune responses and/or inappropriate insertion into our own genomes through a process called recombination. There are groups researching the potential link between this DNA and autoimmune diseases such as juvenile (type I) diabetes, multiple sclerosis and lupus. Our organization, Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute, is focused on studying the quantity, characteristics and genomic recombination of the aborted fetal DNA found in many of our vaccines.
Preliminary bioinformatics research conducted at SCPI indicates that “hot spots” for DNA recombination are found in nine autism-associated genes present on the X chromosome. These nine genes are involved in nerve-cell synapse formation, central nervous system development and mitochondrial function.
Could genomic insertion of the aborted fetal DNA, found in some of our childhood vaccines since 1979, be an environmental trigger for autism? Could the fact that genes critical for nerve synapse formation and nervous system development are found on the X chromosome provide some explanation of why autism is predominantly a disease found in boys? Could the “hot spots” identified in these autism-associated genes be sites for insertion of contaminating aborted fetal DNA?
These questions must be answered, and quickly. Recent literature suggests that autism spectrum disorder may now impact one out of every 100 children. The pharmaceutical industry is also currently moving to replace more animal-produced vaccines with aborted-fetal-cell production and also to produce biologic drugs using aborted fetal cells.
The practice of using aborted fetal cells for vaccine and drug production creates wrenching moral dilemmas for parents and consumers, ignores informed consent rights, and exposes our children and ourselves to contaminants lacking safety evaluations. We cannot ignore this issue in good conscience, and we cannot afford to wait.
Dr. Deisher is president of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (www.soundchoice.org), as well as a cofounder and the research and development director for Ave Maria Biotechnology Company (www.avmbiotech.com), which promote pro-life biotechnology. This article is an adaptation and update of Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute’s June 2009 newsletter and is published with its kind permission. For more information on Dr. Deisher, see "Providing real choice: A conversation with Dr. Theresa Deisher" in American Life League's Celebrate Life magazine (January-February 2009) .
My first born is on the autistic spectrum. He started showing signs at 10 days old, way before he had any vaccines.
My two-cent anecdote.
Well well, the scary movies I grew up on are coming true. When you start playing atound with God’s creation you get trouble.
I would presume they don’t think that all autism is related to vaccines, but there has to be some reason for the explosion in cases in the last few decades. This may be one of the causative factors.
Ye Gods! What a horror story. What do you think the general reaction to this information would be from the citizenry if it were to become widely known?
bttt
Correlation is NOT causality. “aborted cells” makes it sound like newly aborted babies are used in the creation of the vaccines. This is patently FALSE.
“I believe Rubella component of MMR vaccine was originally sourced from aborted fetuses. I have an ethical problem with this. Is this true?”
Rubella vaccine, including that used in MMR vaccine is produced by growing it in a cell culture called MRC5.
The rubella vaccine was developed from a fetus obtained from a single termination of pregnancy carried out on medical grounds in 1966. The rubella virus used in the vaccine was isolated from a different fetus terminated in the 1960s in the United States because the fetus had congenital rubella. No further fetal material has ever been used for rubella vaccine manufacture.
The rigorous purification process during manufacture removes all trace of the cells in which the vaccine was grown and so the rubella vaccine contains no human fetal tissue.
“There is no question of any new fetal tissue being used in making this vaccine, or of those involved in the termination profiting in any way.
All rubella vaccine is manufactured in this way.”(http://www.mmrthefacts.nhs.uk/questions/question.php?id=83)
Now you can scream all you want and call conspiracy and everything else. BUT please at least use the correct information
Wow...I’m shocked. It’s like soylent green. This is utterly disgusting that we are injecting aborted fetus dna into our babies! I feel sick now.
I had no clue about this. Anyone know why they would use such cells in the first place?!
I have two kids with an autoimmune disease. Honestly, I doubt the vaccines were the trigger/source and, obviously, have no clue if any fetal DNA would have been present in the vaccines.
I'm not happy that I didn't know about this (aborted fetal DNA) until now. Hope this turns out to be wrong.
They would turn the channel to watch a Michael Jackson retrospective.
Read the post above yours. It’s not factual.
See #7
Thanks for the background.
Good grief. This possible connection was raised as early as 1979, and I have spent a lot of time reading pro-life literature and opposing fetal stem cells and human experimentation, yet this is the first I have ever heard of this possible cause of autism.
It makes only too much sense. In the first place, it should be obvious that human tissue and DNA is a LOT more likely to be dangerous to other humans than animal DNA. In the second place, it’s hard not to think that in a universe of moral law, there would be moral payback for using aborted human DNA in this way—killing humans to fix humans. It’s unnatural.
Well, we certainly won’t get any government response to this possibility from Obama, or Sebelius, or any of Obama’s other stooges, who are pro-abortion one & all.
Main article: MMR vaccine controversy
In the UK, the MMR vaccine was the subject of controversy after publication of a 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield et al. reporting a study of twelve children who had autism spectrum disorders and bowel symptoms, including cases where onset was considered to be soon after administration of MMR vaccine.[25] During a 1998 press conference, Wakefield suggested that giving children the vaccines in three separate doses would be safer than a single injection. This suggestion was not supported by the paper, and several subsequent peer-reviewed studies have failed to show any association between the vaccine and autism.[26] Administering the vaccines in three separate doses does not reduce the chance of adverse effects, and it increases the opportunity for infection by the two diseases not immunized against first.[26][27] Health experts have criticized media reporting of the MMR-autism controversy for triggering a decline in vaccination rates.[28]
In 2004, after an investigation by The Sunday Times,[29] the interpretation section of the study, which identified a general association in time between the vaccine and autism, was formally retracted by ten of Wakefield’s twelve coauthors.[30] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,[31] the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences,[32] the UK National Health Service[33] and the Cochrane Library review[10] have all concluded that there is no evidence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
In 2007 Wakefield became the subject of a General Medical Council disciplinary hearing over allegations that his research had received funding related to litigation against MMR-vaccine manufacturers, and had concealed this fact from the editors of The Lancet.[34] It was later revealed that Wakefield received £435,643 [about $780,000] plus expenses for consulting work related to the lawsuit. This funding came from the UK legal aid fund, a fund intended to provide legal services to the poor.[29] In 2009 The Sunday Times reported that Wakefield had manipulated patient data and misreported results in his 1998 paper, creating the appearance of a link with autism.[35]
[edit] MMRV vaccine
More information for you to consider
If you had a MMR then you would have had the “scary” vaccine as well. It was first isolated during an outbreak in the 60s. Come one people read the real research not the antivivisectionist stuff that is all over the web.
I am the one who posted number 7 what is your point?
I read your comment after posting. I’m afraid that I find myself unable to trust medical people who would use fetal material to develop a vaccine to be honest about it. And I fail to see how they could ensure that NO human products remained after the vaccine had been produced.
I’m not criticizing what you have said here, which is certainly interesting. But I don’t think it can be accepted on faith from the assertions of the very people who made use of fetal material in the first place. There are too many people in this field who have been corrupted and simply cannot be trusted.
The death culture is so adaptable!
Death from death; what a concept!
I would add that The Lancet, like the New England Journal of Medicine, is one of the most prestigious journals in the field. Yet both these journals have substantial records of shilling for abortion and euthanasia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.