Hmmm you are not as un-baised as you claim seeing that your whole tagline says:
Spreading truth about vaccinations and fighting the proliferation of pseudoscience bullshit nonsense that anti-vaxxers expound. Try the truth. It can't hurt you.
So when you say "personal freedom and choice is paramount"... do you really believe that? If you did, I don't think you would take such a position against "anti-vaxxers". You just end up sounding dishonest.
There is no such thing as "vaxxers" and "anti-vaxxers". It is a false dialectic that you have obviously succumbed to. There is only human beings with individual medical freedom to choose how they want to treat themselves and their children.
The fact is that the two cell lines for the WI-38 and MCR-5 that they still use today to develop vaccines came from aborted human fetuses. No one is said anything about ground up fetal tissue except you. It really doesn't matter if the fetus is from the 1960's, the cell lines are still coming from aborted human fetuses and a lot of people have problems with that and do not want that injected into themselves and their children. It is not "anti-science" to have ethical concerns on how things are made and chose not to participate in something you disagree with ethically.
Honestly the aborted fetal tissue is just the tip of the iceberg. A lot of vaccines contain "fetal bovine serum" which is the blood drawn from cow fetus' So I would imagine Vegetarians and Vegans would have a problem with that too due to their world views.
I am not anti vaccine either. I would love to see ethically made, safe, properly tested vaccines come from manufactures who are not protected by law from prosecution from people suing them for damages. Unfortunately we do not have that, we have the opposite.
I appreciate your viewpoint, but if you want to talk about the facts and see the truth of the matter, you will need to be able to see things from all angles. You are coming across as biased.
Yes, you make good points on seeing things from other angles, thanks. I will attempt to be more balanced. I think I was attempting to disambiguate the information. It's often a mix of issues to support a one sided narrative in these posts. This post is no different from my perspective. The facts are there but hidden or obfuscated behind the rhetoric.
The use of fetal tissue in the use of medical research was discussed in the 1988 Fetal Tissue Trans-plantation Panel, setup by the President, at the time. The panel delved deep into the underlying issue of ethics and biomedical politics in the use of fetal tissue for research.
Fairly long write-up but good read on the deliberations.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234204/
With the advance of medical technologies hopefully other methods will be developed to remove the stigma attached to these cell lines. I'm guessing that would still not remove the barrier to vaccination with the majority of those opposed to vaccination? Or would it?
I can understand. There is a lot of disinformation out there as well as what you said there being a lot of rhetoric. But yes I believe it is important to be as balanced as you can especially if your mission is to change minds.
I will check out the book you sent. It should be interesting. Yeah I would agree that hopefully if technology keeps improving it might change how they are made and remove the issues that some people have with them. I could see that happening, so it will be interesting to see what happens.
Thanks for the response!
@vaxxinusveritas - We understand your viewpoint. Sorry if you feel this post is one-sided, we feel people should be informed. Also, we have told our readers not to take our word for it, to always research the topic and form their own opinion. This post was intended to let people know that fetal tissue was used, that is all. We hope that you at least enjoyed the read and maybe you will check back in from time to time and post a comment.