Information on Novavax’s COVID-19 vaccine has been frequently requested over the last couple of weeks. Here’s a snapshot of this vaccine candidate’s research and development history:
- Novavax used its SF9 insect cell line process throughout the vaccine’s development.
- Multimerization was observed when evaluating the vaccine against different forms of the spike protein. Researchers designed a test in HEK-293T cells to better understand what they had observed.
- Novavax has chosen to delay seeking authorization to focus on production capabilities, according to this article in the Wall Street Journal.
It was anticipated that Novavax would be the first ethical vaccine to make it to the U.S. market. Their testing in aborted fetal cell lines right before entering clinical trials was a disappointment. Further, the company has decided to delay application for authorization until the end of the year. One must then wonder if authorization is even in the cards. FDA approval of one or more of the currently authorized vaccines will place all of the other candidates in clinical trials on the approval path, which will take years.
This is so disappointing.
So disappointed they spread false information. No HEK used. Google it.
I encourage you to click on the link in the post. It will take you to a peer-reviewed paper that describes the materials and methods used in evaluating the vaccine against several manifestations of the spike proteins. The research and development teams wrote that down. Until authoritative information (more than a Google search is required) is made available that negates the information in this peer-reviewed publication, we stand by what we have objectively presented. Google is much more likely to result in misinformation than a review of the scientific literature.
Sure.. I trust google.. not one bit!
Could you please comment on the Sanofi COVID vaccine? It is seeking approval for use in Canada by the end of 2021. Thank you
What I have seen is that Sanofi used human fetal tissue in the testing phase. A good site to see the list of vaccines being worked on is https://lozierinstitute.org/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-covid-19-vaccine/ . Look at the full chart. If everyone that is concerned about vaccines tainted by human fetal tissue donated to the John Paul II Medical Research Institute – they might be able to get an ethical vaccine out and develop acceptable tissue for testing from umbilical cord or placenta from live births. https://www.jp2mri.org/coronavirus-research
Watching Valneva for ethically derived, conventional vaccine. Available late this year.
Why would they ..by Catholics taking the vaccine they are confiming abortin is necessary..it is big business..now even catholics are on board..heartbreaking
I agree with you. I think that the ‘remote association with evil’ argument used by too many is like an emergency parachute deployed to make peace with secular authorities. Peace is when God wins. No abolition of abortion, no peace.
Do you have a list of vaccines in general that are ethically produced? My mother is due for a Dtap booster and I believe that all the formulations are ethically produced, but I wanted to check. Do you have a chart on the website that includes common ethical vaccines?
The only thing I found was at this site. Dtap was not on their list. If anyone else has other information, it would be welcomed.
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/Abortion-Tainted-Vaccines.pdf
Thank you!
Kelly – I originally couldn’t find this link. It does list Dtap, but shows alternatives. I hope you are able to get the alternatives.
https://www.cogforlife.org/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf
Looks like Dtap is only tainted when given in conjunction with something else in a 5 pack shot. I’d guess that’s the other things in the shot like polio or hiB that are tainted.
Can you say if aspirin and other common meds are quality tested using fetal lines?
Marna, please see this article. Aborted fetal cell lines would be useless in QC testing for drugs like aspirin for a variety of reasons. The formulation of acetylsalicylic acid (and many other drugs) can be verified very quickly and inexpensively without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. Cell lines are used as media to measure expression and cytotoxicity – neither of these are objectives in QC testing for drugs like aspirin.
https://cogforlife.org/2021/05/12/lets-get-a-few-things-cleared-up-testing-cell-lines-and-fetal-tissue/
Gregg, here is information from the Valneva website. This looks like a European product. You would need to research further to learn whether it is ethically tested and manufactured, as the website does not explain.
https://valneva.com/research-development/covid-19-vla2001/
Ann, I have researched this and Valneva is ethically derived, free of any association with abortion. Unfortunately, it is not likely to appear in the U.S. market any time soon. Current trials are overseas and all of the vaccine candidates will likely find themselves on the full approval track instead of the authorization track since the Pfizer vaccine has been approved. I’m afraid that it will be years before an ethical vaccine is available.
As always, I appreciate the efforts of Children of God for Life. I do, however, think this article could have dug a little deeper, and I think something needs to be clarified.
Based on my analysis of the researchers’ report which is linked to with the hyperlinked text “designed a test” in the sentence that reads “Researchers designed a test in HEK-293T cells to better understand what they had observed.”
The report was published on BioRXiv and is the work of researchers at The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA. It is reporting laboratory evaluation of the Novavax vaccine, conducted by the following departments within the Scripps Institute: Dept. of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, Dept. of Immunology and Microbiology, and the Dept. of Immunology and Microbiology. The referenced report shows that it was the Scripps Institute that conducted the test involving the HEK293 human fetal cell line, not Novavax or any Novavax owned lab or employee. Now, we could assume that Novavax would have been aware that Scripps Institute would subject their vaccine candidate to human fetal cell lines during testing, but we don’t know.
Does it matter from an ethical perspective who performed any tests using human fetal cell lines, the vaccine manufacturer or an independent 3rd party lab to whom the vaccine candidate was given to evaluate, and if the vaccine developer/manufacturer had foreknowledge that the 3rd party lab would be using fetal cell lines? Ethically for us Catholics, that is a decision for us to make, for our Shepherds to make.
It appears Novavax made every effort to develop the vaccine ethically without fetal cells and tissue and also design a manufacturing process that doesn’t need to use any fetal tissue or fetal cell material to make the vaccine once mass production begins.
So, the article is in fact accurate in saying human fetal cell lines were used in testing of the vaccine candidate. So is the vaccine deemed unethical if the vaccine company had no direct control over whether an independent lab’s evaluation process would subject the company’s ethically produced product to an unethical lab procedure? We need a focused discernment of these questions by our Shepherds and their commentary on the matter.
Craig,
There are Novavax affiliations among the authors of this publication. The peer-reviewed version may be viewed here. Gale Smith, Michael J. Massare, Nita Patel, Alysse D. Portnoff, Jing Hui-Tian and Greg Glenn are all directly affiliated (employees) with Novavax, Inc. We do know that Novavax was aware and an active participant in the effort.
The IP associated with a drug under development is carefully guarded, since many elements of the development and formulation process are subject to patent applications. An independent lab would not have unfettered access to a drug under these circumstances.
Novavax is going to be available as soon as Jan/Feb 2022. Is Novavax untainted by aborted babies?
Cecilia,
As the article states, Novavax was tested in aborted fetal cell lines shortly before initiating clinical trials. It is abortion tainted, and I’m not so sure that it will be authorized any time soon. There are many vaccine candidates sitting on the bench, already having completed clinical trials and securing authorization by the WHO that have received little or no attention from the FDA.
What about COVAXIN? Isn’t it untainted? It’s approved for entry into the US and the EU. Can’t we be behind efforts to make it available here? They’ve applied for an EUA and gotten nowhere. That saddens me. I don’t understand why our government doesn’t realize that more people might get vaccinated with such a conventional vaccine. What can we do to influence the FDA to get moving on this?
I was glad to see this on your annual report: Better Vaccines
“We will work with the USCCB to advocate for the authorization of ethical, non-genetic COVID-19 vaccines that are already approved in other countries.” We need specifics and need to know how to help make this happen. Thanks.
Jose, I’m so grateful to find your website! Thank you for your ministry. God bless you and your work.
Could you please see whether Corbevax is ethical? It’s made in Texas and some mass media says it’s ethical. It will enter Indonesia (my home country) soon, I guess: https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/texas-india-patent-free-covid-vaccine-looks-bridge-equity-gaps-rcna10911
I initially was hoping that Novavax would be ethical because it’s approved in Germany, where my husband is from, and Indonesia, my home country. I felt devastated because of that since we’ve been under pressure with the schools to vaccinate the kids. We don’t want to take different vaccinations from the kids to make travel, if we must, possible.
We are trying to stand our ground to find an ethical vaccine although it’s getting difficult now. I myself a COVID survivor and I don’t believe 100% with COVID vaccination because I was cured by taking Ivermectin. But all the public narrative dismiss it as a hoax and ignore the growing research results on it. I almost died (no exaggeration) and I could sit and walk to the toilet within 48 hours after taking Ivermectin 2 days in row and I had been sick for almost a month before that! My point is, if we have a trustworthy and longstanding medicine with already known effects we can anticipate, why dismiss that?
Tessa,
You may be interested to know that SinoPharm is available in Indonesia, and it is ethically developed, tested and produced.
Corbevax was developed and tested without the direct use of aborted fetal cell lines, but we have recently learned that a commercial biologic was used in testing that is commonly developed using aborted fetal cell lines.
I agree – the politics of this pandemic’s management are maddening.
On Valneva: I skimmed 2-3 papers related to their influenza vaccine research in the past, the way I understand it is they use fetal cell lines to develop it and here’s among others: https://pure.mpg.de/rest/items/item_2153383/component/file_2172442/content
My question is only one: If they have done it using a fetal cell line, why not now?
I wonder what’s the catch. I’m open to feedback on Valneva.
Tessa,
I have not seen anything in the literature that Valneva used HEK-293, or any other aborted fetal cell lines, in the development of their vaccine. Their vaccine’s biologics code is VLA2001 – you may want to use this code as you search. One of our subscribers wrote to Valneva and actually received a direct response to this question – Valneva reports that they have not used fetal cell lines in any phase of their vaccine’s development. That agrees with what we have found in the literature; their vaccine was developed, tested and produced using their established Vero-6 cell line platform.
The paper you linked is a doctoral dissertation and, as such, is pure research and it was not focused on any specific medication. Were you able to determine an association with the doctoral candidate and Valneva?
Is the nasal spray TriSb92 for COVID tainted with aborted fetus tissue research?
From the pre-print (pending peer review) paper:
“Neutralization of SARS-CoV-2 variants and SARS-CoV-1 by RBD-targeted Sherpabodies The potency of Sb92 as a neutralizing agent was tested in a pseudovirus model based on luciferase expressing lentiviral vectors infecting ACE2-expressing HEK293T cells in a Spike-dependent manner15. Pseudoviruses carrying Spike proteins corresponding either to the original Wuhan-Hu-1 virus or the B.1.351 (Beta) VOC were incubated with serially diluted concentrations of Sb92 before the infection. Sb92 showed a robust neutralizing capacity with encouraging half-maximal inhibitory
concentrations (IC50) of 7 nM and 28 nM against Beta VOC and Wuhan-Hu-1-based pseudoviruses, respectively (Fig. 2A)”
The paper can be found here.