HEK-293 was first available to researchers in 1977, long after these products were developed. Their development could not have depended on the use of HEK-293.
- Hydroxychloroquine was first approved for medical use in the U.S. in 1955.
- Ivermectin‘s discovery and development used broad animal trials. Ref: Pesticide Synthesis Through Rational Approaches (acs.org)
- Albuterol (Ventolin) was discovered in 1966, marketed in the UK as Ventolin in 1969. ref: Landau R (1999). Pharmaceutical innovation: revolutionizing human health. Philadelphia: Chemical Heritage Press. p. 226.
- Aspirin was first discovered in 1853. A U.S. patent was awarded to Bayer in 1900. Ref: Aspirin – Wikipedia
- Lidocaine was discovered in 1946 and brought to market in 1948. Ref: Scriabine, Alexander (1999). “Discovery and development of major drugs currently in use”. In Ralph Landau; Basil Achilladelis; Alexander Scriabine (eds.). Pharmaceutical Innovation: Revolutionizing Human Health. Philadelphia: Chemical Heritage Press. p. 211.
- Metformin was discovered in 1922 and first marketed in France in 1957. Ref: Fischer J (2010). Analogue-based Drug Discovery II. John Wiley & Sons. p. 49.
- Metoprolol was first developed in 1969 and patented in 1970. Ref: Fischer, Jnos; Ganellin, C. Robin (2006). Analogue-based Drug Discovery. John Wiley & Sons. p. 461
- Tums is nothing more than calcium carbonate and sugar. It was developed in 1928 by James Harvey Howe, in the basement of his house and first produced for sale in 1930 by the Lewis Howe Company. Ref: Tums – Wikipedia.
- Acetaminophen (paracetamol) has some disagreement as to the date of discovery, but the general consensus is 1877. Ref: Morse, H.N. (1878). “Ueber eine neue Darstellungsmethode der Acetylamidophenole” [On a new method of preparing acetylamidophenol]. Berichte der deutschen chemischen Gesellschaft (in German). 11 (1): 232–233.
- Ibuprofen was discovered in 1961 and first marketed in the UK in 1969. Ref: Halford GM, Lordkipanidzé M, Watson SP (2012). “50th anniversary of the discovery of ibuprofen: an interview with Dr Stewart Adams – PubMed (nih.gov)“. Platelets. 23 (6): 415–422.
- Dextromethorphan was patented in 1949 and approved for medical use in 1953. Ref: Fischer, Jnos; Ganellin, C. Robin (2006). Analogue-based Drug Discovery. John Wiley & Sons. p. 527.
- Pepto Bismol was first sold in 1900 as Bismosal. Renamed Pepto-Bismol in 1919. Ref: Bismuth subsalicylate – Wikipedia
- Maalox was first produced commercially in 1949. Ref: Maalox – Wikipedia
- Pseudoephedrine was discovered 1889, most OTCs with pseudoephedrine content pre-date 1977 substantially. Ref: Ladenburg, A.; Oelschlägel, C. (1889). “Ueber das “Pseudo-Ephedrin” [On pseudo-ephedrine]. Berichte der Deutschen Chemischen Gesellschaft (in German).
While any use of the remains of aborted children ought to be rejected by anyone who values the dignity of human life, these medicines do not exist ‘but for the use of’ those children’s bodies. These medicines were developed independently of such use. Later on, other researchers may have conducted tests on the already existing medicines using HEK-293 or some other aborted fetal cell line, but there is a distinction between medicines that would not be here but for the use of aborted children and those that were later tested. Ultimately, it is that practice that must be ended — indeed the entire practice of abortion — and that is the reason why we focus on the root cause at Children of God for Life.
Fr. Schneider’s article has been lifted off the internet by organizations seeking to impose vaccine mandates on employees and students. We hear from you daily by the hundreds, many of you panicking and confused. We can help, but it is up to each of you to take the stand in front of you. We hope this information helps challenge those leaders who did not do the research for themselves.
Somewhere I recently read that the monclonal antibody therapy also exploits fetal remains.
Do you have any more information in this regard?
Also, do you know where I can obtain a supply of Ivermectin?
Thanks & God bless you.
American Front Line Doctors, and they send it from a pharmacy in the free state of Florida. God bless, Governor Ron DiSantis.
Ave Maria pharmacy in Prescott AZ also fills prescriptions for ivermectin and hydroxycloriquine
Suzan, please check our FAQs – a number of monoclonal antibody preparations have been researched and the summaries posted there. Monoclonal antibodies are similar to vaccines, in that some are ethically derived and some are not.
You can click on this link: https://cogforlife.org/frequently-asked-questions/
Is there a list of medications that are abortion tainted? I’m in severe pain with fibromyalgia and am trying to find out if LDN is ethical or not. Also, which antidepressants? I’m against them and I was on them for years but my Dr is recommending one to help my insomnia. I can’t find anything online. I didn’t take the vaccine on these grounds and I want to make sure I’m not taking any medications or food/drinks that are tainted with fetal stem cells and anything from aborted babies. There isn’tuch online.
Yvie, there is no comprehensive list, and this is due to the sheer number of approved drugs that are available. Last I checked, there were over 20,000 prescription drugs approved for use in the United States and determining their ethical profiles requires individual research. Quite literally, this would require a lifetime of work and the list would never be complete. We will be happy to look into LDN for you.
pushhealth.com
Go to flccc.net. in the menu select “ivermectin”. In the menu that pops up select pharmacies then scroll to the bottom. Lots of pharmacies, including overseas. God bless your search!!
Are other medicines like tylenol which are tested on fetal tissue, tested for/in the manufacture of these medications? Are these tests unrelated to the production of these medicines for consumer use? Thanks for any info on this!
Amy, that is the point! None of these medications were developed using fetal cell lines. That’s a fact.
Any local veterinarian should be able to help you if you feel that your pet may have a worm problem
If I get your intention, this may not be good advice. As a pharmacist I can attest to that “drugs for veterinary use” and those for “human consumption” have WAY DIFFERENT standards (e.g. allowable levels of certain metals like lead etc.). I’m not positive that you are suggesting that VET product be used for HUMAN but if so, I’d advise against it
Thank you for your clarification.
I’ve been searching for days for this information. Thank you so much for posting this. It would seem that the accusations are being used by companies to shame employees who are seeking a religious exemption from the covid vaccines. As a suffering of chronic headaches, ibuprofen has been a blessing for years and has allowed me to keep working. So no surgury has been necessary. When I was told aborted fetal tissue was used for it, I was very concerned and stopped using it, and lived with the pain. Your article helped. More information will always be appreciated.
I appreciate that the authors mentioned this:
“Later on, other researchers may have conducted tests on the already existing medicines using HEK-293 or some other aborted fetal cell line, but there is a distinction between medicines that would not be here but for the use of aborted children and those that were later tested.”
For me, this is where ethical consumption becomes even more complicated.
Medications are reformulated all the time. While a drug might be discovered before the development of fetal cell lines, how that drug is formulated for consumer use may/may not use fetal cell lines.
A drug is simply a chemical compound. These chemical compounds are reformulated repeatedly.
This is not true, actually. Any change in the approved formulation would require a manufacturer to go through an FDA review process, which is time consuming and expensive.
Once a medicine is approved for use, it ‘stays put’ from a formulation standpoint. Aspirin, for example, is 325 milligrams of acetylsalicylic acid per tablet. That is what it has been for over a century.
Here’s an article written by Paul Casey, MD that does an outstanding job delineating medical testing from research. The distinctions are of critical importance in this general discussion.
Thank your work to give clarity to those who have taken the absolute stand against use of aborted children in studies, production and testing of medications. This may be the ultimate test for the Faithful. May we always stand firm.
What about Prilosec? I hear that was use in the testing/use of aborted fetal cells. Please confirm.
I would like to know about Prilosec too.
Thank you for this! I have been struggling when I googled “other drugs tested on HEK
And was horrified to find all these over the counter medicines have.
The clarification that these drugs were not created or developed by fetal stem cells is such a relief.
Thank you for doing this research.
Ivermectin was approved for human use in 1998, and would have been tested against HEK in that process.
Scott, Ivermectin has been used in humans for over forty years and with a sterling record of safety. It has been among the anti-parasitics used by the U.S. military for decades, as well. Ask me how I know. Where are you sourcing your information?
Avermectins were used in animals before they were approved for human use; the reference included in this article is actually regarding veterinary use. Is the difference significant? Maybe? I found a reference saying Ivermectin was approved for human use in 1987, haven’t looked further yet. That’s within a possible time frame for testing with HEK293, but is not proof of that. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471492215002317?via%3Dihub#bib0075).
Sue, it is not as if Ivermectin was completely reformulated when studied for use in humans. It already existed, no one started from scratch. What was involved was evaluating the proper dosing for human use. Human trials were used to develop the proper dosing methods and some of those trials started many years before 1987. For example, several branches of the U.S. military were involved in broad trials of Ivermectin years before it was licensed for human use. Ivermectin is a biocide; its mechanism of action does not depend on a host cell expressing anything. This argument frustrates me to no end – Fr. Schneider made a statement of equivalence, saying that the list of drugs he researched were developed and tested in the same way as the COVID-19 vaccines were developed and tested. That is just not so. Period. The point to my refutation was not so much that Fr. Schneider’s argument is wrong, it is that the focus on the product, an inanimate thing, is wrong and we waste our time doing so. A drug does not have the capacity to be good or evil, no more than the pillow on your sofa does. As long as our focus is on the things, we will continue to lose ground. We need to focus our attention on the actions of people – that is the source of moral fault.
I’m willing to bet a dozen chocolate chip cookies that blaming the automobile for a DUI is a defense that is destined to fail.
Then Jose, thank you for your service to protect our freedoms then and our freedoms now!!
In doing some research, I found this site https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2021/01/if-any-drug-tested-on-hek-293-is-immoral-goodbye-modern-medicine/. It states that a laundry list of medicines to include Tylenol, Aleve, Tums etc used HEK-293 during testing. But this site states this isn’t true due to when they came out. So how can this be disputed? Help! Thank you.
That’s the article refuted elsewhere on this site. The premise is flawed and what is not arguable is that the vast majority of the drugs the list you refer to were developed years, sometimes many decades, before aborted fetal cell lines were even available to researchers. The author of the article you reference equated the development of the drugs on his list with the development of the COVID-19 vaccines. The vaccines would not exist but for the use of aborted fetal cell lines in their development and testing. Most of the drugs on his list were developed before fetal cell lines existed. They cannot be the same. Aspirin, for example, was discovered in 1853. Acetaminophen (paracetamol) in 1877.
These are facts, and these facts make what is being claimed impossible. Unless you have a DeLorean and a flux capacitor . . .
Here’s the refutation to that article : https://cogforlife.org/2021/05/12/lets-get-a-few-things-cleared-up-testing-cell-lines-and-fetal-tissue/
Thank you so much!
Thank you very much for this reply and for the article that expounds upon this issue. I do still have one question, though. It seems that, as regards both the vaccines and the medications that are purported to have a connection with aborted fetal stem cell lines, there is a distinction between development and testing. As you stated, since certain medications like Aspirin were created before the tragedy of using aborted fetal stem cell lines existed, it is impossible that the development of such medications is linked to abortion at its very beginning. But my remaining question is whether certain companies who sell these medications are still testing these products (otc medications) for effectiveness using aborted fetal stem cell lines. I’m not sure whether this is the case or not, but my questions particularly regard ivermectin and Allegra, and any others you would be willing to share as well. Thank you very kindly for your time.
Jordan,
Testing is an integral part of development, whether one is talking about drugs, software, jet engines or cookies. Once the transition is made to production, the nature of ‘testing’ changes to Quality Control, which is fundamentally different. In the case of aspirin, a tablet is supposed to contain 325 mg. of acetylsalicylic acid. Acceptable tolerances around this target content are the focus of production testing, as all of the therapeutic questions were settled in the development process. Cell lines of any sort are useless in this application – not the tool for the job. Quality Assurance Testing and Quality Control Testing are different.
Dr. Paul Casey did a masterful job in this article explaining the difference between medical testing and research. This article is highly recommended reading for anyone wanting to understand what is done in pure research applications and what is done in drug development.
So, is it safe to say that if a medication is FDA approved before 1977 when fetal cell lines started to be used that they are ethically ok to use. If they have been reformulated that would in the information with the FDA?
This is a reasonable rule of thumb, but there are exceptions. The poliomyelitis and rubella vaccines are examples of exceptions. These vaccines were developed decades before the advent of aborted fetal cell lines, yet their development history is among the most barbaric. With regard to reformulation, once a drug is approved, it is almost NEVER reformulated. This is due to the cost and time associated with obtaining approval for the reformulated drug. If the reformulation is insufficient to obtain patent protection, then reformulation makes no economic sense to the manufacturer. Aspirin, for example, has been unchanged over its entire history (over a century as an approved drug). It is still 325 mg. of acetylsalicylic acid per tablet. Enteric coatings have been added and the like, but the drug itself is unchanged.
So what about azythromycin? Are there any antibiotics we need to avoid?
Azithromycin is a macrolide antibiotic, whose mechanism of action prevents bacterial growth by impeding protein synthesis in the bacteria itself. Testing would have been done on bacterial cultures, not on fetal cell lines, as fetal cells would not be a suitable test medium. This is deductive, however, since this antibiotic was discovered and developed in Croatia and the literature dealing with the development is sparse.
Thank you all you guys for clearing that up I would have been boycotting all of them lol…Why would a priest make such a statement?
Thank you for clarifying. The medical community and organizations have referred to this list as evidence to fear people into getting vaccinated. No consideration to strong beliefs and unaware of facts. A lot of people are conflicted and unsure what to follow.
Pat, that list is not evidence. It is the product of contorted logic and an informal fallacy. It pains me no end to think of people that have had their lives turned upside down because of this sort of thing.
I’ll add levothyroxine/synthroid to the list of drugs created before fetal cell lines.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/labs/pmc/articles/PMC5477431/
Well done, Aaron. A good piece of research.
Has anybody found information on Omeprazole or Famotidine?
Do we know fir sure that thyroid medicine like synthroid and Levothryroxine was not tested with fetal cell lines. I was hoping that link that was provided by Aaron was more specific. Any info would be greatly appreciated.
Synthroid (including all of the trade names) was introduced to the market in 1927. Obviously, it was discovered, developed and brought to market without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. They did not exist at the time.
I was teaching a lecture on the Industrial Revolution’s advances in health sciences, including the patenting of aspirin in 1899. One of my students interjected that aspirin could not have been invented in the 19th century because WebMD states that aspirin inventors used fetal stem cell lines in “research and development.” The WebMD claim is linked is below.
Where are the fact checkers when we need them?
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210918/some-medications-also-tied-to-religious-vaccine-exemption
Dr. Trasancos, I appreciate the intensive labor you have put into researching the array of medications and drugs that employers may potentially require us to agree to discontinue using if we seek exemptions from the COVID-19 vaccine. If they succeed in persuading us that these drugs were subjected to testing on aborted fetal cell lines, we will then be made to feel hypocritical if we don’t sign an agreement to stop taking them. Of course, the ultimate desired effect is for us to (at that point) just throw up our hands and agree that everything must be tainted, so we may as well just get the jab. What’s one more tainted product going to hurt, right? So this is a big deal! Many, like me, are relieved that you found many of the drugs on their list were marketed long before the development of the HEK-293 fetal cell line. I just now found out that Benadryl was FDA approved in 1946 and Tylenol was introduced in 1955. If either or both of those drugs were tested on another aborted fetal cell line prior to FDA approval, then we need to see the proof. Otherwise, it’s “fake news.” On the flip side, I have found to my dismay that nearly all of my blood pressure medications were indeed tested on HEK-293, which means I’ve been guilty of “UNinformed consent.” No more. I am now seeking naturopathic alternatives. In discussions I’ve had with individuals who are “on the fence” with this issue, I’ve borrowed a quote from Sarah Pope (the Healthy Home Economist): “Trying to preserve one’s life based on the murder of another can NEVER be health-affirming.”
Larry, you will not see that proof. Aborted fetal cell lines and strains did not exist when these drugs came to market. One cannot argue with the calendar. And Tylenol, the brand name, may have been introduced in 1955, but acetaminophen (that’s what Tylenol is) dates back a lot further. The consensus places its discovery in 1877.
Like I said above, these facts make the claim impossible, unless you know Dr. Emmet Brown. Sorry, I’m very fond of ‘Back to the Future’…
Larry, I would be interested to know what alternatives you have found to your blood pressure medicine. My husband and I are on Lisiniprol. If this was developed using fetal cell lines we would like to seek ethical alternatives.
Hi, Lisa, I apologize for the delayed response to your inquiry. My cardiologist first put me on Lisinopril (five years ago), but within a week of taking it I was unable to get rid of a pungent odor. Upon further research, I found that Lisinopril is derived from the synthesized peptide of venom from the Brazilian Pit Viper. Apparently, the blood pressure of victims bitten by the Brazilian Pit Viper drops to zero. I can understand why scientists would want to study what it is about their venom that causes such a drop in blood pressure; nevertheless, I’m not comfortable ingesting a synthesized derivative of this venom. I asked to be put on something else, and that’s how I began taking Amlodipine, which apparently was indeed tested on the fetal cell line of an aborted fetus. Once I learned this sad truth, I stopped taking Amlodipine. Since then, I’ve been trying naturopathic alternatives. Also, we recently purchased a device called Resperate, which may prove helpful with breathing exercises. My BP was 180/100 a couple of weeks ago, but the last reading I took was 138/81 (today), which I consider a major improvement. My wife used to always have perfect BP (120/80), but in the past few years hers has become about as bad as mine. On another note, I’ve had hypertension since I was in my 20’s, but when you’re in your 20’s, you think you’ll live forever. I am now in my 60’s and my perspective has changed. I hope you and your husband are able to successfully manage your hypertension: -)
Try high dosage (1,000 mg.) odorless garlic capsules (check with doctor). I take 4 capsules per day. My younger brother takes a total of 3 bp drugs and has all kinds of side effects. Garlic is one natural remedy that really seems to work — but just for bp, but also against bacteria and viruses.
Hello everyone. I’m a fairly new reader @ Cogforlife & commenting for the 1st time. Apparently, I’m late to the party. (-; After reading Larry’s comment in regard to BP meds, I’m horrified as I have been on Amlodipine for years.
After watching a lecture on Vitamin D & K2 (the Weston Price story) & researching natural preventatives & remedies, I thought I was good to go. Boy oh boy, ya learn something new every day. The pharma industry is just evil. I guess an eye opener for me was Myron Fagan’s 50 year old recording & a documentary called Rockefeller Medicine.
There are a few moral & spiritual reasons to decline the Covid vax/shot, but how can you ever be sure about all foods/meds? Ever heard of Synomix (sp?)? Supposedly “they” are manufacturing certain foods with fetal tissue as well…as a “flavor enhancer.” I haven’t ventured too far down that rabbit hole—yet. It all reeks of cannibalism..it’s pure evil! What a wonderful world in which we live!?!
Great & informative site.
Hi, Rachel,
I appreciate your kind remarks, plus your reaction echoes that which my wife and I had not so long ago. In our early adult years we would never have imagined that the current national trend could ever become the status quo. Part of me feels like I need to apologize to our children for bringing them into such a world as this! But thankfully there are still many out there who “ask for the old paths” (Jer. 6:16), focusing on Scriptural solutions to modern-day problems. In view of our current politico-medico climate, here’s what I feel is the proper approach: The fact that we don’t know about how various products on the market were either tested or developed IS NOT OUR FAULT! I really love Dr. Irene Polidoulis’ 10/21/2021 article “The Aborted ‘Bioethics’ of Ancient Faith Radio’s Fr. John Parker & Dr. Ryan Sampson Nash” (https://orthodoxreflections.com/the-aborted-bioethics-of-ancient-faith-radios-fr-john-parker-dr-ryan-sampson-nash/). Here’s a pertinent excerpt:
“Every product label known to man touts its so-called purity from ‘gluten free’ to ‘low sodium’ to ‘free range’ to ‘without antibiotics’ to ‘grass fed’ to ‘halal’ to ‘kosher’ to ‘air chilled’ to ‘low fat’ to “’caffeine-free’…but NO product label has ever advertised ‘no aborted fetal cell lines have been used in the development or testing of this product.’ No mention of this detail, when the use of aborted fetal cell lines has become so systemic, is NOT ethical or fair to anyone – not to people of conscience, not to any religious groups, not to vegans or vegetarians, not to anyone.”
Dr. Polidoulis’ point is clear: It should be unconscionable to even consider permitting the labeling of products without including the fact that they were either tested or developed from an aborted fetal cell line—IF that is indeed what occurred. I think it is prudent for us to do our best to look into how various products were developed and tested, but realistically, I’m pretty sure we’re going to miss some things along the way due to this “mislabeling,” if you will, not to mention the possibility that some products may have been covertly tested on an aborted fetal cell line. We don’t know what we don’t know (nor can we legitimately be held accountable).
You asked if I have heard of Senomyx and yes; in fact, we had initially stopped drinking Pepsi products when we were (mistakenly) informed that Pepsi was using their flavor-enhancers, which are based on taste-receptors from HEK293 cells. It turns out Pepsi didn’t actually follow through after some trial rollouts and they cancelled their contract with Senomyx before any products made it to market. I understand Senomyx was bought out by a foreign company in 2018. Nevertheless, all Nestles coffee creamers were tested by Senomyx on HEK-293 prior to FDA approval. Something else I’m aware of is the fact that at least one cosmetics company (Neocutis) uses cells from an aborted fetus for its skin care products. I highly doubt that they label their product accordingly. Dr. Trasancos maintains a short list of U.S. products tainted by either development or testing on aborted fetal cells and here’s a link: https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/fetalproductsall.pdf
About Amlodipine: The Journal of Stem Cell Research & Therapy goes into how Amlodipine was tested. Here’s where I obtained my information: https://www.walshmedicalmedia.com/open-access/use-of-stem-cell-suspensions-containing-separated-fetal-stem-cells-in-complex-treatment-of-patients-with-essential-hypertension-2157-7633-1000366.pdf
Amlodipine begins to be mentioned on page three of the study. I have an upcoming appointment with my cardiologist, at which time he will be informed of the fact that I’ve been off of Amlodipine since late November. I’m afraid he may discharge me as a patient!
I truly appreciate the hearts of so many who post here—those who know that ALL LIVES, including the unborn, are precious. What a better world this would be if everyone felt this way.
Larry, I appreciate your response more than I can say. Jer. 6:16 is very fitting as well as the information & links you provided. I was conflicted about posting some of these topics because I couldn’t recall where I had seen or read the information esp. about the flavor enhancer, so thank you for the clarification. I’m just starting to delve into this & yes it’s overwhelming. It’s reassuring to find other people in the know.
I relate to you & your wife’s conviction in regard to raising children in this world. We raised our sons with a good Biblical foundation & they are very aware of the global agendas at play but like many, do not want to hear “conspiracy theories” about certain foods & medical tyranny to some extent. They are the proverbial consumers lol. They have not taken the shot & don’t plan to so I/we are grateful & blessed on that front. I’m picking & choosing my info battles— treading lightly if you will.
My youngest is a sergeant in the ARNG & we are working on his exemption letter now. I welcome any input & prayers because it’s next to impossible to get exempt in any branch of military. God always provides an escape & we were relieved the compliance date was pushed back to summer’22 which I find interesting. My oldest is a CEO of a well known & established business in our area, so he has some say & control for now..when it comes to mandates.
I agree with your position on not being held accountable for what we don’t know but believe we have to do everything we can to detach (“come out of her my people, my children perish for a lack of knowledge, as in the days of Noah,” all come to mind), from this evil system. Although “detachment” can be a monumental endeavor…though ”all things are possible through Yashua/Messiah.
I haven’t heard of Dr. Polidoulis but research everyone/ everything that comes my way. Thanks again for pointing me in the right direction as this information is invaluable. Although it’s unsettling to pull away from BP medicine, I think you’re doing the right thing. Let me know (if you don’t mind) how your visit with the cardiologist goes & the enlightenment you bestow on him haha! Reminds me of a recent visit my husband had w/a “nutritionist” who recommended a healthy alternative—>margarine instead of butter lol
Also, you’re correct in that it’s very unfair & unethical these companies (and vax manufacturers) don’t have to disclose ingredients of food & substances going into our bodies hence “the world we live in!”
There is no oversight or minding of the store in many aspects of corporate American governance. How anyone can deny (faith or no faith) there are forces at work to our detriment is beyond me. As I’ve heard many times…”it’s Biblical!” Once again, (can’t say this enough) thank you for taking the time to respond & for the links & clarification for readers/onlookers.
Ps// I’m sure you & your wife have done as good a job as any to part values & wisdom to your children & as I’ve also heard many times….we are all here for “such a time as this!” We will all have a valuable part to play as events continue to unfold.
Hello, Rachel,
My wife and I appreciate your kindred spirit; we’re sure you’re a blessing to your entire family and even your community. The bottom line is, we’re all doing the best we can here in contradistinction to a society at large that doesn’t think we need to know whether or not the various products on the market have been tested on the cell line of an aborted fetus. I’m finding that the “ethics web” is so tangled up that no matter where we turn, it seems that most companies or manufacturers we’ve been dealing with play a sinister role in the devious plot. Even our banking institution is a known contributor to Planned Parenthood.
You asked me to let you know how my visit with the cardiologist goes. My visit was today and it was nothing like I expected. In my mind, I fully expected him to say something like, “I’ve prescribed for you the world’s best medications, I helped bring your blood pressure to near perfect levels, and now you’ve decided to stop taking them because you don’t approve of how they were tested? Look, if you can’t go with a program that is proven to work, there is nothing more I can do for you; you need to find someone who will somehow come up with the right medication that meets your rigorous demands.” Something like that is what I expected, but my actual experience was mostly the opposite. He immediately accepted my decision and stated on several occasions, “Larry, when you are here in my office you are the most important person in the world to me, and I want to do whatever it takes to help you stay healthy.” He understands that medical ethics has been an uphill battle, and he brought up the story of Henrietta Lacks, the woman who passed away from cancer in 1951 and whose cells were used for research without her or her family’s knowledge and consent, and those cells continue to be used to this day. He added that for some twelve years he was the chairman of a hospital’s Board of Ethics, where they fight against unethical medical practices. He was very empathetic of my stance, he immediately noted that I was discontinuing my medications due to “ethics,” plus he gave his opinion that in spite of the unethical testing that may have been done on those medications, he feels they are much better regulated (and hence safer) than the naturopathic products that I told him I am now taking (L-Arginine, Taurine and Rauvolfia Serpentina).
In spite of his expressed concern for my health and well-being, he didn’t have any solutions (prescription-wise) other than to recommend that I avoid salt and that I go on the “Dash Diet,” which is probably a great idea. I did not get the sense that he is interested in probing medications that were tested on an aborted fetal cell line versus those that were not.
Finally, I told him about a blood pressure medication that I had come across by the name of Nifedipine that I might be willing to take because from what I’m able to find, it was patented in 1967, so at least this particular drug existed prior to HEK-293. I would surmise that IF it had been tested on any cell lines from an aborted fetus we would not be told about it since abortion was illegal at that time. When I mentioned Nifedipine, his eyes lit up and he said, “Nifedipine is a brother to Amlodipine.” He told me if I would be willing to go with Nifedipine, he would write me up a prescription. I realize some will tell me I shouldn’t even go with Nifedipine, and if it turns out I can’t even use this one based on how it was tested, I will circle back to what I previously told you, “THIS ISN’T OUR FAULT!” We can’t help it if neither these manufacturers nor the US government care enough about consumers to give us the information we need to make informed decisions that align with our convictions. How sad that no matter how hard we try to do the right thing, roadblocks abound. Rachel, I wish you the very best as we tread this difficult path!
Hi Larry! I know this is a few years old by now but I was reading through these comments and noticed your comments down below about Pepsi and Senomyx and about how they had canceled their contract. In the article you linked below, it states that Pepsi did not stop working with Senomyx but said that they would not have Senomyx do testing on aborted fetal cells for their Pepsi products.
Does anyone have info on why these medications are tested on fetal cell lines? Is it for/in the manufacture of them for consumer use? For example, I found one article about testing ibuprofen on cell lines, but it had nothing to do with its manufacture for commercial use.
I believe you answered your own question, Amy. These drugs were not developed using aborted fetal cell lines – their existence was not dependent on the use of aborted fetal cell lines or aborted fetal tissue. A subsequent act was the source of moral fault. It is the practice, not the product.
Could anyone help me definitive resource on whether or not cell lines were used to develop Zoloft? Thank you very much.
Zoloft (sertraline) was developed in 1977 and without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. Homogenated rodent tissues (liver and brain) were used for the in vitro testing and rat models were used for in vivo testing.
Ref: Welch, W., Discovery and Pre-Clinical Development of the Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Sertraline, Advances in Medicinal Chemistry Volume 3, pages 113—148, 1995 JAI Press Inc.
Thank you so much for the reference, grateful.
This article is flawed because it fails to understand the argument that Fr. Schneider is making. Take #8, “Tums is nothing more than calcium carbonate and sugar.” That may have been true in the beginning, but not now.
The current list of ingredients in Tums are: calcium carbonate, corn starch, FD&C red #40 lake, FD&C yellow #5 (tartrazine) lake, FD&C yellow #6 lake, flavors, mineral oil, sodium poly phosphate, sucrose, talc.
So, while the brand name is the same, the ingredients have changed. You can’t buy the original Tums anymore – Tums 1.0 – it doesn’t exist. All you can buy is Tums 2.0, or Tums X.0, which has been tested on the HEK293 cell line.
I disagree. I find no authoritative evidence that Tums has ever been tested in fetal cell lines. The publications that Fr. Matthew Schneider linked in support of this argument have NOTHING TO DO with Tums. Here, read them for yourself:
First Reference
Second Reference
I tried and tried and tried – couldn’t find a single mention of an antacid’s mechanism of action, nor did I find a single reference to Tums, Tums 2.0 or Tums X.0 or whatever you referred to. Both of these publications focused on experimental gene delivery mechanisms using nano-structured calcium carbonate and related compounds. Both experimental works were done in Wuhan, China at Wuhan University. None of the researchers involved had or have any affiliation to the manufacturer of Tums (Glaxo SmithKline) and neither does Wuhan University.
As I mentioned in the article, calcium carbonate is literally everywhere. By your and Fr. Schneider’s logic, sidewalks, the eggs in your refrigerator, the White Cliffs of Dover, broccoli, concrete and the state capitol building in Indianapolis, IN are abortion tainted. All of these things are loaded with calcium carbonate. And that doesn’t make any sense.
If you have evidence that Tums has been tested in aborted fetal cell lines, please share a citation to an authoritative source. And let’s keep it about the medications named, shall we? I believe that was the point Fr. Schneider tried (and failed) to make in this case.
I cannot imagine the mental and ethical hoops so many people here are jumping through to support their opposition to the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine and dispel any ethical problems with other medications. This is cognitive dissonance at its finest. These vaccines were tested on fetal tissue JUST LIKE many food additives, medications, etc. Had cloned fetal tissue not been available these vaccines would still exist just like the other medications listed here. Your only argument is essentially “its totally fine that these medicines were discovered and sold to people and then the changed/updated versions were tested on fetal cells, but medicines that were tested on fetal cells before being sold to the public are unethical” . If the CURRENT PRODUCT was tested on fetal tissue lines it is the same as any new product tested on fetal tissue lines.
If you can cite authoritative sources to support these claims, please do so. I have found no direct and authoritative evidence and the references provided in Fr. Schneider’s article don’t feed the bulldog. See the commentary on Tums. If you’re advocating for people to just get over the exploitation of the killed unborn and that it’s no big deal, and I’m pretty sure that’s your position, you will be respectful of people who form their conscience differently than you if you wish to post on this website.
With regard to the vaccines, take one if you want to. I’ll defend to the death your right to do so. Leave others alone to decide on their own. I will defend that as well. Judging another’s conscience is bad style. If you wish to argue the facts and the science, I and others will insist that you back it up. As W. Edward Deming said, ‘In God we trust. All others, bring data.’
Thank you so much. I took the Moderna vaccine and God has tugged at my heart strong enough to KNOW the evil in all that we have been led to believe is “safe” and effective. I knew I should not take the J and J, but had no idea of the story behind HEK 293 and the other vaccines. I have looked to the Catholic church for guidance, and agree most strongly with YOUR position. However, ANY cell line from an aborted fetus is horrible. I also defend an individuals conscience dictating if they will take the vaccine and I will defend that right. Before God, I answer for me. I should have just as much right to reject boosters now, based on the Lord opening my eyes. For me it will not stop here. I will explore any medications I take, so thank you for helping in this process. The information on the meds mentioned above give me such relief, as I take some of them. This is so difficult to navigate. I honestly hadn’t even given it any thought until I started hearing sound bites on the news about the church’s position. I am going to explore this site and get involved. I am a “protester” but I love the Lord and respect the Catholic church and your stand for life. God bless you!!!
JWilson, there is a difference between (1) testing aspirin or even bananas in HEK293 cell lines today and (2) using HEK293 lines for in-vitro mRNA expression to encode spike protein for the Moderna vaccine design. Number (1) shows us that fetal stem cells have no association to the origins of aspirin, or bananas. Number (2) shows us that fetal stem cell testing was crucial in the origins of the Moderna vaccine. No need to jump through ethical acrobatics. Quite simple. Just look at the origins of every drug/vaccine and you’ll have your answer.
My family and I are on a pork-free diet, so we always check labels to confirm there are no pork products in anything we purchase at the store. My wife and daughter have celiac disease, so we also check to confirm products are “gluten free.” Additionally, I’m allergic to Red #40 food dye, so we check labels for that ingredient. We also check for things like high-fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils. In other words, we as consumers always read the labels before we buy! But no one ever deemed it necessary to put anything like, “This product was tested on an aborted fetal cell line prior to approval by the FDA.” Would such information have halted our decision to purchase the product? ABSOLUTELY!!! And NOW we are confronted by individuals saying things like, “Well, if you’re going to decline the vaccine due to its having been tested on an aborted fetal cell line, then you’re going to have to stop using THIS product or THAT product, too!” Is it now our fault that we’ve been victims of “UNinformed consent” and we’re not 100% savvy of all the products on the market that were tested on an aborted fetal cell line without our knowledge? And now, on top of all that, we’re being fed misinformation about products “allegedly” having been tested on an aborted fetal cell line, but in actual fact, they were not. Fake news is REAL and the ones who conscientiously object to murdering babies before they are born and then using their corpses for testing purposes are the ones being portrayed as idiots. I see a bitter fulfillment of Isaiah 5:20 in what’s going on in this world today. Thank you for allowing me to express my concern.
I am a reader from Nigeria and appreciate this discourse. I believe the argument that it is hypocrisy to object to the vaccine if you consume other products from aborted cell lines is immoral and bogus bullying. It is like a caught thief arguing his release based on the fact that other thieves have not been caught yet.
Whether I have yet come to knowledge, conclusions or decisions on other ills does not rob me of the right to reject the ills i am currently rejecting even if they are similar.
Thank you for strengthening our faith in the Lord Jesus and its implications on our decision with your research.
Any info on claritin. I have looked and looked can’t find anything help
From an exhibit recently prepared in support of plaintiffs’ case in a lawsuit:
25. Claritin (loratadine): Discovered by Dr. Frank Villani and Dr. Charles Magatti in 1976, working at a Schering AG facility in Italy. No aborted fetal cell lines were used in the research or development of loratadine. Ref: Jie Jack Li, “Blockbuster Drugs: The Rise and Fall of the Pharmaceutical Industry”, OUP USA, 2014, pp. 82-84
Any information on Lipotor (Atorvastatin) development testing with fetal cell lines?
Brian, atorvastatin was developed using rodent in vitro and in vivo models, much like sertraline, mentioned above.
Refs: Roth BD (2002). The discovery and development of atorvastatin, a potent novel hypolipidemic agent. Progress in Medicinal Chemistry. 40. pp. 1–22.;
U.S. Patent US5686104A https://patents.google.com/patent/US5686104A/en?oq=5%2c686%2c104
Jose, so, just so that I understand, unlike the vaccine, atorvastatin is ok to use?
Thomas, atorvastatin was developed (synthesized) and tested without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. Rodent models were used for in vitro and in vivo testing.
I’ve been trying to keep the original article up dated as more information is listed. But may I suggest you redo the article to add in all the additional drugs that are ‘clear’ along with the references? I realize its a break from Fr. Schneider’s original article, but this information is really good and this is the only place where I have found it.
I am curious about the morality of drugs created without stem cell lines that, through future testing on stem cells, further practical uses are found. Is accepting treatment for those newly discovered uses ethical then? Or are you only limited to those applications discovered without stem cell line testing?
Brendan, I think that most important thing is to focus on the origins of each drug/vaccine, R&D that went into developing it, not what happened afterwards. Trying to follow up on all the substances that were used in the experiments utilizing these cell lines would be an extremely laborious if not impossible task. Suppose some researchers in Italy are testing Cayenne pepper’s tumor-fighting properties by using fetal cell lines. And suppose that they discover that Cayenne pepper does have those properties. Does it mean that all Cajun food is now tainted with abortion? No, not really. Cayenne’s cancer-fighting properties were already naturally built into the pepper’s profile by means of Intelligent Design, the fact that humans discovered those properties using questionable means does not mean that those naturally existing properties are now somehow tainted.
This was a very interesting and informative read. Thank you so much! I was curious to know if anyone has found any info on Naproxen Sodium/Aleve development and fetal cells as I use this medication frequently. I have been looking but have been unsuccessful in finding anything other than Naproxen was first on the market in 1976 and Naproxen Sodium was on the market starting in 1980. Since that is so close to when HEK293 became available for use in research, I am unsure what to think!
You’re correct on their approval dates, however, naproxen was patented in 1967, ten years before HEK-293 was available for use.
Yes, but the patent may have come before the trials. Meaning it could still have been tested for development after it was patented. The FDA approval date is the only one we can be sure of using the dates alone. 1966 was the earliest fetal cell acquisition I can find. I too am trying to find this info.
Thank you for this, this is an answer to prayer.
Bio-ethics is a serious issue, and anyone here – including me – is likely to be pro-life. We strongly oppose abortion and we oppose the use of any derivatives of abortion on moral grounds. Usually the argument is that we don’t want to receive a benefit from an immoral and/or unethical practice. Sometimes someone points out that we don’t want to incentivize an immoral or unethical practice that comes before the subsequent product. …
But in the case of Covid-1984, the issue has become a football because it’s worse than that.
All of us paying attention know that the current ‘vaccines’ that do not ‘vaccinate’ and are far, far more than just a product deliberately tainted by an immoral or unethical practice. Covid ‘vaccines’ are unnecessary, dangerous, experimental, and employ technology that has never been approved, (except the FDA approval of the Pfizer jab 23 Aug 21, which is suspicious). These ‘vaccines’ were only ‘authorized’ due to an alleged ’emergency’ that never materialized (to the extent claimed) – and never went away on our televisions.
So we are supposed to take the risk of a ‘vaccine’ that does not vaccinate for a health crisis that does not exist. We fear for our lives and the lives of our children. And rightly so. But if the jab mandate stands, we will all give up both the right to refuse medications or other ‘improvements’ to our bodies, and the right to keep our decisions private.
Think about that. If it doesn’t scare you half to death, you’re living under a rock. Would you let people who hate you inject anything they want into you? Even if it’s moral and safe like saline solution? It’s like forcing you to burn incense to the Emperor, say, ‘Uncle’ and eat meat consecrated to idols. It’s intended to humiliate you and control you. And that’s just the icing on the cake. It also forces you to bow down before others, and intimidate others into following the same action. It’s a wicked and immoral and unethical plan even if the injected product is safe and moral. And we all know it in our gut if not in our head.
On a new forum, I won’t go into the details, but those of you who know how and why medical privacy was implemented in HIPAA also know how truly hypocritical and disgusting all of this is. I only bring it up here because I want to point out that the objectives remain the same even though the tactics have reversed and the outcomes contradict each other. HIPAA was essential to getting us here because it effectively made it impossible to audit the chain of evidence from the data collected by health professionals to the steaming sausage handed to us by healthcare bureaucrats. They want our vax status to be public to intimidate, humiliate, and control us.
Why should we expect any bureaucrats to give us the truth about anything? …
… Let’s just say, if you have nothing to hide, why are you hiding the data?
God bless everyone here. And God help us all.
Are any past seasonal flu vaccines, in the last 15 year, connected to fetal cell lines/abortion tainted?
To answer precisely would take many hours and that is time we do not have these days, so here’s a deductive answer to your question.
Flu shots change from year to year because the dominant strains change from year to year and the government agencies and research community come up with their best guess as to the dominant strain(s) in the coming year. A change to the viral strain being cultured does not require a change in culturing method. The culturing method is part of a production process that is closely regulated by the FDA and any change to that process requires examination and approval by the FDA. That takes time, money and capital investment in the new process. Flu shots are a low-margin drug and it makes no sense for a manufacturer to change any part of an established GMP (Good Manufacturing Process) without a very compelling reason to do so.
Until recently, flu shots had been cultured in avian cells – chicken eggs. Recent years have seen insect cell lines and non-human mammalian cell lines used as culture media. Some manufacturers have invested in different culturing methods to insulate their production capacity from fluctuations (shortages, in this case) in the supply of the commodity used in culturing – chicken eggs.
In short, there is no reason to expect that flu shots have seen changes in their manufacturing process in the last fifteen years.
Is there a concrete chart that shows which of these were/were not developed using fetal cell lines? Thanks!!!
Tylenol; Pepto Bismol ;Aspirin; Tums; Lipitor; Senekot; Motrin; Ibuprofen; Maalox; Ex-Lax; Zocor; Zostavax; Tylenol Cold & Flu; Benadryl; Sudafed; Albuterol; Preparation H; Enbrel; MMR Vaccine; Acetaminophen; Claritin; Zoloft; Suphedrine; Prilosec; Azithromycin; Varilrix; Havrix
Check your email, Jane. The information you seek is in a document that is seven pages long and doesn’t lend itself well to a comment box.
What a fantastic compendium of data for responses to false claims of various products having been developed or tested using fetal cells. Using the same list Jane provides, the form I’m addressing notes these ‘are not inclusive’ as well. Is the information/seven-page document you noted available at a link or, alternatively, can I respectfully request a copy as well? Thank you so much Mr. Trasancos…”by their fruits you will know them.”. God bless you for your dedication!
I would love a copy of that list as well pretty please!
Mr. Trasancos, I’m so thankful I stumbled on this site as I take 3 of the medication listed above. I’m a School Bus Driver in NorCal and a couple of months ago I slipped down the stair well of my bus and have been off work since September 21st. I will be going back to work soon and would love the information you have, as I’m sure I’m going to need that as well as a religious exception, which I still have to get. I will not be taking this evil jab ever or any flu shot as I haven’t for several years. God gave me a great immune system! However I know I will have to be prepared when HR approaches me regarding not taken the jab….
Thank you inadvance….
Hi Mr Trasancos, can you send me a copy of that 7 page document that gives additional information in regards to the medicines that company’s are claiming we’re developed using fetal cell lines.
Hi Jose, could you please send me that 7 page document? I really appreciate it
Sim, I tried twice, and your email address bounced back as undeliverable. Please email me at jose@cogforlife.org and we’ll get it figured out.
Jose, can you provide information in relation to lisiniprol and whether HEK 273 was used to test / produce it for sure? If it was, would you know of any other alternative blood pressure medications?
Lisinopril is a non-metabolic ACE inhibitor, patented by Merck in 1978. It is a synthetic derivative of captopril. It was developed and tested free of any association with aborted fetal cell lines or aborted fetal tissue. From the patent filing:
“Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility
There was no evidence of a tumorigenic effect when lisinopril was administered for 105 weeks
to male and female rats at doses up to 90 mg/kg/day (about 56 or 9 times2 the maximum
recommended daily human dose, based on body weight and body surface area, respectively).
There was no evidence of carcinogenicity when lisinopril was administered for 92 weeks
to (male and female) mice at doses up to 135 mg/kg/day (about 84 times2 the maximum
recommended daily human dose). This dose was 6.8 times the maximum human dose based
on body surface area in mice.
Lisinopril was not mutagenic in the Ames microbial mutagen test with or without metabolic
activation. It was also negative in a forward mutation assay using Chinese hamster lung
cells. Lisinopril did not produce single strand DNA breaks in an in vitro alkaline elution rat
hepatocyte assay. In addition, lisinopril did not produce increases in chromosomal aberrations
in an in vitro test in Chinese hamster ovary cells or in an in vivo study in mouse bone marrow.
There were no adverse effects on reproductive performance in male and female rats treated
with up to 300 mg/kg/day of lisinopril. This dose is 188 times and 30 times the maximum
human dose when based on mg/kg and mg/m2, respectively.
Thank you very much for your feedback! God bless, Jose.
Can you please prove information on Omeprazole being linked to aborted fetal cell lines? Thank you!!!
I researched omeprazole as part of a broader refutation of Fr. Schneider’s list and the list being used by Conway Regional Health System and many other organizations. Omeprazole, more commonly known as Prilosec and Prilosec OTC (and other brand names), was not developed or tested in aborted fetal cell lines. Please refer to the following from an exhibit recently prepared in support of plaintiffs’ counsel in a matter pending litigation:
30. Prilosec and Prilosec OTC (omeprazole): A proton pump inhibitor, this drug’s mechanism of action is external to the cells lining the gastrointestinal tract. This drug, and many that share its mechanism of action, were developed and tested using simulated gastric fluids in vitro. No fetal cell lines or cell strains were used in the drug’s discovery or development. Ref: U.S. Patent US20040248942A1, https://patents.google.com/patent/US20040248942A1/en?q=omeprazole&oq=omeprazole
Can you tell me about zoloft? generic name is sentraline
Elaine, my comment posted on November 16, 2021 answered this question. Here’s the text from the post:
Zoloft (sertraline) was developed in 1977 and without the use of aborted fetal cell lines. Homogenated rodent tissues (liver and brain) were used for the in vitro testing and rat models were used for in vivo testing.
Ref: Welch, W., Discovery and Pre-Clinical Development of the Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Sertraline, Advances in Medicinal Chemistry Volume 3, pages 113—148, 1995 JAI Press Inc.
While its great that HEK293 is getting attention for testing, I ran across WI-38 used for testing in Buspar. Surprised me as I thought MRC-5 and WI-38 were just for vaccines.
Can you advise if Vitamin C and Vitamin D and other vitamins were tested on HEK-293?
No, they were not. There is no reason to do so.
Any links you can point me to? I’ve had the argument thrown at me because I’m refusing the vaccine that I’m already using these vitamins researched via HEK-293.
If the people you are arguing with are that ill-informed – to be polite – I don’t think a link will help. All of the common vitamins were identified long before the development of testing on aborted fetal tissue lines. It’s also true that there is no reason for testing vitamins on aborted fetal tissues. I’m sure it’s been done – because the minions of Moloch receive grants … but there is no scientific reason for it. …
So what you’re looking for is akin to finding a link to a scientific paper proving the Earth is round. You won’t find it because there is literally no reason to do so.
One point that might help is a reference to the post-hoc fallacy. Fr. Schneider’s entire argument is a post-hoc fallacy combined with a false-equivalence. In this case, Schneider used the post-hoc fallacy to claim something (e.g. vitamins) would be immoral because it was misused after the fact (tested on aborted fetal tissue). When the fallacy was pointed out to Schneider, he reversed the argument. He claimed that if something (vaccines) are misused after the fact (that is, tested on aborted fetal tissue after the fact), the “vaccines” are moral for the same reason other products are moral.
To say it again; Schneider claimed that products like the “vaccines” are morally equivalent to other products because the “vaccines” were not created or developed or approved with aborted fetal tissues. The vaxxers are now claiming that we are hypocrites – or ignoramuses – because – they claim – products were tested after the fact on aborted fetal tissues.
Their claim is a post hoc fallacy because that is literally equivalent to claiming that we cannot use cars because cars are used as get-away vehicles by criminals.
It’s a complex and tedious argument. We know intuitively that the argument is false. The Wright Brothers did not invent airplanes by testing planes on aborted fetal tissue, but we are not supposed to use planes because abortionists use planes.
Again anyone who is so ignorant or ill-informed that they do not understand this is unlikely to be persuaded by a ‘link.’ This is especially true because we know vitamins have been tested on aborted fetal tissue. … In fact, I’m surprised they have not used aborted fetuses as airplane or car crash subjects precisely to impose this false moral stigma to planes and cars.
I suggest that you try to explain how a test on any product after the fact has no impact on its morality. Use the example of a plane or a car or make up an example that you think will make more sense to the person you’re working with.
One last point. The “vaccines” are immoral, and would be immoral even if they were not tested on ‘aborted fetal tissue.’ The fact that they were developed with aborted fetal tissue – and that the manufacturers are trying to hide that fact – is not the only issue. Safety is also not the only issue. If the “vaccines” were developed without abortion, and if they were safe, they would still be immoral. It is immoral for government to use healthcare to control everyone and destroy any opposition to tyranny.
This point is relevant because – regardless of your decision to take the ‘jab’ or not – governments will continue to push the ‘jab’ mandate to create a passport and social credit type system. That would make us all slaves subject to the rule of sadistic criminals with power. The ‘jab’ must be fought to stop this without regard to whether the manufacturers used aborted fetal tissue.
Apologies for the long rant, but I saw your comment in my email inbox. I hope this helps.
*** God bless you and yours – and whatever happens, I hope you all will be well.
Well said!
If you get a chance can you email me that 7 page document of the list of medicines … also I am looking gif anything that shows synthroid medicine for thyroid is not tested with fetal cells lines .. thank you for doing all this research
Thank you, Jose …
*** God bless you and yours …
Hello, it appears more and more imminent that my employer is going to require all employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19, so I have three more drugs that I would like to know about if at all possible. They are: Crestor (Rosuvastatin), Losartan and Ezitimibe. It appears that all were approved post-1990, but I’m unable to determine if they were tested on an aborted fetal cell line. Also, if you’re able to e-mail me that seven-page document you referred to, I would certainly appreciate it! Thanks again for looking into these matters for us!
I take metformin. Just to confirm I will not have to stop taking this correct? According to this it was not subject to fetal cell use?
Jennifer,
Metformin was developed five decades before fetal cell lines were made available to the research community. It is simply not reasonable for anyone to claim that this drug was developed with aborted fetal cell lines. One should consider it ethically uncompromised.
Thank you for your helpful site. I have just been reading through various pages on your site and read this article ‘14 Medicines Fr. Matthew Schneider Claimed Use Aborted Fetal Cell Lines – But Do Not’. I have been trying to search and find out if Zofran (Ondansetron) was developed/ tested on any fetal cell lines as I understand it is a newer drug. I have spent some time searching online but can’t find the information. I thought I would email you to ask if you know, or whether you can point me in the direction of where to find that information? The other drug I was researching was Prednisilone, I understand it was developed and approved for use long before the fetal cell lines were used. During pregnancy I have been unwell with Hyperemesis Gravidarum (Excessive Vomiting) and have been dependent on medication to suppress the vomiting.
Zofran’s development, testing and manufacture are free of any association with abortion. A variety of animal models using nervous system tissues were used in the research, development and testing of ondansetron (Zofran). No fetal cell lines or tissue were used.
Thank you – wish I could get the comprehensive list
The comprehensive list is available here.