Use of Aborted Fetal Tissue in Vaccines and Medical Research Obscures the Value of All Human Life

If it ducks like a quack: balancing physician freedom of expression and the public interest

Physicians expressing opinions on medical matters that run contrary to the consensus of experts pose a challenge to licensing bodies and regulatory authorities. While the right to express contrarian views feeds a robust marketplace of ideas that is essential for scientific progress, physicians advocating ineffective or dangerous cures, or actively opposing public health measures, pose a grave threat to societal welfare. Increasingly, a distinction has been made between professional speech that occurs during the physician-patient encounter and public speech that transpires beyond the clinical setting, with physicians being afforded wide latitude to voice empirically false claims outside the context of patient care. This paper argues that such a bifurcated model does not sufficiently address the challenges of an age when mass communications and social media allow dissenting physicians to offer misleading medical advice to the general public on a mass scale. Instead, a three-tiered model that distinguishes between citizen speech, physician speech and clinical speech would best serve authorities when regulating physician expression.

Religious Concerns About COVID-19 Vaccines: From Abortion to Religious Freedom

In the midst of the debate about vaccines against COVID-19 and vaccine mandates, there are a surprisingly large number of concerns coming from some churches centring on the dependence of some of the vaccines on historic abortions and limitations of freedom of choice. Although the ethical significance of separation between historic abortions and the vaccines has been widely accepted by most religious authorities, the pandemic has led to renewed concern by some. The emergence of vaccine mandates, with their potential negative impact on church attendance, has led some to oppose anything that would limit freedom of choice. Within this opposition is a medley of other messages, such as lack of trust in experts and human rights violations. Some regard vaccine passports as a form of 'medical apartheid' or 'therapeutic totalitarianism', coercing people's conscience. A countervailing perspective is provided by most church organizations that take a far more communitarian view based upon Jesus' teachings, identification with the poor and marginalized, and public health considerations. These Christians place far greater store on science as a gift from God, medical science as a means of transforming societies for good, and the potential of vaccines to control a rampant pandemic. Flexibility in imposing vaccine mandates is essential with onus placed on protecting the vulnerable, the community, and directed by the biblical precept of love for one's neighbour.

Development of Ethical COVID-19 Antibody Testing that Adheres to Pro-Life Principles

The use of cell lines derived from elective abortions in the development and production of COVID vaccines was opposed by the Catholic church who encouraged pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies to produce and distribute ethical vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for healthcare providers or those requiring vaccination. In response to the church’s call for ethical alternatives in research and development of COVID vaccines, we present an approach for the measurement of Anti–SARS-CoV-2 Ig antibodies in blood plasma (COVID-19 Antibody test) that does not utilize any products produced in aborted fetal cell lines. The SARS-CoV-2 RBD protein used in this test was produced in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells and test performance for determination of SARS-CoV-2 seroconversion was equivalent to a commercially available COVID-19 antibody test that utilized RBD protein and other reagents produced in embryonic cell lines.

Current status and legal/ethical problems in the research use of the tissues of aborted human fetuses in Japan

To date, there is no law regulating the research use of human aborted fetuses in Japan. The aim was to review the current status with historical background and legal/ethical problems limiting the research use of the tissues of aborted human fetuses. We reviewed literature via PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Japana Centra Revuo Medicina and CiNii, reports from various committees and research groups from Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW), and domestic books. Aborted human fetal tissues used for research purposes were first documented in the 1920s. The first guideline, the Peel Code was released in 1972. Since then, in Western countries, the research use of aborted fetuses has been less restricted compared with that of embryos, due to the following guidelines outlined by expert groups. Currently, aborted fetal tissues are commercially available for research purposes in the United States. In Japan, only four indications are presented in "a public statement permitting research use of deceased fetuses' and 'neonates' organs, etc." (1987). In the 2000s, expert committees of the MHLW concluded that research use of human aborted fetuses should be discontinued, and that comprehensive rules and independent regulations should be implemented. This issue has not been discussed in the Japanese legislature since 2003. Establishment of laws and guidelines for this issue is insufficient not only in Japan but also in other countries. It is important to secure transparency for making laws and guidelines and in obtaining public understanding.