In December, C-PLAN shared an informative presentation given by Catholic biologist Pamela Acker about the morality, safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines, and the tragic link between abortion and these treatments.
Subsequently and sadly, we have learned that another COVID-19 treatment, monoclonal antibodies (depending on the manufacturer) are also connected to abortion (though some are not). This is disheartening as many who have declined the COVID-19 vaccines, due to its link to abortion, may have hoped that monoclonal antibody treatments were an ethical alternative to abortion-linked vaccines.
This hope was also encouraged by some popular COVID-19 doctors and even pro-life elected officials who touted the antibodies’ benefits in helping to reduce severity of COVID-19 symptoms and perhaps save lives.
Regretfully, for most monoclonal antibody treatments there is a link to abortion, although there is at least one ethical version, and possibly others in development.
In a helpful and sobering article on January 11, Children of God for Life, the pro-life organization focused on ending aborted fetal cell research, provided documentation that sadly confirms most monoclonal antibody treatments could not exist without aborted fetal cells – just like the COVID-19 vaccines.
We encourage everyone to read their article and share with family and friends:
Children of God for Life notes that their list is not exhaustive and there are more antibody treatments in development (both with and hopefully without links to abortion).
Are there any ethical treatments for COVID-19?
With the ethical controversy surrounding COVID-19 vaccines and monoclonal antibodies continuing, this begs the question: Are there any ethical and early treatments for COVID-19?
In addressing the issue, C-PLAN should acknowledge that there is a vigorous (and often) heated debate or even divide currently occurring within the medical and scientific community over effective and early treatment for COVID-19. Many healthcare facilities and professionals adhere to, and have confidence in, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Food & Drug Administration’s (FDA) approved treatments and Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) recommendations to treat COVID-19, including vaccines. However, many of these treatments while holding promise may still be experimental and have ethical concerns (e.g. link to aborted fetal research).
Alternatively however, a growing minority of healthcare professionals such as those affiliated with America’s Frontline Doctors, Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, Truth for Health Foundation, or North Carolina Physicians for Freedom, have expressed concern over the government’s limited options for early COVID-19 treatments as well as its efficacy. Instead, these healthcare professionals have opted to prescribe long existing, generally safe and inexpensive medications on an off-label basis to try and treat COVID-19 patients in an early, outpatient setting to prevent severity or hospitalization. Some of these medications such as Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were developed without the use of aborted fetal research.
Critics of this alternative approach argue that there is a lack of extensive studies on these medications in successfully treating COVID-19. Supporters however have noted there is ample anecdotal and field evidence that these medications can and have been helpful in early treatment of COVID-19, preventing hospitalizations and even saving lives.
This has led to a clash, with some healthcare workers even being fired by hospitals or practices, or face losing professional privileges as a doctor in Houston recently encountered. This clash garnered the attention of U.S. Senator Ron Johnson who held an extensive 6-hour panel discussion in late January on the matter.
This divide among the medical and scientific communities is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.
While C-PLAN does not provide healthcare guidance, nor does it endorse medical treatments, individuals may wish to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified healthcare professional to learn more on this matter.
Questions to Ask
With COVID-19 vaccines, most monoclonal antibodies, and potentially new medical treatments tainted by aborted fetal research, it raises an important discussion point as well as questions for Catholics.
In her 1988 book, Beyond Abortion: A Chronicle of Fetal Experimentation, Suzanne Rini documented the pervasive and gruesome practice of aborted fetal cell research by the scientific community during the 1930s – 1980s. These barbaric practices which continue today often use “aborted” babies who are born alive and have their organs harvested while alive and without anesthetic. They die not from the abortion procedure but from having their organs removed. We can only imagine the horror these precious little ones felt in their first and only moments of life.
Considering this practice has been ongoing for 80-plus years and the financial incentives that drive it, barring a miracle, the situation is unlikely to change.
In closing, C-PLAN offers a few questions:
- What will it take for a local Catholic community and other people of goodwill to pressure the medical and scientific community to cease this barbaric practice and develop ethical medical treatments?
- Are writing protest letters to pharmaceutical companies – who engage in and profit from barbarism – really the only and effective option to convince these businesses to change course?
- Has the Catholic Church and her members truly leveraged everything they possibly have to put an end to this practice?
