One woman's journey on a medical question

I urge you to read this post from Leila Miller, on her honest and self-accusing look at how she came to face the moral and political issues surrounding the question of vaccination, something that, as a person close to many medical professionals, she took for granted as being good and trustworthy. She writes:

My first child was born in 1991, and I did not hesitate to vaccinate her on schedule, just as I did with the next two children. About a year after my third child was born, the chickenpox vaccine came out to much fanfare, and I remember hesitating about that one. I wondered why it was such an important inoculation, because all of my generation had gotten chickenpox, and it was really not a big deal (aside from the itch)...

... As the years went by, all my children received all their shots on schedule—until the HPV vaccine (GARDASIL) came out. That one was a game-changer for me, as I was finally willing to reject one of the recommended vaccines. An injection to prevent a sexually-transmitted virus that might cause a highly curable cancer was a bridge too far. The hype around it did not make sense to me. I was not alone in questioning the shot, and several other pro-vaccine friends refused it for their children as well. 

... [however,] I still sat in judgment of a couple of friends who didn’t want their kids to get any shots. I had less judgment for those who were on a “delayed schedule,” but I still thought their caution was unnecessary. The “crunchy” Catholics, I admit, made me roll my eyes. Sure, reject the shots dealing with sexual transmission. I get that. But measles? Measles was making a comeback! We needed to be smart and sophisticated, not rubes and ignoramuses. 

I believed that the “anti-vax” sentiment was dangerous to society.  

... But there was always something bothering my conscience. Throughout all the years of vaccinating my eight children (and all ten of us getting our flu shots every year), there was an underlying ethical issue that I tried—mostly successfully—to ignore. .. that most vaccines in use were morally compromised, as they were produced by using the bodies of aborted human children. In other words, produced via a sophisticated cannibalism. I also learned the Church’s stance on the use of those abortion-tainted vaccines, namely that if there is only “remote material cooperation” involved, the shot may (not must) be taken. However, for a Catholic who makes the decision to take the shot, there is a moral obligation to speak out, to object, to demand the creation of an ethical alternative, and to make it difficult for the pharmaceutical companies to continue to make unethical vaccines. 

...  And then it was just a few years ago, probably a year or two before the Covid cult and vaccine idolatry, that my dear friend Leila Marie Lawler (the “other Leila”) started telling me that certain blue states were working to make it illegal for parents to opt out of vaccines for their children. Parents’ rights would be stripped, and no religious or conscience exemptions given for those enrolling in public schools. She gently warned me that power was changing hands from the parent to the state, and I needed to get on this bandwagon, and quickly. Once this blow against freedom and parental rights was enacted, there would be no going back... 

... With horror, I understood the obvious implications, and then I proceeded to … hide my head in the sand. I did nothing and said nothing publicly. It disturbed my peace to think about it, so I pulled a Scarlett O’Hara: I’d think about it another day. 

Read the whole thing

And when you have finished, I ask you, beg you, to watch the seven-minute video embedded here, especially if you doubt the moral centrality of the use of aborted baby cells in the research and development of these products (and more). Watch the body language of Stanley Plotkin, "godfather [sic] of modern vaccines." Watch his hands and eyes when he says this, if you are sure that the use of aborted babies in medical products is safely in the past:

The Catholic church has actually issued a document on that which says that individuals who need the vaccine should receive the vaccines regardless of the fact and that, uh, that I think it implies that I am the individual who will go to hell because of the use of aborted tissues, which I am glad to do. (emphasis added)

 

4 comments:

  1. Oh, my GOSH. What a thing, spelled out clearly. After watching the video, I did a search on Stanley Plotkin and came up with something from the British Medical Journal, Dec. 2019, and this was a part of it:
    " This is not just a UK matter. We urgently need an international system and ethos which ensures that people involved in healthcare, and influencing health policy, properly disclose their conflicts of interest, including a history of their conflicts of interest."
    It seems too late for this way of thinking to gain any more ground. Anyway, I'm going to pass this video and transcript around!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very powerful pieces, from both Leilas. Maybe the hardest thing to come to terms with about our times is the true depth and breadth and height of the corruption we are living in. Yet we will not find our way out of this pit until we do.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I watched the entire video of Stanley Plotkin quite a while ago when I was first starting to opt out of vaccines for my children. If I remember correctly (and I could be wrong) there is a part where he talks about using orphaned and mentally handicapped children in the experimentation of the vaccines. I think this would be very morally problematic as well!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, yes, here is a transcript:
      https://pakistan.shafaqna.com/EN/71652

      Delete