Bishops Gung-ho on questionable COVID vaccine

You are not logged in as a Premium user; we rely on Premium users to support our reporting. Log in or register today!

WESTMINSTER, England (ChurchMilitant.com) – Bishops urge Catholics to receive the newly approved British COVID-19 vaccine despite the British Medical Journal (BMJ) expressing major concerns over questionable vaccine trials and the government’s own advice government against pregnant women having the vaccine.

In a statement released Thursday, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales (CBCEW) endorses the COVID-19 vaccine as “an important breakthrough in protecting yourself and others from the virus.”

Britain cleared the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine for emergency use on Wednesday.

The CBCEW statement allows Catholics to receive vaccines from aborted fetal tissue “provided there is sufficient moral distance between the present administration of the vaccine and the initial illicit action.”

The bishops’ statement fails to mention that Pfizer and BioNTech performed tests on aborted fetal HEK293 cell lines and only identifies the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine as “developed from cell lines from cells of an aborted fetus in 1983 . “

Bishop Richard Moth, chair of the social justice department of CBCEW, argues in the statement that a “vaccine is the most effective way” to “protect others from infection with its risk of serious illness and, for some , of death”.

Cast doubt on vaccination

However, BMJ’s research expressly disputes Moth’s claims, pointing out that “none of the trials currently underway are designed to detect a reduction in any serious outcome such as hospitalizations, intensive care use, or death.”

Forcing people to have a rushed and poorly tested vaccine is a brewing future health crisis.

“Vaccines are also not being studied to determine whether they can interrupt the transmission of the virus,” writes Dr Peter Doshi, deputy editor of the BMJ and associate professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the School of University of Maryland pharmacy.

“The truth is, the science remains far from clear, even for influenza vaccines that have been in use for decades,” Doshi warns. “History shows many examples of serious adverse events due to vaccines released to the market under times of enormous pressure and waiting.”

According to Doshi, “the results [of vaccination] reflect a time point relatively soon after vaccination, and we know nothing about vaccine performance at 3, 6, or 12 months, so we cannot compare these efficacy figures with other vaccines such as vaccines against influenza [which are judged over a season]. “

“It’s hard to avoid the feeling that the sponsors are claiming victory and finishing their trials and [U.S.] The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will now come under enormous pressure to quickly authorize vaccines, ”the researcher laments.

The truth is, the science remains far from clear, even for influenza vaccines that have been used for decades.

The prestigious scientific journal Nature has confirmed that the UK’s approval is based on data from only 170 infections and “none have been shown to completely prevent infection or reduce the spread of disease in a population” .

Thus, “those who are vaccinated could remain susceptible to an asymptomatic infection and could transmit this infection to others who remain vulnerable,” observes Nature, quoting Leeds University virologist Stephen Griffin: “In the worst case scenario, people are walking around fine, but spreading the virus everywhere. “

The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) announced on Wednesday: “Women should be advised not to be vaccinated if they are pregnant or planning to become pregnant within three months of the first dose.

Given that “data on adolescent vaccination are very limited, with no data on vaccination of younger children, at this time”, the JCVI indicated “that only children at very high risk of exposure and outcome severe, such as older children with neuro-disabilities who require residential care should be offered vaccination. “

The CBCEW statement does not sufficiently educate Catholics about the potential dangers of the vaccine even though, according to anthropologist Karen Harradine, “forcing people to have a rushed and poorly tested vaccine is a brewing future health crisis.”

In accordance with European Union law, vaccine manufacturers will enjoy legal immunity from claims for damages for any side effects.

The Charlotte Lozier Institute has provided detailed information on the use or non-use of aborted derived cell lines in the creation or testing of COVID-19 vaccines.

Let “ conscience ” dictate

The bishops advise Catholics to educate their “conscience about it and decide what to do,” noting that “Catholics can in good conscience receive any of these vaccines for the good of others and for themselves.”

“In good conscience, we can refuse a particular vaccine, but we continue to have the duty to protect others against infection,” concludes the CBCEW.

— Campaign 31877 —

Got a news tip? Submit news to our advice line.

We rely on you to support our reporting. Please donate today.