Skip to main content

Childhood Vaccinations, The Moral Dilemma Comments

Hello everyone, and thank you for your comments on my blog about vaccines. I wish to share with you clarifications on several points. I will be writing about autism in a future blog, as it is such an important topic and deserves my main focus. Continue Reading

11 - 15 of 15 Comments

  1. MelodyRN
    1 year ago

    The last sentence in the first paragraph says it all- "Vaccinations has saved many lives and families."
    When researching the origins of vaccines and the manufacturing process, one must read the guideline the Pontifical Academy for Life issued that describes why it is permissible or perhaps even obligatory to use the vaccines. It's important to understand that these guidelines apply to Catholics across the globe, and are not limited to the United States

    In the guidelines and within pastoral explanations, it has been stated, "We find, in such a case, a proportional reason, in order to accept the use of these vaccines in the presence of the danger of favoring the spread of the pathological agent, due to the lack of vaccination of children. This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles/Rubella." The author in the article did an excellent job in explaining the need to vaccinate against measles- another virus prevented with the MMR vaccine is the german measles/Rubells virus. The Rubella virus is one of the most pathological infective agents for an unborn child. If a mother contracted the Rubella infection during pregnancy, the risk of fetal infection is 95%. The Pontifical Academy for Life describes a severe epidemic of German measles that occured in 1964 that caused
    -20,000 cases of congenital rubella
    -resulting in 11,250 abortions (spontaneous and surgical)
    -2,100 neonatal deaths
    -11,600 cases of deafness
    - 3,580 cases of blindness
    -1,800 cases of mental retardation

    All these effects of the virus are avoidable with the highly effective MMR vaccines. It is because of the efficiency at protecting the most vulnerable, that the Pontifical Academy allows individuals to use the vaccines despite the origin.

    Those who aim to prevent people from accessing these life-saving vaccines, despite the origin need to examine their intention and need to be ready to face the consequences of spreading misinformation, especially if their words are the catalysts of outbreaks that cause avoidable death and preventable suffering.

  2. AutismNewsBeat
    1 year ago

    Anne Dachel is a paid publicist for an anti-vaccine website associated with Jenny McCarthy's Generation Rescue. The group holds to the view that vaccines cause autism, a idea that medical science rejected years ago, and for which there is no credible evidence.

    Dachel intentionally misleads when she writes "Since 1986, (vaccine manufacturers) have had absolutely no liability for vaccine injuries." Drug companies can still be sued in civil court, but only after the cases are heard through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. Plaintiffs have a far better chance of succeeding through NVICP, where the standard of proof is far lower than in civil court.

    Of the 3,000 cases heard and compensated through NVICP, about 1,000 were for encephalopathy and/or seizure disorder associated with the old DTP vaccine. But it became clear 20 years ago that these conditions were genetic, and not associated with the vaccine. It is doubtful that many of those cases would have succeeded in civil court, where causality needs to be determined with scientific certainty.

    Dachel knows this, but continues to mislead. That's her job.

  3. Johanna Holmes
    1 year ago

    I really enjoyed this article. I wish that the MMR was not grown in fetal cell culture because it is unethical to do so, but the misinformation surrounding this vaccine is so pervasive. The way this vaccine is discussed one would think that MMR production depends on abortion remaining legal and performed in high numbers, and that's simply not true. Abortion could end today and we would still be able to protect the vulnerable against these diseases. Many people know of the threat that rubella poses to preborn babies, but fewer know about the risk that measles poses to babies before birth and their mothers. And these diseases are not gone. And they are not mild. They are a plane ride away from being a threat to every immunocompromised person, every child too young to be vaccinated, every pregnant mother. My faith demands on me that I stand with the weak and protect them. It is a large part of why I am pro-vaccine, and vocally so.

    The MMR has been demonstrated to be safe and effective. The principle of subsidiarity demands that we respect the autonomy of science. Scientific questions deserve scientific answers, and when I see misinformation on this topic it actually reminds me of when someone who is anti-Catholic says "Catholic Church Hates Women! Wants to Oppress Us All!" They're catchy slogans that sound plausible enough that they seem like they could be true, but when you go to the relevant experts involved, a far different picture emerges from the one being widely spread about.

    I would strongly urge all parents to ask the hard questions. That is the role of responsible mothers and fathers. But it's equally important to listen to the answer once a question is asked. I hope that every parent educates himself and herself on the benefits and risks of immunization using the best material available on the subject, and to do so with an eye towards charity. Calumny concerning the motivations of the men and women who work in the pharmaceutical industry is unworthy of any Catholic trying to examine this issue.

    God bless!

  4. Karen Ernst
    1 year ago

    Thank you for another reasonable post on immunization. As a pro-vaccine, faithful Catholic, I always appreciate a thoughtful discussion that includes both science and faith.

    I do hope that when parents read the Pontifical Academy for Life statement on the use of cell lines derived from fetuses, that they also pay attention to the footnotes as well, particularly footnote 15, which reads: "This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles, because of the danger of Congenital Rubella Syndrome. This could occur, causing grave congenital malformations in the foetus, when a pregnant woman enters into contact, even if it is brief, with children who have not been immunized and are carriers of the virus. In this case, the parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of foetuses, when they have been discovered to be malformed."

    Whatever choice we make has consequences. Before immunization, babies were aborted because their mothers were exposed to rubella. Now, however, we can prevent rubella as well as a host of other illnesses that have very real and quite devastating consequences.

    I implore parents to seek out sources of information that are accurate, and to remain skeptical about anti-vaccine sources (including--and especially NVIC) as they are not based in fact. The best source of information about vaccines is the pediatrician or physician who cares for and about your children. Rely on the experts, protect your children, and protect your communities.

  5. Anne McElroy Dachel
    1 year ago

    Moral Reflections on Vaccines Prepared From Cells Derived From Aborted Human Foetuses

    "Although the Pontifical Academy for Life has strongly condemned the development of vaccines from fetal tissues, the president of that Academy notes that parents may still be justified in having their children inoculated with such vaccines. "

    So in the end, there's no moral question for parents who have their kids vaccinated with vaccines derived from cells from aborted fetuses.

    Parent have to choose between a vaccination procured through human cells or no vaccination. This document said, "This is an unjust alternative choice, which must be eliminated as soon as possible." As soon as possible? This statement from the Catholic Church was issued in 2005. I don't think vaccine makers care. Why should they? Since 1986, they have had absolutely no liability for vaccine injuries. The few parents who actually have a case heard by the Court of Federal Claims are up against the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, not the people who produced the vaccine that injured their child.

    Even U.S. health authorities concede that only one to ten percent of vaccine injuries are ever reported.

    Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism

Leave a Comment

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment

Newsletter Sign Up

Saint of the Day

March 6 Saint of the Day

St. Colette
March 6: Colette was the daughter of a carpenter named DeBoilet at Corby ... Read More