http://www.dgwsoft.co.uk/homepages/vaccines/alternatives.htm
by Catherine
Williams
As parents strongly opposed
to abortion my husband and I were very concerned to learn that many childhood
vaccines are manufactured from the cell lines of aborted babies. We succeeded
in obtaining alternative polio, measles and mumps vaccines for our children,
but were told that no alternative rubella vaccine existed. During the mass
measles vaccination campaign in 1994 we did not allow our children to have the
Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine provided by the government. Our
children received instead a measles-only vaccine derived from animal cells. I
have continued to try to find alternative vaccines both from the UK and
elsewhere. I have recently obtained a rubella vaccine from Japan. Our own
children and eight others have recently received this vaccination. This vaccine
is derived from rabbit cells. Though widely used in Japan for fifteen years, it
is not licenced for use in the UK. However it can be obtained and administered
by GPs.
I am writing this article to provide the
information I have obtained to other concerned parents. With this information,
you will be able to determine whether the vaccines administered to your
children are derived from aborted babies, and to decide whether to seek out the
alternatives.
Some common vaccines, including the rubella component of all
MMR vaccines worldwide except Japan, are produced from cell lines produced from
the tissue of aborted babies. Two cell lines commonly used are MRC5 (Medical
Research Council 5) and WI-38 (Wistar Institute 38). MRC5 originates from the
lung tissue taken from a 14 week male fetus aborted for "psychiatric reasons"
from a 27 year old woman in the UK in the 1970s. WI -38 originates from a
female fetus aborted for "psychiatric reasons" in the 1960s. These
abortions were not done for the purpose of producing vaccines.
In general, those with objections to abortion will consider
any use of material from aborted fetuses to be ethically dubious. This is not
always taken as a conclusive argument against the use of these vaccines
(especially when no alternatives are available), but it is a serious
consideration for many Roman Catholics, Muslims, and members of other
religions, and of none, who are opposed to abortion.
We consider it unethical to use vaccines from fetal cell lines for the
following reasons:
Vaccines for viral diseases need to be grown on living
cells. Cell lines are often used. This involves taking cells from an animal or
aborted baby and growing them for many generations in a laboratory. Viral
infections for which vaccines are available include Measles, Mumps, Rubella (German
measles) Rabies, Hepatitis A, Yellow fever, Japanese encephalitis and
influenza. Vaccine production for bacterial infections does not involve cell
lines, human or animal. Bacterial infections for which vaccines are given
include Whooping Cough, Tetanus, Diphtheria,Typhoid, Tuberculosis and HIB.
The meningitis vaccine being given to
students is against meningoccocal strain C. This is a bacterial infection
and therfore is not grown on human or animal cell lines.
The following list of vaccines licensed and commonly used in
the UK are derived from fetal cell lines. See also US vaccine
information.
|
Vaccine |
Company |
Cell lines (Human fetal) |
|
|
|
|
|
MMR II (Rubella component) |
Pasteur Merieux MSD (RA27/3 strain) |
WI-38 |
|
Meales Mumps Rubella (Priorix) |
SmithKline Beecham |
MRC5 |
|
Rubella (Ervevax) |
Smithkline Beecham |
MRC5 |
|
Rabies (HDCV) (Imovax) |
Pasteur Merieux |
MRC5 |
|
Hepatitis A (Havarix) |
SmithKline Beecham |
MRC5 |
|
Hepatitis A (Avaxim) |
Pasteur Merieux |
MRC5 |
I have found alternative vaccines for the following
childhood and travel immunisations which are made from animal cell lines which
we consider to be ethical. This list does not include all ethical vaccines in
the world but only those from companies frequently used in the UK. The
alternatives are:
L= licensed UL=Unlicensed in the UK
|
Vaccine |
Company |
Source of cell line |
|
Polio L |
SmithKline Beecham |
Monkey kidney |
|
Measles ( Rouvax) |
Pasteur Meriux, France |
Chick Embryo |
|
Mumps (Mumpsvax) UL |
Provaccine, Switzerland |
Chick embryo |
|
Rubella UL |
Kitasato Institute, Japan |
Rabbit Kidney |
|
Rabies (RVA) UL |
Smith-Kline Beecham |
Rhesus monkey |
|
Rabies (Rab Avert) (PCEC) UL |
Chiron Berhing GmbH & Co. |
Chick Embryo |
|
Hepatitis A (Aimmugen) UL |
Chemo-sero-therapeutic Institute, Japan |
Monkey Kidney |
|
Yellow Fever (only vaccine licensed) L |
Aprilvax |
Chick embryo |
|
Japanese Encephalitis (JE-Vax) UL |
Pasteur-Merieux |
Chick embryo |
|
Influenza all brands L |
Wyeth labs, Pasteur-Merieux, SmithKline Beecham, Evans
Solvay Healthcare Ltd |
Chick embryo |
Note that the Kitasato Institute rubella vaccine is not
licensed for use in the UK at present. It is only Japan which uses animal cell
lines for rubella vaccine. All other vaccines in the world use fetal cell
lines. The Kitasato Institute has kindly agreed to supply their vaccine. They have
made it clear that no compensation is available outside Japan for any side
effects as a result of the vaccine in line with Japanese law. Your doctor can
obtain this vaccine by contacting IDIS World medicines in London.
IDIS have recieved permission to import this vaccine by the medical control
agency after a doctor from our campaign persauded them of the saftey and
effectiveness of this vaccine.
Your doctor must agree to take responsibility for injecting the vaccine and
must sign that he will make no claim against the Kitasato Institute. The
vaccine must not be passed on to a third party. As an unlicensed vaccine it is
only available on a named patient basis. This vaccine gives 98.9% immunity.
Side effects are rare and usually mild. They include joint pain, swelling of
the lymph glands or a rash. These disappear in a few days. There have been
reports of serious allergic reactions at around 1 in 100,000 cases. This is
probably due to gelatin allergy. In the fifteen years up to 1996 (the latest
time from which evidence is available) no serious complications were reported.
Full details of the vaccine are are available from IDIS or from us. We can
also supply sample patient consent forms for doctors.
procedure
for obtaining rubella vaccine
We have become aware that there is a treatment available to
non-immune women unfortunate enough to come in contact with rubella during
pregnancy. A handicapped baby or abortion are not the only options. This is
called Rubegam IM and is available from Natal Bioproducts Institute. The
manufacturers state "rubella immunoglobulin may afford some protection
against congenital rubella when used in pregnant patients who in the first few
in the first few months of pregnancy will not consider termination of
pregnancy." It is appalling that this seems to be offered as a last line
of defense only after a woman has considered abortion and is not initially
offered to all women at risk. Obviously the possibility that handicap could be
avoided would effect the mothers decision on whether to have an abortion. On
the dozens of internet pages devoted to rubella this treatment seems to be
either unheard of or ignored. Only two sites apart from the SAEPI site mention
it. The Merck manual states " Women exposed to rubella early in pregnancy
should be informed about the potential risks to the fetus, and termination of
pregnancy should be considered. Some authorities recommend administration of immune
globulin (0.55ml/Kg) for exposure early in pregnancy.? Another site Anti viral
therapy states ?Passive immunisation with anti-rubella immunoglobulin is used
in rare instances when therapeutic abortion is unacceptable and fetal
monitoring is possible." Many sites consider congenital rubella syndrome
to be the inevitable consequence of not receiving a vaccine. Although the
effectiveness of rubella immunoglobulin is doubted by some authorities it must
be worth trying. Also only 20-25 % of babies whose mothers contract rubella are
effected in any way and some cases are very mild and treatable. It seems that
abortion is recommended when mothers contract rubella even if four out of
five babies are totally healthy. Rubella immunoglobulin does not appear to be
available in the UK.
It is vital that women keep their immunity up to date with vaccination to
avoid the risks. We would hope considering the importance of the vaccine that
GPs and medical authorities would co-operate fully with requests for the
alternative animal cell line rubella vaccine from Japan.
The rabies vaccine used in the UK is immovax (HDCV human
diploid cell vaccine) produced by Pasteur Merieux from MRC5. This is also the
most widely used rabies vaccine in the USA. However also licensed by the FDA
(Federal Drugs Administration) are another human diploid vaccine DCO, a vaccine
from a cell line of fetal rhesus monkeys (above) and a vaccine grown on chick
embryo cells (PCEC). It should be noted that the human protein remaining in the
HDCV even after purification has been shown to produce an allergic reaction due
to an interaction with one of the other components in 6% of patients (reference
Michigan department of health). Therefore pre-exposure doses of this vaccine
are limited despite the necessity of keeping immunity up in those at risk. PCEC
also contains trace elements of human protein which have been reported to have
produced allergic reactions. PCEC is also cheaper and easier to produce than
HDCV according to the FDA.
It is possible to use unlicensed vaccines in the UK with the
agreement of your doctor (and probably his/her insurers). It is up to you and
your doctor to access any risk and take responsibility for using them.
However in 1999 the government wrote to chemists and drug importers forbidding
them from importing any alternatives to MMR except in special circumstances.
They did allow children who had started to finnish the course. Many
parents have gone to France in order to start the course. It is now
difficult to find a GP who will administer the single doses of
measles,mumps and rubella. There are a few doctors throughout the UK who have
managed to get supplies and are willing to administer them. These are mainly
private clinics.The vaccines that these clinics supply may not be the ethical
ones . I am currently trying to come to an agreement arrange for a London based
clinic to agree to import Rouvax, mumpsvax and Rubella Takahasi strain on
request.
The vaccines we have listed, apart from the Japanese rubella vaccine, are from
countries and companies frequently used and trusted in the UK. We have
suggested licensed products where possible unfortunately there are no licensed
alternatives for rubella, Hepatitis A and rabies.
The Government had been aware that many people are opposed
to vaccines from fetal cell lines since 1993 when MP Ann Winterton MP put down
a Parliamentary Question on the subject. This was answered by Tom Sackville. He
gave no new information, ruled out the labelling of vaccines produced from
fetal cell lines and stated "that a switch to the use of other materials
would cause major supply problems, probably for many years and the production
of rubella and hepatitis A vaccines would cease". He made no commitment to
encourage research into other materials or consider whether an ethical vaccine
could be obtained abroad.
Although this information was not publicised widely until it became of
general interest due to the Government's mass MMR immunisation campaign in
1994, the Government had been made aware of the problem over a year earlier and
should have anticipated pro-life objections and investigated other vaccines,
especially since there is no ethical objection to the measles component of the
vaccine. Our child received the measles only injection and some Catholic
schools provided only the measles inoculation rather than the MMR.
We understand that due to the concern expressed at the time of the measles
campaign Sir Kenneth Calman the Chief medical officer agreed to ask the
pharmaceutical companies to investigate alternative cell lines for Rubella
vaccine production but received no interest from the companies who consider the
current vaccine to be effective and relatively free from side effects. They are
presently under little financial pressure to change from using fetal cell
lines.
I hope by publishing which vaccines are made from fetal
lines and making people aware that there are alternatives the companies can be
encouraged to use animal cell lines in future vaccine development and even
change present vaccine production to animal cell lines if there is enough
consumer pressure. As can be seen from the above list the drug manufacturers
who make vaccines from animal cells lines also make other vaccines from human
fetal cell lines. There are no all good and all bad companies. If people
request the animal cell lines and tell the companies why they do not wish to
use the human fetal cell lines it is possible that one company could be persuaded
that there was mileage to be made out of switching to all animal cell lines. We
would be delighted to publicise any company that chose to take a moral line on
this.
I would also like to add that spokesmen for the Roman Catholic church only
said that use of the vaccine could be considered the lesser evil on the basis
that there were no alternatives available, and in the light of exaggerated
government predictions of a huge measles epidemic. I am sure that now a
suitable alternative has become available they will reconsider their statements
on the MMR vaccine.
The informaton in this article is now as up to date as I can make it, but I
will try to update it as neccessary. The information comes from a variety of
sources and I can not guarantee that it is correct, or has not changed. You
should check the suitability of vaccines with your own doctor and supplier. I
would welcome any assistance in keeping this list up to date. Please E-mail me
if you have trouble obtaining any of the vaccines. I would be pleased to
include any comments or corrections from drug companies.
Catherine Williams
catherine@dgwsoft.co.uk
When sending E mails please state what country you are writting from so that
we can give the correct information.
last updated 16 February 2001
References
*
New links providing evidence of the use of aborted babies in vaccine
manufacture.
For obtaining rubella, measles, mumps vaccines ...
IDIS World Medicines, Millbank House, 171-185 Ewell Road, Surbiton, Surrey KT6,
6AX United Kingdom 0181410070
for information on the abortions which produced the MRC5 and WI-38 cell
lines ...
Letter from C .Bolwell Product information Associate, International Medical
Affairs.
*The Wellcome Foundation. letter wellcome
*Also letter from Tom Sackville MP to Anne
Winterton MP, January 1993letter department
of Health
For information on currently available licensed vaccines ...
ABPI data sheet compendium published by Datapharm publications 12
Whitehall place London.
Hansard
Parliamentary questions house of Commons
For information on the cell lines used in their vaccines.
Personal communication with the following companies...
*Medeva International, Langhurst, Horsham, West
Sussex.letmed.htm
Smithkline Beecham Mundells, Welwyn Garden City, Hertfordshire, England.
Pasteur Merieux MSD Clivemont House, Clivemont Rd , Maidenhead, England.
Pasteur Mérieux
Connaught USA, Web site
The Kitasato Institute Research Center for Biologicals, 6-111 Arai, Kitamoto-city,
Saitama 364 Japan.
For information on vaccines available around the world ...
Minnosota
department of Health web site
For information on cell lines in various vaccines ...
South African
electronic products inserts.
For information on available rabbies vaccines...
Child secure web site
CDC
Wonder
Infectous
Diseases News
Chiron Web site
Morbidity
and Mortality weekly report Jan 16 1998
For information on Hepititis vaccines ...
ABPI data files compendium
South African
electronic products index Havarix
ISTM org website
Merck
Sharp and Dohme web site Vaqta hepatitis A vaccine
Rubella immunoglobulin ...
The
Merck manual
Anti
Viral therapy
US
vaccine information.
comming soon Canadian information
News
Back to Index
ALL INFORMATION, DATA,
AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION
PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR
OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING
MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN
IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN
CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.