|
|
|
|
The practices and beliefs of various religious groups can
seemingly be in conflict with some of the components of some
vaccines. The information below touches on some of these
topics and provides links to articles/webpages expanding on
these issues.
Porcine-derived components
Some vaccines contain components with porcine origins.
Religions that oppose the use of pork products may have
objections. Information and links addressing these concerns
are below.
| |
Muslims:
·
“The
Gelatin formed as a result
of the transformation of the
bones, skin and tendons of a
judicially impure animal is
pure, and it is judicially
permissible to eat it.” 1995
decision by the Islamic
Organization for Medical
Sciences in English and
Arabic [link
to complete text]
|
| |
Jews:
·
Drugs of
Porcine origin are derived
from the Pancreas which, as
extracted, is not edible in
the food sense
[link
to complete text - see
page 27]
·
Excipients (non-active
ingredients in vaccines)
[link
to complete text - see
page 28]
|
| |
|
Gelatin:
if no alternative is
available, consumption of
gelatin is permitted because
it is being consumed in a
non-edible form
Lactose: this is also an
inedible form |
Aborted Fetuses
Two cell lines currently used in vaccines are derived from
selective abortions performed overseas in the 1960s; WI-38
from Germany in 1961 and MRC-5 from UK in 1966.
Many excellent and thoughtful papers have been
written on the ethics and religious aspects arising from use
of these human cell lines (see links below).
| |
Catholics:
·
“...as regards the vaccines
[containing WI-38 or MRC-5]
without an alternative, the
need to contest so that
others may be prepared must
be reaffirmed, as should be
the lawfulness of using the
former in the meantime
insomuch as is necessary in
order to avoid a serious
risk not only for one's own
children but also, and
perhaps more specifically,
for the health conditions of
the population as a whole -
especially for pregnant
women."
2005 Official
Document, Moral Reflections
on Vaccines Derived from
Aborted Human Foetuses
[link
to complete text]
·
“danger to the health of
children could permit
parents to use a vaccine
which was developed using
cell lines of illicit
origin, while keeping in
mind that everyone has the
duty to make known their
disagreement and to ask that
their healthcare system make
other types of vaccines
available.”
2008 Instruction
Dignitas Personae on Certain
Bioethical Questions
[link
to complete text - see
page 21]
|
| |
Christians:
·
“Using technology developed
from tissue of an
intentionally aborted fetus,
but without continuing the
cell line from that fetus,
may be morally acceptable.”
2004, Christian
Medical & Dental
Associations.
[link
to complete text]
|
Links to Relevant Articles
-
Christian
Medical &
Dental
Associations. Immunization
and
Potential
for Moral
Complicity
with Evil.
2005 [link]
-
Furton EJ.
Vaccines
Originating
in Abortion.
Ethics &
Medics
1999;24(3):3-4.
[link]
-
Grabenstein
JD. Where
Medicine and
Religion
Intersect.
Ann
Pharmacother
2003;37:1338-9.
[link]
-
Grabenstein
JD. Moral
considerations
with certain
viral
vaccines.
Christ Pharm
1999;2(2):
3–6. [link]
-
Mynors G,
Ghalamkari
H, Beaumont
S, Powell S,
McGee P.
Drugs of
porcine
origin and
their
clinical
alternatives:
an
introductory
guide 2004.
National
Prescribing
Centre. [link]
-
NNii. Human
Fetal Links
with Some
Vaccines.
2008. [link]
-
Pacholczyk
T. The
Morality of
Vaccinating
Our
Children.
2005.
National
Catholic
Bioethical
Center. [link]
-
Rudd G. Is
Vaccination
Complicit
with
Abortion?
Ann
Pharmacother
2003;37:1340-1.
available at
[link]
-
Wikipedia.
Vaccination
and
Religion. [link]
-
Zimmerman
RK. Ethical
analyses of
vaccines
grown in
human cell
strains
derived from
abortion:
arguments
and Internet
search.
Vaccine
2004;22(31-32):4238-44.
[link]
|
|
|
This page
was last updated on
October 03, 2011
© 2010
Institute for Vaccine Safety |
|
