Home » Vaccine Misinformation » Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?

Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?

Why do anti-vax folks think that MRC-5 is the name of an electively aborted baby boy who is an ingredient in vaccines?

MRC-5 is the name of a cell line that is used to make some vaccines.
Since many think that we have a “moral obligation to protect the life and health” of our children and those around us, what does that make those folks who use propaganda to scare parents away from getting their kids vaccinated and protected.

Of course…

Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?

So what’s the real story?

MRC-5 is a line of human diploid cells that are used to make some vaccines.

“The second human cell line is MRC-5 (Medical Research Council 5) (human, lung, embryonic) (ATCC number CCL-171), with human lung fibroblasts coming from a 14 week male foetus aborted for “psychiatric reasons” from a 27 year old woman in the UK. MRC-5 was prepared and developed by J.P. Jacobs in 1966 (J.P. Jacobs et al, 1970).”

Vatican Statement on Vaccines Derived From Aborted Human Fetuses

And despite what the sign implies, vaccines do not contain aborted fetal tissue or fetal parts.

The original MRC-5 cells aren’t even involved in making vaccines anymore. The cells used today have been copied, over and over again.

They are descendant cells, which is why a common way to explain all of this is to say that vaccines are said to have a “distant association with abortion.”

“It should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”

The Question of Parental Rights and Mandated Vaccinations

And even then, the cells are removed before the final vaccine is produced.

“Many Catholic experts concur that cooperation today is not really possible in an event that was over and done with many years ago. Because the abortion occurred long ago, and for reasons completely unrelated to vaccines, it is untenable to conclude that vaccine recipients today somehow cooperate in the original abortive event.”

The Morality of Vaccinating Our Children

So what about MRC-5 cells is keeping you from vaccinating and protecting your kids?

Vaccines are safe, with few risks, and are obviously necessary, preventing millions of deaths each year.

Don’t let someone holding an anti-vax sign to scare you away from making the right choice to vaccinate and protect your family.

More on MRC-5

3 thoughts on “Is MRC-5 the Name of an Electively Aborted Baby Boy?”

  1. How do I know your not lying?
    Just because you say so, I want more proof.
    Your word is not enough.
    There have been too many lies. Get honest.

  2. I just noticed that you misspelled Iatrogenic. You spelled it with an L instead of an I. Doctors should know that – and I’ve had two doctors confirm that after effects of medications produce diverse symptoms loosely called Iatrogenic results. Usually, one medication produces sufficient ‘side effects’ for long enough to create a different medical condition requiring medication. So how wonderful is that!! Perhaps you can explain the increase in vaccine schedules in the past 15 years. Where I live, the schedule consists of 36 vaccines in groups of 6 or 7 before an infant is 18 months of age. My children maybe had 4. I maybe had 2. Still alive, thriving and not as sickly as the protected vaccinated population. I am not against vaccines. I am against propaganda FOR EXTREME VACCINATION SCHEDULES without substantive evidence of the need. We are a first world country using a more aggressive approach than some third world countries. Since you spend so much time defending the Vaccinate or Else propaganda, please explain this. Thanks

  3. 1. “distant association with abortion.” – so you’re implying that a “distant” association with murder is OK? I don’t believe God would agree with this. Is/should there ever be a statue of limitations on murder?

    2. “The original MRC-5 cells aren’t even involved in making vaccines anymore. The cells used today have been copied, over and over again.” – So what? Could these vaccines have been made without murdering an unborn baby? If I steal something and make a copy of it, does than excuse the original crime – or profits therefrom?

    Your implied assertion that the end justifies the means is deplorable, unethical, and most importantly, evil.

    I will never willingly take a vaccine to save my life or anyone else’s when it comes by the murder of someone else – especially a defenseless baby.

    If you are questioning whether you should get a vaccine derived at any stage from someone that was killed, listen to your conscience and don’t be complicit in the murder-for-profit big pharma companies push with their propaganda through websites like this.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: