The Dark Reality of Fetal Research and Harvesting

''If you are going to kill all these people, at least take the brains out so that the material may be utilized.''    

– Nazi doctor Julius Hallervorden, 1945

According to the National Institute of Health (NIH), human fetal tissue is defined as "tissue or cells obtained from a dead human embryo or fetus after a spontaneous or induced abortion or stillbirth.”  Fetal tissue most of the time refers to pancreatic or neural brain tissue (tissue from the cranial cavity). 

The first fetal organ transplant was performed in December of 1985 in Denver. Researchers Everett Spees and Kevin Lafferty transplanted fetal pancreatic tissue into the body of a 51-year-old diabetic. These cells began to produce the needed insulin for the patient. In 1988, researchers went further. Brain cells from an aborted seven-week-old baby were transferred to an adult patient for the first time, implanted in a 55-year-old male with Parkinson's disease by a surgical team led by Dr. Curt Freed and Dr. Robert Breeze at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. 

My first encounter with the reality of the harvesting of aborted babies started sometime after God opened my eyes fully to the matter of abortion itself. From sources such as LiveAction, I began to learn about this horrifying crime committed against babies, that not only were killed but were also subjected to experiments. But my knowledge flourished through Tommy Kearns, the father of little hero Clementine, who was aborted against his wishes (the mother regretted the decision right after it), and her organs were sold/harvested illegally for profit by the abortion facility in New Jersey. 

I couldn't believe it. How more evil can this industry get? And perhaps even worse, how is this allowed to happen in our society? By the government? By their neighbours, who should care for and protect them? We have failed and betrayed each other. 

So many questions. So much frustration and anger. But then, determination to do something about this, even in the smallest ways. God wants us to act. And we must do that while still loving those who support or even commit this horror. It is not easy, but that is why we need Him, why we must deny ourselves and let Jesus Christ increase in us and work through us.

Again, like with IVF and surrogacy, the methods are not questioned or justified, because something good, like a baby comes as a result, or/and the woman carrying the child receives benefits. Everyone's happy, and everyone gets what they want. As Guttmacher.org states:

''Medical research using human fetal tissue obtained from abortions has benefited millions of people worldwide and holds great promise for the continued advancement of basic science, as well as for the development of lifesaving vaccines and therapies. Since 1973, when abortion became legal nationwide, fetal tissue research has, time and again, become entangled in the abortion controversy. The current controversy—set off by a series of heavily edited and misleading videos—grew out of abortion opponents’ long-standing campaign to vilify abortion and abortion providers, and it now threatens fetal tissue research itself.''

But at what cost? 

This article will explore the following topics. Sources will be provided at the end, along with other educational materials to help expand our knowledge of this often-overlooked subject.

But before going forward, we must start by knowing the body systems most affected by the diseases that are allegedly ameliorated in those who receive fetal tissue transplants.

● Brain stem (The lower portion of the brain)

● Cerebellum (located forward of and above the medulla)

● Anencephaly ( Total lack of the cortex (upper brain), with lack of skull closure. Usually, the hypothalamus is malformed, and the cerebellum is rudimentary or absent. This condition includes the exposure of the cranial matter to the air and is almost always fatal within hours or days (about 75 percent stillborn, with mortality of birth survivors at 90 percent in the first week), but some anencephalic babies do live several years.)

● Hydranencephaly (the cortex (upper brain) is entirely replaced with spinal fluid. There is total or near-total hemispherical destruction. There is great ventricular (brain cavity) enlargement with little or no cerebral mantle. The brain stem, cerebellum, and basal ganglia are present but may be abnormal. Usually, the brain stem remains functional.)

● Hydrocephalus ( The obstruction of the normal accumulation or drainage of cerebrospinal fluid from its points of production to its areas of absorption, involving increased pressure in the head.)

● Microcephaly (Abnormally small head size, usually (but not always) associated with brain disease and/or mental disability.)

● Megalencephaly (The baby's head is enlarged due to abnormal enlargement of the brain.)

The ''Benefits''

Over 15 million Americans alone suffer from diseases and injuries that are believed could be helped by fetal tissue transplants, including Parkinson's Disease, Alzheimer's Disease, diabetes, head injuries, paralysis, etc. These are the conditions that pro-harvesting researchers focus on when they say that fetal transplants are necessary. Through millions of abortions, we can help others. This brings great joy to researchers, the medical world, and, of course, to many people suffering from the illnesses listed before. 

That is why Dr. Abraham Lieberman of the New York University Medical Center said:

"This [fetal tissue techniques] is to medicine what superconductivity is to physics."

The Reality

More than three-fourths of all studies in this area have concluded that fetal tissue transplantation benefits only a very few people: The scientists participating. Only a very few articles have described measurable improvement in symptoms related to neurological disorders, and most of these articles describe studies that are incomplete or flawed.

Dr. Robert J. White reviewed these studies and stated:  

"The clinical studies so far conducted in transplanting human fetal brain tissue into the cerebral hemisphere of patients with Parkinsonism have demonstrated little evidence of measurable, lasting improvement in neurological dysfunction."

Keith Crutcher, Ph.D., states the following:

My own research has been focused with the hope of providing some information that might lead to the relief of pain and suffering of individuals who suffer from neurological diseases. But that cannot be the ultimate guideline for all that I do ... If I have to rely on the death of another individual to extend the life of another, I reject it and I have done this very forcefully.

Evil disguised as good

Medical researchers who advocate for fetal harvesting and related experiments to find cures for diseases may encourage abortion in the first place. The logic follows: more abortions lead to more fetal tissue available for research, which they claim may increase the chances of finding medical breakthroughs. This mindset might even influence a pregnant woman considering abortion to think, “Well, if I go through with this, at least something good will come out of it.”

In the 1988 hearings before the National Institutes of Health, one pro-fetal organ harvesting researcher insisted that "There should be no attempts to influence the women's decisions about having an abortion or persuading them to donate the [fetal] tissue."

Later, the same researcher acknowledged the unworkability of this concept, saying that in Sweden, where fetal organ harvesting is common, "The reaction from most women is that they are encouraged that at least something 'good' is coming out of this invariably negative experience of having an abortion."

Or as Mary Ann Warren proposes in her "Can the Fetus be an Organ Farm?" Hastings Center Report, October 1978,  Warren not only endorses the practice of using the organs from the babies who are aborted because they were products of unintended pregnancies, but she also recommends that women become pregnant intentionally to grow babies for the sole purpose of harvesting their organs. This is the conclusion: Human babies must die to improve the quality of life for adults. 

Some physicians, like  Dr. Ralph DeGeorgio, resist this and fight back. And won't compromise on morality for the sake of convenience. As the doctor himself stated: 

"We must recognize why the use of human fetal tissue is being advocated in the first place: Precisely because it IS human.''

A fetus is a person. To obtain fetal tissue is to obtain the bodies or parts of preborn human beings. Many Pro-choicers/abortionists claim that a fetus isn't a human being (fetus in Latin means 'offspring'), but for these experiments, research to happen, we need human organs from humans. Contradictions left and right. 

And continuing this horrendous and immoral crime in the name of progress simply follows the belief that, in the name of progress, if any atrocity must be committed, it should be for the sake of progress. As if there is a worship done towards 'progress.' It has become above human dignity for some.

But it goes further. Many see no moral obstacle to using live, unanesthetized unborn babies in the name of progress.  In February 1987, in the issue of the Hastings Center Report, 'ethicist' Mary Mahowald and researchers Jerry Silver and Richard Ratcheson of the Case Western Reserve School of Medicine stated that using live babies for the same purposes ...'' is morally defensible if dead fetuses are not available or are not conducive to successful transplants."

Aborted preborn babies will inevitably become the victims, because rarely are miscarried and ectopic babies suitable. 

Frederick Bieber, a geneticist in Brigham and Women's Hospital's pathology department, examined the results of 1,025 miscarriages during a year and found that only 39 (3.8 %) produced a genetically normal baby that had not died two or three weeks previously and hence been unusable for transplantation purposes. Of these 39 babies, most were infected in some manner and hence unusable. 

During this same year, most of the babies who died as a result of 125 ectopic pregnancies that Bieber examined were also unusable for transplant purposes. This is why abortion is, and will be, encouraged even more, for the so-called ''greater'' good, if fetal research continues to be promoted.

''The Love Of Money Is the Root of All Evil''

In 2018, the NIH provided funding for 200 such projects involving fetal tissue at a total cost of $115 million. There is much effort and money spent to harm others rather than to care and help, like the pregnant mothers in difficulty or struggling families, for example. 

But read for yourself what this money helps to do:

Abortionists alter the abortion procedure so that they can obtain more intact fetuses or parts that are useful on today's fetal organ market. Abortionists have known that live-born aborted babies are more profitable than those who are aborted dead. Therefore, to profit from their crimes, they have altered their procedures so that aborted preborn babies are either kept alive or killed in such a manner that their organs are not destroyed in the process. 

The Fetal Pancreas Network, organized in 1984, recommends that the best 'abortion tissue' is obtained from 6-month babies killed by D&E abortion.

 Dr. Kurt Hirschhorn of New York's Mt. Sinai Hospital says that "With prostaglandins, you can arrange the whole abortion so the fetus comes out viable in the sense that it can survive hours, or a day."

The abortionists also assess "service charges" by providing dead unborn babies to labs that specialize in experiments requiring fetal tissue.  All of this is reported poorly in the mainstream media and prestigious medical journals, demonstrating the casualty of accepting this violation of a right every human possesses. The New England Journal of Medicine of May 18, 1972, reported that "Most of the babies delivered by the latter method [ hysterotomy or Cesarian section] were still alive when they were dropped into a tissue grinder to be homogenized." 

And according to the April 15, 1973, Washington Post, Dr. Gerald Gaull, Chief of Pediatrics at the New York State Institute for Basic Research in Mental Retardation, "... injects radioactive chemicals into umbilical cords of fetuses ... While the heart is still beating, he removes their brains, lungs, liver, and kidneys for study."

James S. Bardsley, president of the International Institute for the Advancement of Medicine, provides hundreds of pounds of fetal tissue annually to researchers. The company advertises for abortionists to use a specialized abortion suction technique that leaves the baby's head intact so the brain can be removed, and later used for experiments. 

They also advertise for the remains of second-trimester babies killed by dismemberment (D&E) rather than by salt poisoning, because in the D&E, the baby is still alive when the abortion begins, and the aborted tissue is much fresher in that way.

Greed of Profiting and Manipulation

The National Institute of Health tells us the following:

''Those who claim that fetal tissue research and transplantation are ethical offer several responses. First, in this nation, over 1.3 million induced abortions are performed each year. Hence, a plethora of fetal tissue exists. Second, under the proposed NIH guidelines, women will be informed about the option to donate fetal tissue only after they have chosen to abort.''

But Bardsley once again reveals the importance of the role privacy plays in this practice: "All too often, the woman is not even told that the tissue will be used for medical research."  

And as Tommy Kearns, father of Clementine, testifies:

''They asked her repeatedly if she was ready to schedule an appointment, in which she explained, "I don't have money." They told her not to worry because there were many women just like her who didn't have money and they had funding. They did not tell her that funding was going to be birthing our daughter alive and harvesting her organs.

Clementine's mother thought she was dying on the second day because of the amount of Misoprostol and Pitocin that was given to her. On the first day, they never mentioned fetal research or a fetal donation. Over the phone call, they never mentioned fetal research or donation. On the second day, they never mentioned fetal research or donation, so how were they able to take our daughter's body?''

''On the first day, Clementine's mother was under the influence of marijuana, and that's stated on the medical documents. You cannot sign a consent for any medical procedure while under the influence of any narcotic, so we have the evidence proving that the consent form for the abortion was void. On top of this, the consent form for fetal research was given to her on the second day, which is illegal and void. There is no date on this consent form. You cannot be given a consent form after a procedure has already begun.''

(Read his full testimony here)

This refusal is very telling. The abortionists know that women would reject the idea of having their babies torn apart. Like the mother of little Clementine. This is similar to the refusal to provide 'listening rooms' for pregnant mothers to hear their baby's heartbeat, because 9 out of 10, if not 10 out of 10, a mother would change her mind on abortion after hearing her baby's heartbeat. 

But as pro-abortion medical 'ethicists,' Marjorie Schultz has suggested, the doctors and companies may soon be making millions from selling fetal body parts, and the woman should be able to profit too.

And Harry Schwartz, a member of the New York Times editorial board, stated that "If a poor woman wants compensation for the use of tissue from her aborted fetus, by all means let her have it if someone needs that tissue and is willing to pay for it."

This is yet another potential way to exploit women through abortion. Some pro-choicers have even suggested that poor women should turn to "tissue breeding" as a replacement for welfare and workfare.

At the 1990 annual meeting of the National Medical Association in Las Vegas, Dr. Mark Evans seriously proposed that "... possibility of creating a new legal definition to permit physicians to declare anencephalic neonates 'brain absent' and therefore legally dead, so their organs might be harvested for transplantation."

The Hope Not Shown

Advances have been made in adult stem cell research and other non-embryonic avenues for repairing or replacing damaged organs and tissues. The field of "tissue engineering" using adult cells has exploded as researchers move toward rebuilding ears, tracheas, and hearts. (1) 

Adult stem cells have successfully treated hundreds of thousands of patients with cancer and leukemia, have repaired damaged corneas, restored sight to people who were legally blind, healed broken bones, and are being used to regenerate heart tissue damaged by a cardiac arrest. (2)

 Adult bone marrow stem cells were responsible for the first completely successful trial of human gene therapy, helping children with severe combined immunodeficiency disease to recover an immune system and safely leave their sterile environment for the first time. Adult cells from a young paraplegic woman's immune system, injected into the site of her spinal cord injury, have cured her incontinence and enabled her to move her toes and legs for the first time (3) – "generating hope for those with spinal-cord injuries around the world," as one news report states. (4)

Finally, adult pancreatic islet cells from cadavers have been used to reverse juvenile diabetes in fifteen patients. At the annual meeting of the American Diabetes Association, researchers announced that all patients benefited from the transplants, and nine have remained insulin-free for eight months, with some patients requiring no injections for up to two years. (5)

Considered by experts as a "remarkable advance," this breakthrough has also received enthusiastic attention from Lee Ducat, founder of the Juvenile Diabetes Foundation (JDF). "There's still a lot to be learned, but this is the most optimistic I've been in 30 years," she continues. "To take patients who are ill and going in and out of shock and give them a normal life... this is an unbelievable result. They say they never knew what feeling normal is all about." (6)

But as the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) states:

''Yet this good news has gone largely unnoticed by the current leadership of the JDF. Instead, the organization is focused on diverting funds toward a misleading ad campaign to persuade Americans to support killing human embryos for their stem cells.''

Summary of the Catholic Church's Response

Donum vitae highlights that the corpses of embryos and fetuses, deliberately aborted or not, “must be respected just as the remains of other human beings.” And in the case of adult corpses, “all commercial trafficking must be considered illicit and should be prohibited.”

Dignitas personae (2008), issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) with the approval of Pope Benedict XVI, states the following:

''The dignity of a person must be recognized in every human being from conception to natural death. This fundamental principle expresses a great “yes” to human life and must be at the center of ethical reflection on biomedical research, which has an ever greater importance in today’s world. The Church’s Magisterium has frequently intervened to clarify and resolve moral questions in this area. The Instruction Donum vitae [1987] was particularly significant. And now, twenty years after its publication, it is appropriate to bring it up to date.''

Donum vitae (focused more on the morality of assisted reproductive technologies and their impact on the dignity of marriage and protection of the human embryo), on embryo research, rejects the “principle of separation” that is the foundation of American and British public policy on FTR:

''The criterion of independence as it has been formulated by some ethics committees is not sufficient. According to this criterion, the use of “biological material” of illicit origin would be ethically permissible provided there is a clear separation between those who, on the one hand, produce, freeze and cause the death of embryos and, on the other, the researchers involved in scientific experimentation. The criterion of independence is not sufficient to avoid a contradiction in the attitude of the person who says that he does not approve of the injustice perpetrated by others, but at the same time accepts for his own work the “biological material” which the others have obtained by means of that injustice. . . . 

It is necessary to distance oneself from the evil aspects of that system in order not to give the impression of a certain toleration or tacit acceptance of actions which are gravely unjust.''

Conclusion

What also made me sad upon writing this article for you was the challenge I faced while searching for sources to provide for you, and widening my knowledge on this topic even deeper, but as I said, it was a challenge. The second source link you will find at the end of this article was the richest source. A lot of what I wrote today, the direct quotes and older sources, are from there. You will find the very original resources from them. 

I highly recommend continuing with the research, as I must do as well. This crime is done regularly, but very much in the dark, but it is an industry, or rather a crime, that is receiving positive responses. If we can dismantle the harvesting industry, this exploitation of murdered children, which enriches the abortion industry, the industry itself, can, through that, fall completely and hopefully permanently.

We can suffocate this industry with every act of courage we take for the defense of these little human beings, who are infinitely precious in the eyes of God, and if we remain faithful to our conscience, it should be precious to us as well. 

SOURCES

https://humanlifereview.com/fatal-tissue-the-horror-and-the-lure/

https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/fetal--newborn-organ-harvesting-respectable-graverobbing-9611

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6699036/

https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R44129.pdf

https://www.everycrsreport.com/files/20010810_RL31015_d452c9dbf0d9ed8e5c5a0f5442eb89e96ed8361e.pdf

https://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/stem-cell-research/human-embryo-research-is-illegal-immoral-and-unnecessary

https://www.cbhd.org/cbhd-resources/the-ethics-of-fetal-tissue-research-catholic-perspective

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20081208_dignitas-personae_en.html

(These sources are credited to USCCB, providing the original resources below (1-6))

- @clementines.voice is Tommy Kearns' Instagram, where many have joined to pray and fight for Clementine. Tommy also provides educational sources on this matter.

(1) G. Vogel, "Can Old Cells Learn New Tricks?", 287 Science 1418-9 (February 25, 2000) at 1419; L. Johannes, "Adult Stem Cells Have Advantage Battling Disease," Wall Street Journal, April 13, 1999 at B1.

(2) G. Kolata, "Parkinson's Research Is Set Back By Failure of Fetal Cell Implants," The New York Times, March 8, 2001, at A1, A12.

(3) R. Folkerth and R. Durso, "Survival and proliferation of nonneural tissues, with obstruction of cerebral ventricles, in a parkinsonian patient treated with fetal allografts," 46 Neurology 1219-25 (May 1996).

(4) A. Caplan and G. McGee, "Fetal Cell Implants: What We Learned," Hastings Center Report, May-June 2001 at 6.

(5) S. Stolberg, "Scientists Create Scores of Embryos to Harvest Cells," The New York Times, July 11, 2001, at A1.

(6) A. Regalado, "Experiments in Controversy," Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2001, at B1