I read on Facebook recently about how ‘The’ Vaccine had questionable ethics. By questionable I mean using aborted foetal tissue. Since the pressure is going to be on to take the vaccine whatever its ethical implications I thought it might be a good idea to find out if the claim made on Facebook is true or not. Well, I am no scientist, so I decided to look at the website of someone that I know is.
John regularly writes on ethical issues and more importantly is a scientist. John posts updates on these things so his website was my first port of call. His latest update was in October and he assures me there will be further updates. If you go to John Ling’s Updates page (click on the yellow marquee in the top left-hand corner) it will help with the other links that I’ll give.
Next I visited the CMDA (Christian Medical & Dental Associations) website and read the article Ethical Science at Warp Speed by David Prentice. This in turn led to the following helpful charts – which, as I say, make more sense if you read John’s October update first.
This CHART from the Charlotte Lozier Institute goes through the current vaccine research and shows origins and testing. I thought it was helpful. Last updated, at the time I post this, was November 11th.
Finally this Fact Sheet, again, from the Charlotte Lozier Institute.
These issues aren’t always quite as straightforward as we’d like them to be and we still need to know more. As John says Christians will inevitably disagree over some of these things. The vaccine is being rolled out soon, so whether we (Christians) decide to take the vaccine or not, we should try to be informed about our decision.
I also read that, apparently, atheists are praising the god of science for the vaccine. We aren’t anti-science and we should remind ourselves that if God had not created the world with order science wouldn’t even be possible. So we might want to thank the scientists, but we also thank The Lord of all creation for giving the gift of science at all.
Dilemmas arise when new vaccines are introduced during epidemics and imminent risk, as was the case in SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) or Ebola (Ebola haemorrhagic fever) and the new Covid-19 infection. These dilemmas, whilst applicable to the population at large, are particularly challenging in case of pregnancy because of the unknown and unquantifiable fetal risk. Women who are unable or unwilling to follow clinical advice may place themselves and, in-turn, their babies at some risk. Whether non-concordance is voluntary can influence perception of moral agency. The status of pregnant women and unborn babies and the concern, interest or support afforded to them by society has changed over time and will necessarily continue to evolve in response to cultural and economic factors.