University of Pittsburgh’s Organ Harvesting Practices Include Racial Quotas for Minority Babies
Earlier this year, an investigation revealing that researchers were grafting the scalps of aborted babies onto mice to create “humanized mice” was released; in May, David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress went on Tucker Carlson Tonight to discuss the grotesque research being done on aborted babies by the University of Pittsburgh with funding from Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH). . . .
We have known about the experiments at the University of Pittsburgh for some time. What we are just finding out is that researchers harvested organs from aborted babies who were still alive.
FOX News is now reporting on the fact that the university received millions of federal dollars for the tissue bank that harvested “heart, gonads, legs, brain” from aborted babies. In an attempt to defend their research, the University of Pittsburgh confessed that when they referred to “ischemia time” in their grant application to the National Institutes of Health “refers to the time after the tissue collection procedure.”
According to the Center for Medical Progress: “Ischemia starts when the organ (the kidneys primarily in Pitt’s GUDMAP project) is cut off from blood circulation. The NIH defines ischemia as ‘lack of blood supply to a part of the body.’ The University states the fetal organs do not undergo ischemia—lose their blood supply—until ‘after the tissue collection procedure’. This means the organs are still receiving blood supply from the fetal heartbeat during the ‘tissue collection.’”
David Daleiden responded to the news by releasing a statement: “Pitt is now admitting to news media that the aborted babies are still alive at the time their kidneys are cut out for NIH grant money. Pitt’s grant application for GUDMAP advertised this to the federal government and that labor induction abortions, where the baby is pushed out of the mother whole, would be ‘used to obtain the tissue.’ The plain meaning of the GUDMAP grant application, and the University of Pittsburgh’s statement today explaining it, is that Pitt and the Planned Parenthood abortion providers responsible for its ‘research’ abortions are allowing babies, some of the age of viability, to be delivered alive, and then killing them by cutting their kidneys out.” Pitt
Comment on Reproductive Ethics
"This is a public interest group focusing on ethical dilemmas surround human reproduction, particularly the new technologies of assisted conception."
Do Not Harm: The Coalition of Americans for Research Ethics
"Stem cell research promises great good and is a worthy scientific priority as long as we pursue it ethically. Obtaining stem cells from people without seriously harming people in the process can be ethical. This website recommended by the USCCB."
Bioethics of Experimental Vaccine Deployment
The suppression of information, discussion, and outright censorship concerning these current COVID vaccines which are based on gene therapy technologies cast a bad light on the entire vaccine enterprise. It is my opinion that the adult public can handle information and open discussion. Furthermore, we must fully disclose any and all risks associated with these experimental research products.
Hands Off Our Ovaries
"This organization is concerned about the adverse effects of bio-technological research and development on women. Sadly, here have been too many instances of coercion and deception and violations of informed consent."
- Bioethics has long shaped policy concerning end-of-life decision-making, which involves numerous choices about what treatments to administer, taper off, cease, or withhold.
- Traditionally, ethicists have considered patients’ wishes to be paramount.
- Patients can express their wishes for end-of-life care in advance directives such as living wills, which are legally binding in all 50 states.
- Some bioethicists now believe that other interests should be considered in end-of-life decision-making, such as the wishes of family members and others who are close to the patient.
- Another challenge to long-held ethical views on end-of-life care is coming from new findings in neuroscience —specifically, evidence that a “permanent vegetative state” may not always be permanent, suggesting that treatment in such circumstances may sometimes not be futile.
National Catholic Bioethics Center
The Center promotes the dignity of each human being from conception until natural death by helping those involved in health care to understand how the moral teachings of the Church apply in contemporary situations.
Pontifical Academy for Life
The Academy’s purpose is the study, information, and formation on the principal problems of biomedicine and of law, relative to the promotion and defense of life in the direct relation that they have with Christian morality and the directives of the Church’s Magisterium.