In the wake of announcements from
multiple pharmaceutical companies about safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines,
many are expressing ethical doubts about whether it is OK to take these
vaccines. Do
Catholics have a moral duty to decline an inoculation if it was unethically
produced using a cell line that came from an abortion?
The short answer is
“no.” This has been discussed and explained in several magisterial church
documents in recent years.
In 2008, for example,
the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith reminded us in the instruction “Dignitas Personae” that: “Grave reasons may be morally proportionate to justify the use of such
‘biological material.’ Thus, for example, 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 health care system make other types of
vaccines available.”
For a serious reason,
therefore, Catholics may receive a COVID-19 vaccine having an association with
abortion, and a serious reason could include a threat to one's health and well-being.
Those who are elderly or who face comorbidities like diabetes, obesity or other
significant health conditions are among the highest risk groups for adverse
outcomes from infection, and would clearly have a serious reason.
Included below is
information comparing some of the COVID-19 vaccine candidates that may become
available in the U.S. in terms of their association with abortion-derived cell
lines, helpfully collated by the Charlotte Lozier Institute and alphabetically
arranged:
Company/Sponsor | Abortion-Derived
Cell Line Used in Vaccine Development/ Production? | Abortion-Derived
Cell Line Used in Vaccine Lab Testing? |
“Ethical
Profile” |
Altimmune
|
Yes
|
?
|
Poor
|
Arcturas Therapeutics
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
AstraZeneca/University
of Oxford
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Very Poor
|
Immunity Bio &
NantKwest
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Very Poor
|
Inovio Pharmaceuticals
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
Janssen Res/Johnson
& Johnson
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Very Poor
|
Merck and IAVI
|
No
|
?
|
Good
|
Moderna
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
Novavax
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
Pfizer/BioNTech
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
Sanofi & GSK
Protein Sciences
|
No
|
?
|
Good
|
Sanofi
Pasteur/Translate Bio
|
No
|
Yes
|
Good
|
Sorrento [“T-viva-19”]
|
No
|
No
|
Very Good
|
Univ. of Pittsburgh
|
Yes
|
?
|
Poor
|
Vaxart
|
Yes
|
?
|
Poor
|
Vaccines from Moderna
and Pfizer are likely to be among the first to receive emergency approval in
the U.S., and do not rely on cell lines from abortions in the manufacturing
process. As such, they appear to be good candidates for Catholics to use. There
is a problem that a cell line from a 1972 abortion was used to carry out some
ancillary testing of those vaccines, but the fact that zero material derived
from any cell line from an abortion is present in these vaccines, that is to
say, inside the syringe which actually jabs the patient, is sufficient in the
minds of most to assuage any concern over using them, even if problematic
laboratory testing may have taken place along the way.
If we end up facing a
choice among multiple COVID-19 vaccines of similar or equal safety and
efficacy, as appears likely, it will clearly be preferable to choose
alternatives with a better ethical profile, i.e. those not associated with, or
less associated with, material derived from abortions.
Suppose, however, that
two new vaccines both appeared to be safe during clinical trials. The first
vaccine had no association with abortion, but was only 35 percent effective at
protecting from COVID-19, while the second was more than 90 percent effective,
but was manufactured using a cell line derived from an abortion. In such a
case, again, we could choose the significantly more effective version for the
serious reason of danger to our health.
Relying on cell lines
from abortions to manufacture a COVID-19 vaccine provokes strong moral
objections and some can and will refuse the vaccines on these grounds. While it
is a personal decision of conscience as to whether or not to accept a vaccine,
it is important to be clear that the church, for her part, does not require us to decline it on such grounds
in the face of serious reasons, as in the situation of an elderly person or
someone with multiple health issues who faces significant risks if they were to
contract COVID-19. This fact, of course, in no way absolves or diminishes the
serious wrongdoing of those who used cell lines from abortions to make vaccines
in the first place.
Any time we decide to
receive an unethically produced vaccine, moreover, we should push back. We need
to do our part in applying pressure on the manufacturer, perhaps by sending an
e-mail indicating our objection to the fact that their vaccine was produced
using ethically controversial cell sources, and requesting that they
reformulate it using alternative, non-abortion-related cell sources.
Alternatively, we might write a letter to the editor of our local paper
pointing out the injustice of being morally coerced to rely on these cell
sources, or take other steps to educate and inform others.
Such efforts help expand
public awareness of the problem and apply real pressure for change. Such
efforts can be more effective (and require more authentic determination on our
part) than merely “digging in our heels” or “taking a stand” and refusing to
get vaccinated, which has the negative effect of subjecting us, and others
around us, to heightened risk from various diseases.
While
it is too early to know which COVID-19 vaccines will end up becoming available
in the U.S., the pandemic is certain to elevate the profile of abortion-related
ethical concerns among the public to a degree not previously seen, offering a
unique opportunity to push for the elimination of these cell lines from future biomedical
research and pharmaceutical development projects.
Fr.
Pacholczyk, a priest of the diocese of Fall River, Mass., serves as the director
of education at The National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia.