Archive for fetal tissue research

Human-animal hybrid research combine to make Chimeras

Posted in Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR), Animal Human Hybrid, Chimeras, fetal research, Fetal Stem Cell, Fetal Tissue with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 7, 2018 by saynsumthn

Chimeras become a reality in disturbing new human-animal hybrid research

chimeras

Recently, scientists have made breakthroughs in the creation of human-animal hybrids known as chimeras(ky-MEER’-ehz), or a mix of human cells with an animal host. Nature.com explained, “To create chimeras, scientists generally inject pluripotent stem cells — which can become any type of organ — from one species into the early embryo of a second species.”

According to Science Alert, the term comes from “a legend in Greek mythology, describing a monster which was often depicted as a lion with a goat’s head sticking from the side of its neck, and a snake for a tail.”  A 2011 report from UK’s Academy of Medical Sciences notes that “human cells used to create chimeras can be taken with appropriate consent directly from early embryos (e.g. surplus from IVF treatments), aborted fetuses, or a live-born person (e.g. human liver cells, or a cancer biopsy) or from cultured human cell lines.”

Recently, Live Action News reported on how the FDA is contracting with Advanced Bioscience Resources to obtain fetal parts for experiments involving “humanized mice”. The contract states, “ABR is the only company that can provide the human fetal tissue needed to continue the ongoing research being led by the FDA. Fresh human tissues are required for implantation into severely immune-compromised mice to create chimeric animals that have a human immune system.”

Image: FDA Chimeric fetal tissue research

FDA Chimeric fetal tissue research

Live Action News consistently reports on the ethics of using aborted fetal parts for ghoulish experiments:

  • Videos from the Center for Medical Progress showed Planned Parenthood staffers haggling over the price of aborted baby body parts.
  • In the 1970s, aborted babies were being used for medical research funded by taxpayers at the EPA.
  • Experiments on aborted children date back to the 1930’s, including a number of experiments on living abortion survivors.
  • The National Research Act established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research, was chaired by Kenneth John Ryan, MD, who taught abortions.
  • Taxpayers have funded millions of dollars for human fetal tissue experiments for years through the National Institutes of Health (NIH), estimated to spend $103 million in FY2018 and $95 million in FY2019. It is unclear which of those studies include more ethical sources of tissue other than tissue from aborted fetuses.
Image: Human fetal research NIH estimates updated

Human fetal research NIH estimates updated

In 2016, NIH announced plans to rescind their moratorium forbidding federal funding of human/animal chimera embryo research. Alan Moy, M.D., CEO of Cellular Engineering Technologies and scientific director of the John Paul II Medical Research Institute, opposes the mixing of species.

Image: Objection to animal human chimera research

Objection to animal human chimera research

And, although it is unclear whether the controversial research uses human adult or embryonic tissue or cell lines, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops objected to the “problem of exploiting human embryos as cell factories for research”.

NPR report also expressed ethical concerns. “One issue is that scientists might inadvertently create animals that have partly human brains, endowing them with some semblance of human consciousness or human thinking abilities,” the report read. “Another is that they could develop into animals with human sperm and eggs and breed, producing human embryos or fetuses inside animals or hybrid creatures.”

George DaleyDirector of Stem Cell Transplantation at Samuel E. Lux Children’s Hospital Boston, who presented at a 2015 NIH workshop on “animals containing human cells,” argued that, “Humanized mice have been essential for cancer research.”

Image: Humanized Mice Chimeras

Humanized Mice Chimeras

But Daley also admitted that even scientists had concerns about “the chimerizing of human cells with non-human primates over mice.” “[W]hat is the plausibility, with which a human cell would fundamentally change the nature of the animal host?” he asked.

Image: NIH Workshop concerns over chimerizing embryos

David Resnik from the Netherlands Institute of Health Sciences (NIHES) (6:06:16) pointed out that the “potential to humanize an animal’s brain” may cause the public to become uncomfortable, because “science moves fast… the specter of an intelligent mouse being stuck in a laboratory somewhere screaming ‘I want to get out’ can be very troubling to people… ”

“The public can change it’s mind just like that as we saw; the videos of… the abortion clinics… can have a tremendous impact on the public… “

In a January 2017 paper published in the journal Cell, scientists at the Salk Institute reported a breakthrough in “generating human cells and tissues in early-stage pig and cattle embryos” where they “[S]uccessfully implanted sows with those embryos”. Nature detailed how scientists “allowed the pig–human chimaeras to develop for three to four weeks before destroying them, according to ethics regulations”.

Image: Human Pig Chimeras

In 2011, media in the UK blew the lid on a secret program that created 150 human-animal hybrid embryos in British laboratories. According to a report in the Daily Mail, which explained, “This legalised the creation of a variety of hybrids, including an animal egg fertilised by a human sperm; ‘cybrids’, in which a human nucleus is implanted into an animal cell; and ‘chimeras’, in which human cells are mixed with animal embryos.”

In 2018, National Geographic reported the second successful human-animal hybrids: sheep embryos that are are 0.01-percent human by cell count.

Image: Human-pig Chimera

In 2016, Congressman Chris Smith introduced legislation to prohibit human/animal chimeras. The bill has essentially gone nowhere. In 2017, pro-life leaders asked the secretary of HHS for NIH to “withdraw the proposed changes to NIH guidelines which would allow funding for research which attempts to create human-animal chimeras… ”

To date, that has not happened.

$1 million to abortion clinics and Planned Parenthood for aborted fetal tissue from ABR

Posted in Aborted Baby Body Parts, Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR), Center for Medical Progress, Chimeras, FDA, fetal research, Fetal Tissue, Planned Parenthood sells aborted baby parts with tags , , , , , , , , on September 6, 2018 by saynsumthn

Planned Parenthood got over $300,000 in 6 years from one fetal tissue harvester

Planned Parenthood

Live Action News recently reported about how the FDA is contracting with Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) to obtain “fresh human tissues” — aborted fetal body parts — “for implantation into severely immune-compromised mice to create chimeric animals that have a human immune system.” ABR’s history with fetal tissue research goes back years. According to the Center for Medical Progress, ABR is “the largest and oldest fetal tissue seller in the U.S.” It was founded in 1989, and is the primary supplier of fetal tissue for the U.S. government. And it has paid numerous abortion facilities a great deal of money for this tissue — including a number of Planned Parenthood centers.

The stunning graphic below from the House Select Investigative Panel report summarizes known ABR payments to various Planned Parenthood facilities for fetal tissue — totaling more than $350,000 over the course of six years, from 2010 to 2015:

Image: ABR 2015 Fetal Sales to Top 5 Customers Product and Totals (Image credit: Congressional Investigation)

ABR 2015 Fetal Sales to Top 5 Customers Product and Totals (Image credit: Congressional Investigation)

According to a 2015 report from Politico:

The Food and Drug Administration has also paid about $73,000 to the company since 2009… mostly for liver and thymus tissue that are used largely to develop a human-like immune system in mice…. The NIH, with a $30 billion budget for research nationwide, funded about $76 million in dozens of fetal tissue projects in 2014.

Image: FDA Chimeric fetal tissue research

FDA Chimeric fetal tissue research

The FDA has a dozen contracts with ABR for various items, including lab equipment and supplies, according to the General Services Administration’s Federal Procurement Data SystemOnline records at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) indicate ABR is regularly granted federal dollars for various projects.

READ: FDA buys ‘fresh’ aborted body parts from company referred for criminal charges

The 2015 Congressional investigation regarding the illegal sale of fetal body parts, following undercover videos released by CMP, led to a report. In this report, quoted below, it was revealed that ABR had been contracting with universities and abortion facilities for years:

  • Before [founder and CEO Cate Dyer] began StemExpress, she worked for Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc. (ABR)
  • The University of Minnesota (UM)… obtains fetal tissue from procurement companies—in this case, Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR) and StemExpress—in addition to an area clinic.
  • The University of Wisconsin, School of Medicine and Public Health (UW SMPH)… more recently obtained fetal tissue for research from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, UW, and ABR.
  • Colorado State University (CSU)… receives a significant amount in federal grants and obtains much of its fetal tissue from ABR and StemExpress. Between 2010 and 2015, CSU received seven NIH grants to support their projects using fetal tissue, at a taxpayer expense of $3.5 million.
  • According to productions made by 25 clinics from which ABR has received fetal tissue, ABR paid them a total of $1,002,147 from 2010 to 2015…. The chart below shows ABR facility fee payments from 2010 through 2015 to the abortion clinics from which it obtained fetal tissue:
Image: ABRs abortion clinic facility fees 2010 to 2015 (Image credit” Select Panel investigation of fetal tissue)

ABRs abortion clinic facility fees 2010 to 2015 (Image credit” Select Panel investigation of fetal tissue)

The panel then detailed ABR’s 2015 fetal parts sales to its top five customers:

Image: ABR 2015 Fetal Sales to Top 5 Customers Product and Totals (Image credit: Congressional Investigation)

ABR 2015 Fetal Sales to Top 5 Customers Product and Totals (Image credit: Congressional Investigation)

In a letter from Rep. Marsha Blackburn to the then-District Attorney of Riverside, California, the Congresswoman detailed ABR’s relationship with Planned Parenthood:

Image: ABRs interactions with Planned Parenthood fetal tissue

ABRs interactions with Planned Parenthood fetal tissue (Image credit: Letter from Rep. Marsha Blackburn)

In 2016, Houston attorney Briscoe Cain claimed he found evidence of four Texas medical schools purchasing fetal tissue from ABR. Invoices from to one of the schools, given to KFOX14 Investigates and reported by CBS4, show the school paid at least $4,000-$5,000 for fetal parts including livers, spleens and thymuses.

Image: ABR invoices for fetal tissue to Texas Universities

ABR invoices for fetal tissue to Texas Universities

Image: ABR invoices for fetal parts to Texas Universities

ABR invoices for fetal parts to Texas Universities

“The research being done is humanized mice. Scientists inject the mouse with fetal tissue so the mouse is genetically altered to accept the graphing of human tissue,” Cain said at the time.

In 2011, the University of Minnesota contracted with ABR for “human fetal pancreas tissue” between 16-24 weeks.

Image: ABR contract with U of Minnesota for fetal tissue 2011

ABR contract with U of Minnesota for fetal tissue 2011

In 2000, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was tasked to study “the involvement of federal agencies under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education in the acquisition of human fetal tissue for biomedical research.” The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) told GAO that “NIH is the only federal agency under the Labor, HHS, and Education Subcommittee’s jurisdiction that sponsors research using human fetal tissue.” But Live Action previously showed that the EPA used aborted fetal tissue for research in the 1970’s.

According to that report, NIH sponsored three central human fetal tissue supply organizations:

  • The Birth Defects Laboratory at the University of Washington, which distributed 2,869 human fetal tissue samples and collected $52,035 in fees directly from researchers in fiscal year 1999.
  • The Brain and Tissue Banks for Developmental Disorders at the University of Maryland and the University of Miami School of Medicine/Children’s Hospital of Orange County, primarily to serve as suppliers of human nonfetal tissue…. The University of Maryland Bank provided 195 human fetal tissue samples to investigators in fiscal year 1999, and the University of Miami Bank provided approximately 40 samples between March 1 and August 31, 1999.

GAO states that researchers also obtained human fetal tissue from private organizations that did not directly receive federal funds, including ABR.

1970’s Commission looks into fetal experimentation and research

Posted in Abortion History, Fetal Development, fetal heartbeat, Fetal Homicide, Fetal Organs, Fetal Pain, fetal Remains, fetal research, Fetal Stem Cell, Fetal Surgery, Fetal Tissue, The Ryan Program with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 27, 2018 by saynsumthn

Some abortion survivors were kept alive almost a day for experimentation

Image: 10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image credit: Life Magazine Sep 10, 1965)

In part one of this series on fetal research, Live Action News detailed a number of experiments conducted on living abortion survivors. Due to the outrage over such experiments reported in the media in the 1970s, the National Research Act established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. The commission was chaired by Kenneth John Ryan, MD, an abortionist who also taught others how to do abortions.

IMage: Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

Dr. Kenneth Ryan chaired commission on fetal research (Image credit: Harvard Gazette)

A report published by the Harvard Gazette at the time of Ryan’s death states:

 President Jimmy Carter appointed Ken to chair the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research.

…When he became the Chief of Staff at the Boston Hospital for Women in 1973, one year after the Roe vs Wade decision, he established the first abortion service in a university hospital and included training in the necessary skills as a routine part of residency education. In 1975 Ken credentialed and granted admitting privileges to Dr. Kenneth Edelin, an African-American, even as he was under indictment for manslaughter in a politically motivated prosecution for performing a legal abortion at Boston City Hospital.

The Ryan Program, which bears the doctor’s name and partners with Planned Parenthood, was established in 1999 to train OB-GYN residents in abortion.

Dr. Paul Ramsey, a Professor of Religion at Princeton University, also served on the commission. He wrote a lengthy opinion in the section entitled, “Moral Issues in Fetal Research,” criticizing NIH definitions of life and death regarding the preborn child, with good reason:

The answer seems clear enough: the difference between the life and death of a human fetus/abortus should be determined substantially in the same way physicians use in making other pronouncements of death… the 1973 NIH proposed guidelines studiously refuses to speak of the previable fetus as “living” or having “life.” By studiously refusing to speak of a previable fetus/abortus who may still be medically “alive” and by leaving the determination of viability entirely to the discretion of physician researchers (not even excluding abortuses with respiration from being deemed previable and entered into experimentation), the American guidelines can be faulted for lack of definitional clarity. Indeed, if and only if the previable fetus is human, unique for certain purposes, and alive in significant medical respects–i.e., if it is not dead–could claims be made that researchers need the knowledge uniquely to be gained by using the fetus/abortus while it is still living, growing and reacting as a tiny, whole fetal human being or entity.

This national commission was tasked to investigate and study research involving abortion survivors, and to recommend whether and under what circumstances such research should be conducted or supported by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW). Up to this time, the July 1974 “National Research Act” had ruled that the “Secretary may not conduct or support research in the United States or abroad on a living human fetus, before or after the induced abortion of such fetus, unless such research is done for the purpose of assuring the survival of such fetus.”

Report Research on the Fetus

At the time the commission began, a New York Times article detailed how members of the commission had reviewed existing research of human fetuses. Members told the paper that the amount of research already conducted using aborted fetuses was “so substantial as to seem surprising.”

Image: article Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

Hundreds of aborted fetuses delivered outside womb, NYT 1975

The most controversial form of research the commission found was on the “fetus outside the womb,” involving “fetuses delivered by abortion.” The commission claimed hundreds of reports of such cases had been conducted. Experiments were also conducted on already expired fetuses from spontaneous or induced abortions. Below is a small sample of what the commission found:

  • Physiologic and Metabolic Studies: Fetal hearts, removed just after death of a fetus following hysterotomy abortion, have been studied to establish physiologic response data.
  • Studies of the Pregnant Mother: Women undergoing elective midtrimester abortion have been starved for 87 hours before abortion in an attempt to learn the effects of caloric deprivation on pregnancy and to gain some information as to whether the fetus could adapt to fuels other than glucose.
  • Research With the Previable Fetus Outside the Uterus: To learn whether the human fetal brain could metabolize ketone bodies, brain metabolism was isolated in 8 human fetuses (12-17 weeks’ gestation) after hysterotomy abortion by perfusing the isolated head (the head was separated from the rest of the body). The study demonstrated that, similar to other species, brain metabolism could be supported by ketone bodies during fetal life suggesting avenues of therapy in some fetal disease states.
  • Another technique for studying the ability of the midtrimester fetus to carry out endocrine reactions used 4 fetuses (16-20 weeks’ gestation) immediately after hysterotomy abortion. The fetuses were perfused through their umbilical veins while being housed in a perfusion tank. Fetal tissues were examined at the end of the study.
  • After studies with newborn and fetal mice, cutaneous respiration (breathing through the skin) was studied in 15 fetuses (9-24 weeks’ gestation) from induced abortions. The fetuses were immersed in a salt solution with oxygen at high pressure. The fetuses were judged to be aliveby a pulsating cord or visible heart beat; if necessary the chest was opened to observe the heart. Four fetuses were supported for 22 hours in this attempt at developing a fetal incubator.
  • Seven previable fetuses (200-375 grams) from spontaneous or induced abortions were immersed in a perfusion tank and perfused with oxygenated blood through their umbilical vessels. The fetuses survived and moved for 5-12 hours.

Interestingly, in addition to general experimentation, the commission noted that if the fetus could “feel pain” then experimenting on abortion survivors would not be permissible. Of course, that debate continues to linger despite evidence that they do feel pain.

Still, members were mixed:

The fetus in utero or in process of being aborted provides a more difficult ethical analysis than does the dead fetus or the living viable infant. There is a presumption of viability at any stage in gestation for the living fetus as long as it remains inside the uterus. Thus experimentation involving that fetus must have acceptably low risk of any harmful effect on viability or on the potential for meaningful, healthy life. If the process of abortion has begun, the life of the fetus will soon end. There is debate about whether different standards apply in that situation and we disagree in our own analysis.

One view holds that no risks can be imposed that would not be acceptable for the fetus which was continuing life. Another view will accept an increase in risks if the information is important and alternate ways of obtaining the information are not practical, if the methods of the experiment are acceptable in themselves (i.e., would be used in other classes of human subjects), and if the process of dying for the fetus were not altered in an unacceptable way.

In any event, expected benefits from the experimentation still must be clear and must require the use of the human fetus to gain the desired information. Ethical considerations as to sensory perception by the fetus also must be addressed. We know of no evidence to suggest or support a contention that the fetus at midgestation or earlier, when abortions are performed, is aware of pain or has a psychologic fear of death.

Image: Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

Ban on experimenting on live aborted fetuses (Image credit NYT, April 1975)

The commission ultimately drafted several recommendations, including a restriction on experimenting on living abortion survivors. But their report also recommended that research resulting in “no harm to the fetus” be permitted, so long as that research might benefit other fetuses.

Unfortunately, this did not stop the push for the research nor the push to obtain federal funding. According to a historical timeline of fetal research regulations published in a report by the Institute of Medicine:

After the National Commission issued its report (Report and Recommendations: Research on the Fetus), fetal research following abortion was permitted under subsequent [Department of Health Education and Welfare] DHEW regulations for therapeutic reasons, but otherwise held to the standard of “minimal risk.” Minimal risk means that no more potential harm is tolerated than would be encountered in daily life. In the case of a fetus, almost all interventions exceed minimal risk, and the regulations did not distinguish between fetuses that were carried to term and those intended for abortion. The DHEW regulations, however, contained the possibility of waiver of the minimal risk standard on a project-by-project basis by a complicated procedure to be decided ultimately by an Ethics Advisory Board.

Image: article 1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

1975 Ban funding fetal research (Image credit Corpus Christi Times)

The first Ethics Advisory Board (EAB) was convened in 1978. The sole waiver issued by this body was to test the efficacy of using fetal blood samples for prenatal diagnosis of sickle cell anemia. The charter for the EAB expired in 1980, and despite publication of a draft charter in 1988, it has not been reactivated.

According to CQ Researcher, in 1988, an NIH commission “voted 18–3 to pronounce fetal tissue transplant research ‘acceptable public policy’—a position then unanimously endorsed by the standing advisory committee to the director of the NIH. That advice, however, was rejected in November 1989 by Louis W. Sullivan, the Bush administration’s secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), NIH’s parent department. Sullivan decided instead to extend, indefinitely, the moratorium on NIH funding of fetal tissue research first ordered by the Reagan administration in March 1988. The moratorium barred NIH funding of clinical transplantation studies using tissue from induced abortions.”

However, “The NIH moratorium did not affect privately funded research in the United States.”

Co-chairman on that 1988 NIH panel was none other than Kenneth Ryan, the same abortionist/trainer who chaired the 1970’s commission. When the push for federally funded research failed, Ryan began calling for private funding to experiment on aborted children.

In part three of this series, Live Action News will detail who eventually lifted the ban on federal funding of fetal tissue research and how much taxpayers spend on this research every year.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Not just Nazis: The grisly history of research on abortion survivors

Posted in Abortion History, Fetal Development, fetal Remains, fetal research, Fetal Surgery, Fetal Tissue with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on April 26, 2018 by saynsumthn

A look back at some of the grisly experiments once conducted on human abortion survivors will most likely make your stomach turn. This history shows the depravity a society can spiral into when medical research is allowed to advance untethered to any sense of ethical morality. Today, as videos of Planned Parenthood staffers haggling over the price of aborted baby body parts come to mind, a look into the fetal research market dating back to the 1930s reveals again how those who experiment on the bodies of tiny victims will often justify their actions as good.

Davenport Hooker’s Fetal Experiments on Living Aborted Babies

Image: Davenport Hooker University of Pittsburgh

Davenport Hooker University of Pittsburgh

Davenport Hooker (Image credit: University of Pittsburgh)

From the 1930s until the mid 1960s, University of Pittsburgh anatomist Davenport Hooker conducted research on children who survived surgical abortion by hysterotomy, a risky procedure similar to Caesarian section, where the doctor opens up the uterus with an incision and pulls the baby out.

Forensic anthropologist Emily K. Wilson authored a paper in the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, explaining how Hooker obtained the abortion survivors:

Immediately following a surgical abortion by hysterotomy, performed on an unnamed woman at a nearby lying-in hospital, Hooker took the seven-week-old fetus to an observation room. He touched and stroked the face, body, arms, and legs as a motion picture camera recorded the fetus’s corresponding movements and reflexes. Over the next thirty-one years, Hooker would observe more than 150 fetuses and prematurely born infants in this manner. The project resulted in over forty articles and one nine-minute medical film and contributed information and photographic stills to numerous scientific and popular publications.

Wilson also writes, “But while Hooker and the 1930s medical and general public viewed live fetuses as acceptable materials for nontherapeutic research, they also shared a regard for fetuses as developing humans with some degree of social value.”

According to PittMed, a publication of the University of Pittsburgh, “Hooker purchased a 35-mm motion picture camera. Having gained the trust and permission of the obstetricians at Magee-Womens Hospital, Hooker was able to observe therapeutically aborted fetuses removed by Caesarian section. Upon stimulating the skin, he recorded the degree of reflex development, and in January of 1933, created the first films ever made of human fetal movement.”

Rutgers professor Johanna Schoen, an abortion supporter, adds, “In 1952, he [Hooker] assembled his footage into a silent educational film called “Early Fetal Human Activity.” The film showed the muscle activity of six fetuses ranging from 8 1/2 to 14 weeks.”

Video from that film can be viewed below (Warning – Images may be disturbing for some):

Author Lynn Morgan also did research on Hooker and discovered a brief account of Hooker’s experiments before the American Philosophical Society were published in a 1938 Time Magazine article entitled, “Embryonic Grasp.” Morgan writes:

“It described how a twenty-five week old fetus “snatched a glass rod weighing three grams from the scientist’s hand, waved it feebly but triumphantly for an instant before the spark of life went out.”

Hooker pointed out to his audience that an abortion survivor at twelve weeks gestation makes a “pretty fair fist.”

Article: Time Magazine Research on aborted baby 1938

Time Magazine Research on aborted baby 1938

The article noted that the doctor was notified by a Pittsburgh hospital, “whenever it has on hand a living abortus so that Dr. Hooker can rush to the scene with his photographer, make pictures and experiments before the fetus expires.”

Writing in her book, “Icons of Life: A Cultural History of Human Embryos,” Morgan seemed troubled by the calloused demeanor of Hooker’s audience and the journalist, writing:

“The journalist cited the “admiring voice” of the scientist as Hooker described his findings before a “spell bound” audience… Didn’t the audience question the ethics of fetal experimentation? Didn’t the audience question whether 149 women would have had to be subjected to major abdominal surgery if the researchers had not wanted the fetuses delivered alive?”

Schoen, who approves of using abortion survivors for research, goes on to write that, “Several of Hooker’s images were published in 1962 in an early pregnancy guidebook, ‘The First Nine Months of Life.’ Its author, Geraldine Flanagan, did not discuss how the fetuses were photographed or mention the conditions, such as therapeutic abortion, that allowed them to be used in research.”

Images: Davenport Hooker fetal specimens featured in First Nine Months of Life

Davenport Hooker fetal specimens featured in First Nine Months of Life

Nurse Testifies Aborted Fetuses Shipped Alive on Ice

In 1972, a former Magee-Women’s Hospital nurse anesthetist testified before the Pennsylvania Abortion Law Commission that she witnessed the hospital shipping aborted and still living human fetuses to researchers for experimentation. Wilhamine Dick told the committee she witnessed “live fetuses being packed on ice” for use in research. According to a March 15, 1972, article published by the Indiana Evening Gazette, the former nurse also told the commission, “It was repulsive to watch live fetuses being packed in ice while still moving and trying to breathe, then being rushed to some laboratory and hear the medical students later discuss the experience of examining the organs of a once live baby.” She added that she resigned because she was “no longer able to accept seeing tiny arms and legs considered routine specimens.”

Image: article 1972 Nurse testifies about living human fetuses shipped alive

1972 Nurse testifies about living human fetuses shipped alive

Stanford University Experiments on Living Aborted Children 

A report by the New York Times detailed experiments which involved scientists at Stanford University who allegedly immersed 15 abortion survivors in a salt solution to see if they could absorb oxygen through the skin. An October 4, 1973, report by the Placerville Mountain Democrat quoted an alleged witness by the name of James Babcock, who told a legislative panel that he “learned that live fetuses had been placed in a special chamber, their ribs cut open to observe their heartbeat under certain conditions.”

report by the Stanford Daily, which did not dispute that the experiments happened, claimed the project had been “terminated in 1969.” In fact, according to the report, Dr. Robert Goodlin, an associate professor of gynecology and obstetrics, performed the research at Stanford in the 1960s and told the paper, “Our goal was to keep the fetus alive.” He added, “Cutting the fetus open was sometimes necessary to observe heart action and at other times to massage the heart.”

Paul Ramsey, author of “The Ethics of Fetal Research,”writes that the longest Goodlin was able to keep a fetus alive was eleven days, adding, “Again, the experiments would have been pointless if those previable abortuses had not been importantly and relevantly ‘alive’ before yet having capacity for respiration.”

The Stanford Daily reported, “Funds for further research were halted in 1969 when it was decided that Goodlin and other scientists were ‘too far away’ from their goal of keeping the fetus alive outside the womb….”

Image: article Stanford Daily Med School Doctors attack fetal research ban

Stanford Daily Med School Doctors attack fetal research ban

The paper also stated:

Stanford, along with other medical schools in the nation, made their research widely known in Life magazine article in September, 1965. Life stated that Goodlin and other scientists were “working toward the day when it would become routine to save prematurely aborted fetuses at almost any age and carry them through to “birth” in artificial wombs.

… In 1965, Life magazine depicted a 10-week-old fetus kept alive in an artificial womb by Goodlin’s team of Stanford physicians. Goodlin said the objective at all times was “to preserve life.”

Image: 10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image: Life Magazine)

10 week old Fetus kept alive via artificial womb (Image: Life Magazine)

That same year, Life Magazine published Swedish photographer Lennart Nilsson’s photo essay, “Drama of Life Before Birth.” Nilsson later published many of the images in the book, “A Child is Born.”

Today, there seems to be a bit of a mystery about where Nilsson may have obtained his images. In fact, Time.com claims that some of those babies he photographed had been aborted:

Image: Life Magazine cover from 1965

Life Magazine cover from 1965

In the accompanying story, LIFE explained that all but one of the fetuses pictured were photographed outside the womb and had been removed—or aborted—“for a variety of medical reasons.” Nilsson had struck a deal with a hospital in Stockholm, whose doctors called him whenever a fetus was available to photograph. There, in a dedicated room with lights and lenses specially designed for the project, Nilsson arranged the fetuses so they appeared to be floating as if in the womb.

The website Making Visible Embryoscreated in part by an historian of biological and medical sciences, makes a similar claim:

Although claiming to show the living fetus, Nilsson actually photographed abortus material obtained from women who terminated their pregnancies under the liberal Swedish law. Working with dead embryos allowed Nilsson to experiment with lighting, background and positions, such as placing the thumb into the fetus’ mouth. But the origin of the pictures was rarely mentioned, even by ‘pro-life’ activists, who in the 1970s appropriated these icons.

Whether allegations that some of the photographed babies came from abortions is true or not is difficult to verify; however, a paper published in Bulletin of The History of Medicine, written by Solveig Julich, associate professor and senior lecturer at the Department of History of Science and Ideas at Uppsala University in Sweden, makes a compelling case. She writes in part:

He admitted that most of the pictures were of “fetuses, just removed surgically” in connection with miscarriages or extrauterine pregnancies. They looked as if they were alive because they were still alive. He had only a few minutes in which to take the pictures before they developed ugly blotches and were changed. A few of the pictures, Nilsson told the reporter, were “taken inside the mother by means of a cystoscope and a flash in connection with a necessary abortion.” But he insisted that his photographs should not be seen as a contribution to the abortion debate: all he wanted to do was to give a clear conception of the origin and development of human life.

In all fairness to Nilsson, now deceased, there is no way to absolutely confirm these allegations nor to understand fully what his motivation was, if, in fact, he did use aborted babies in his photography.

Read the full paper here.

History is full of examples in which scientists and doctors went too far in their research on human subjects. The most vivid example of this comes out of the Holocaust, during which Nazi physicians believed the medical advances from experiments somehow justified their actions. In an article published by the Montreal Gazette, Dr. Hans Munch, an SS research pathologist at a Nazi institute near Auschwitz, described concentration camp physician Josef Mengele, who experimented on Jews inside the horrific camps:

Mengele saw the gassings as the only rational solution and argued that as the prisoners were going to be gassed anyway, there was no reason not to use them for medical experiments.

Sadly, that kind of reasoning for experimenting on human subjects sounds too familiar, as readers will see in parts two and three of this series on the history of experimentation on abortion survivors.

  • This article is reprinted with permission. The original appeared here at Live Action News.

Panel issues subpoenas in aborted baby body parts investigation

Posted in Aborted Baby Body Parts, Center for Medical Progress, National Abortion Federation, stem Express with tags , , , , , , , , , , on February 19, 2016 by saynsumthn

The chair of a U.S. House investigative panel has announced that they have issued subpoenas to obtain documents regarding the possible sale of aborted baby body parts. The investigation follows a 2015 University of New Mexico (UNM) research study obtained by New Mexico Alliance for Life (NMAFL) which detailed “how aborted baby liver and kidney tissue [was] harvested from ‘six fetuses,’ only 15 minutes after the abortion procedure.”

Fetal Body parts Curtis Boyd abortion

Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN)who chairs the Select Investigative Panel on Infant Lives, said the panel plans to subpoena the University New Mexico (UNM) and the late term abortion facility South Western Options (SWO). The Panel, which consists of both Republican as well as Democrat members, falls under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and has been tasked to gather information and get the facts about medical practices of abortion service providers and the business practices of the procurement organizations who sell baby body parts, according to their website.

Rep. Blackburn’s office told Live Action News that the Majority Staff of the Select Investigative Panel has sent more than 30 letters requesting documents. Those letters all asked for information to be provided voluntarily.

“By failing to fully cooperate with our investigation, these organizations have compelled our panel to subpoena these documents in order to acquire information that is vital to the completion of our work,” Chairman Blackburn stated.

“Without these subpoenas, the American people and the House itself would be left to speculate about what is going on in the fetal tissue industry. We cannot leave questions unanswered,
” she added.

As Live Action News has previously reported, SWO is located in Albuquerque and operated by abortionist Curtis Boyd, who served as a UNM “assistant professor” and has been working with UMN for ten years. UNM’s health science center (UNMHSC) which reportedly used the fetal tissue for their research recently halted a training program using abortionists from SWO.

via prolifewitness.org

via prolifewitness.org

According to a consent form obtained by local pro-lifer Tara Shaver, the remains of babies aborted at Southwestern Women’s Options, are automatically used in research. “Since the “consent” for research is buried in the same consent form for the abortion, it is doubtful many women even realize their babies are being turned into fodder for laboratory experimentation,” reports Operation Rescue which investigates abortion clinic nationwide.

In January, the New Mexico Alliance for Life obtained a letter which they say confirmed that abortionist Boyd “facilitates” the, “collection of aborted baby body parts such as hearts, lungs, heads, livers, aortas, brain tissue, etc. from his late-term abortion clinic to the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center.”

Vurtis Boyd UNM letter aborted fetal parts

The letter read in part:

    “I have reviewed and been kept up to date on your research and feel that the use of fetal tissue continues to be appropriate for your studies. Therefore I will continue to facilitate your collection of samples from my clinic. following the usual inspection of the tissue…”

curtisboyd

Boyd, who once admitted that he is “killing” states on his website, that he was involved in establishing the National Abortion Federation (NAF) and is a founding member of the Federation’s Board of Directors.

CMP Planned Parenthood Stem Express NAF

NAF is seeking a permanent gag order against the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) whose undercover investigation exposed how the abortion industry haggles over the prices of the babies they abort. The abortion provider organization is seeking to prevent the release of footage from their annual conferences in 2014 and 2015, claiming fraud. A recently released tape, by CMP appears to show an alliances between the National Abortion Federation, Planned Parenthood, and abortion providers in regards to fetal tissue procurement.

Cassy Fiano, of Live Action News reviewed the tape and reported that in the video, NAF’s training and education coordinator, Sandy Fulkerson, floats the idea of a “group purchasing program” offered through NAF membership, where participating abortion facilities would supply aborted fetal tissue to buyers, and then split the profits. Fulkerson admits the abortion group “knows somewhere” where large quantities of fetal tissue are “available.” Another NAF supporter then chimes in that the financial rewards are a “win-win” for both parties, Fiano writes.

In addition to SWO and UNM, the panel has also issued a subpoena to obtain documents from StemExpress, (the infamous fetal parts procurement company exposed in CMP’s videos), for failing to dully cooperate with document requests. CMP videos show the biotech company’s CEO, Cate Dyer, boasting, “I have a picture from Hillary” Clinton on her desk. In another video, she jokes about shipping the fully intact bodies of aborted babies to unsuspecting lab technicians.

Last year, House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders sent a letter to StemExpress requesting briefings and information regarding their practices relating to human fetal tissue collection, sale, and/or donation. When asked why the Select Investigative Panel issued the subpoena against Stem Express, Chairman Blackburn told Live Action News:

    StemExpress brought the subpoena upon themselves by redacting critical information.

Read the subpoenas that were sent to StemExpress, University of New Mexico, and Southwestern Women’s Options.

Hospital halts training program with late term abortion clinic which provides “fetal tissue”

Posted in Aborted Baby Body Parts, Abortion Training, Abortionist, Curtis Boyd, former abortionist, Late term abortion with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 28, 2015 by saynsumthn

Univ NM

A New Mexico University has halted a training program using doctors from a late term abortion clinic which provides the University with fetal tissue for research. The Albuquerque Journal newspaper has reported that the University of New Mexico (UNM), which is a publicly-funded institution, has cut ties with Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO), a late-term abortion facility owned by Texas abortionist Curtis Boyd and has been the subject if a previous undercover sting conducted by Live Action. The abortionist is one of a handful of doctors in the country that performs abortions in the third trimester. He claims to be a former Baptist minister and admits that he knows he “is killing.” Southwestern Women’s has a location in Dallas and one in Albuquerque.

curtisboyd

Pro-lifers Tara and Bud Shaver who founded the pro-life group, ProtestABQ, have diligently exposed the late term clinic for years. In July, Tara Shaver filed a formal criminal complaint with the Attorney General of New Mexico asking for a complete and thorough investigation of Boyd’s clinic following revelations that Planned Parenthood was taking part in a gruesome baby parts operation. Shaver indicated Boyd was also using the body parts of babies he aborted for research. She based her allegations on documents obtained by prolifewitness.org indicating SWO staff members are, “ in fact, harvesting baby body parts for use in medical research.”

The documents included copies Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO) informed consent paperwork which every abortion patient must sign indicating that Boyd and (SWO) may be using aborted babies in medical research.

2015-abortion-consent-Fetal-SWO-Curtis-Boyd

The 2015 consent form (image above) states:

    “I understand that the pregnancy tissue will be removed from my body during this procedure. The pregnancy tissue may be examined here at the Clinic and the Clinic doctors may dispose of the tissue according to the law. The pregnancy tissue may be used for medical research.”

This consent form from 2012 (image below) says, “tissue and parts will be removed during the procedure.”

2012-Abortion-Consent-Southwestern-abortion-Boys-fetal-harvest

The form goes on to state, “and I consent to their examination and their use in medical research and their disposal by the clinic and/or physician in the manner they deem appropriate.”

Protest ABQ pointed out that New Mexico has a law prohibiting the selling of body parts. But despite the law, UNMH officials admitted to the Journal that they have been accepting fetal tissue from Boyd’s clinic for a decade claiming the abortionist is not paid for the baby body parts. In addition, Dr. Richard Larson, executive vice chancellor and vice chancellor for research at the UNMHSC, the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, told the Journal that Boyd’s clinic is the school’s only supplier of fetal tissue.

To justify the use of dead children in the late gestational age, Larson told the Journal that the “fetal tissue” they collect from Boyd will, “reduce the mortality of premature babies, especially these extremely premature babies.” Officials also claim that their grisly research will reduce the likelihood of blindness, cognitive defects and other anomalies found in newborns between 24 and 30 weeks, the same age as the babies Boyd kills. In a May 2015 letter to UNMH, the Journal reports that Boyd specified that in abortions of less than 20 weeks, his doctors use “aspiration, dilation and evacuation.” Abortions after 20 weeks involve “feticide” by injecting the fetus with the drug Digoxin, Boyd’s letter states.

Images: Albuquerque Journal

Images: Albuquerque Journal

University officials still find the use of “fetal tissue” acceptable. What they are now publicly distancing themselves from is their training program with Boyd’s clinic and fellow abortionists staff who were described as “faculty” under the training agreements with UNM. The decision by UNMHSC officials to no longer send medical fellows or residents to Boyd’s clinic, follows a letter from New Mexico state Rep. Rod Montoya and other legislators who questioned top Health Sciences Center officials last July about the relationship with Boyd’s clinic and the use of “body parts” from women who have abortions there, the paper states. Montoya told the Journal that the argument could be made that the residents and fellows were helping the clinic augment its staffing for abortions.

“Initially, it had the appearance of being a transaction of sorts,” Montoya said, according to the Journal. “Of staffing in return for the body parts. That’s the appearance, and I informed them, ‘that’s how it appears to me,’ ” adding that he is concerned that there is no oversight of abortion clinics in the state.

“We know that the vast majority of New Mexicans believe we should not have a free-for-all when it comes to abortion
,” the Representative said.

In addition to the using fetal tissue for research in New Mexico a former employee of Boyd’s testified that he also had an agreement with the Director of Fetal Research at the University of Texas Health Science Center to use “large babies” for fetal research there. The former staffer, Nita Whitten, made this statement at a “Meet the Abortion Providers” workshop sponsored by the Pro-life Action League of Chicago, directed by Joe Scheidler:

“One thing that happened at the clinic that I worked at that was incredibly devastating, right before I left. Dr. Boyd had made an agreement with a doctor, and I cannot name this doctor because I just don’t think it would be wise to name him today, but he was the Director of Fetal Research at the University of Texas Health Science Center at that time. He had made an agreement with this doctor to give him our large babies for him to do fetal research on. They did this, and I believe at the time, it was against the law. I don’t know if it is now, and I’m not familiar with the legal terms because I’m not a lawyer, but I remember we were told not to tell anyone, and they only came in secret to get the babies…He had them come in and they dissected a baby for us in our lab room so we could see what they were doing with the body parts. They did that right there and everybody filed in and looked. I looked at it. I pretended like I was being brave and walked out. It made me sick.”

Bud Shaver described the University’s “fetal tissue research” program as unethical and immoral and said that he is now calling for them to cut all ties with the late term abortion doctor, “The University of New Mexico (UNM) has been caught red handed trafficking and using baby body parts for their medical research,” he told Saynsumthn.

“This is unethical and immoral which is why Protest ABQ is calling for UNM to cut all ties with Curtis Boyd at Southwestern Women’s Options (SWO) which is their sole provider of baby remains. The fact that the residency training rotation has been stopped at SWO is merely a bandaid on the bigger problem which is UNM’s overall radical abortion agenda which is what Protest ABQ is demanding UNM to halt,” he added.

Read the Journal’s report here.

Secretly recorded tape reveals abortion clinic chain using similar fetal research methods as Planned Parenthood

Posted in Abortion clinic, Abortion Worker, Center for Medical Progress with tags , , , , , , , , , , on October 30, 2015 by saynsumthn

In a leaked under cover tape, an abortion clinic chain is exposed using similar dehumanizing fetal research methods a Planned Parenthood.

The video was secretly recorded at a National Abortion Federation Conference by the Center for Medical Progress and was leaked to GotNews.com by a hacker last week. In part one, of the Fetal Disposition series you hear a representative from a Washington State abortion clinic describe their fetal tissue research program. In an eerily similar way that the Center for Medical Progress caught Planned Parenthood describing their ghoulish method of procuring tissue from babies they aborted, the Cedar River abortion clinic chain employee brags they are doing the same thing.

Although the staffer identified only as “Connie” does not specify which University they have their research program through, she does indicate that Cedar River abortion clinics collaborate with some of the same private medical research facilities as Planned Parenthood. Connie begins her talk with National Abortion Federation (NAF) conference attendees by showing a slide which reads, “Fetal Tissue disposition of fetal tissue and working collaboratively with Biomedical research projects.”

Cedar RIver abortion fetal tissue

Connie brags that Cedar Rivers is among the “pioneers of first and second trimester abortion” which operates “three clinical sites.” She describes the Cedar River abortion chain as a “proud abortion provider.” Connie also brags that Cedar River offers abortions “up to 26 weeks elective” meaning that they will end the life if an unborn child in the third trimester for any reason the mother should desire to have the baby aborted.

Cedar Rover abortion third trimester

Connie expresses her pride in the fact that Cedar River will pursue any possibility to work with research projects by couching their horrific operation of using the tissue of aborted babies as “reproductive health care.” Calling it “fortunate” to practice in Washington State, Connie claims women are “empowered” if they can “make choices” that include “what happens to the fetal tissue after the abortion.” She then details what her state allows abortion clinics to do with the body of the dead child including, includes burial, cremation, incineration and donation.” Connie adds that they contract with Stericycle for medical waste disposal.

She tells her audience that they have counted the cost for getting involved in fetal tissue research or as she calls it “human subject research” because Cedar River understands the “target they’d be placing on our backs” when they began their program. “We learned about the ethical principles of human subject research. What types of human research was regulated…Regulatory protections for research subjects. And last, informed consent as it relates to human subject research,” she adds.

The abortion clinic worker then further dehumanizes the babies they kill by coldly describing the process of sending the “tissue” to the lab as if she is shipping lollipops and not parts of humans. She even refers to shipping and processing – something we are used to hearing when we place orders for gadgets online not when we are talking about little children.In the recording you can hear Connie tell the NAF member audience in her session the “work flow” program Cedar River has put in place includes, “enrollment eligibility, program overview and informed consent, and then fetal tissue processing, handling and packaging.”

She emphasized that women who enroll in the “program” are not compensated. But, she states, that the University “rents” a space where they conduct their “research” and procure the “fetal tissue.” In another dehumanizing reference to the child her clinic has aborted, Connie notes that clinical staff must be trained on how to handle “the specimen” after the abortion including “packaging and labeling and storage of the specimen prior to courier pickup.”

“Upon receipt of the tissue at the lab, the University staff actually performs a dissection of the fetus and placental tissue and then those components collected for research are forwarded onto their in-house projects and other academic research projects across the country,” she says.

It is almost hard to fathom using clinical terms in such a fashion with no remorse as if the child is part of an automobile and not a living human person. The clinic staffer does her best to convince her audience that what Cedar River abortion clinics is doing is a good thing because it would benefit medical research. And this is exactly how Connie and her Cedar River abortion staff pitch it to women seeking abortions at their facilities. It is clear to those who listen to Connie that fetal tissue donation is helping to ease the conscience of women who pay to have their children killed. In fact, Cedar River admittedly offers women a place where they can memorialize their dead child which the clinic just tore apart into tiny little pieces before being shipped to a research lab.

As Connie puts it, if the tissue is not used for research it is “disposed of by cremation” and then “buried at a group burial plot provided by the University.” And, she states, for a “minimal expense” women can place a small plaque for memorial purposes at the burial site, something the abortion worker said is an “appreciated option for many women who cannot afford private burial and cremation and would like to do so.”

Connie’s Cedar River abortion clinic is doing exactly what the Center for Medical Progress exposed Planned Parenthood for doing. They are talking women into donating their babies for medical research. And what happens to those children is no different at Cedar River than it was at Planned Parenthood. In fact, Connie tells her audience that they have collaborated with the same private specter research lab as Planned Parenthood partnered with, Stem Express.

“We’re really fortunate to be able to work together with both of these, the University and Stem Express to make this happen,” she says.