Merck Stops Making Moral Alternatives of Measles & Mumps Vaccine

(Note: This is a long post, but because of what it deals with it, it needs to be.)

This was sent out by Children of God for Life on 30 Dec 2008 (My comments & Judie Brown's below):

ACTION ALERT:

Manufacturer Stops Sales of Monovalents for Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccines
www.cogforlife.org/merck1208.htm

ATTENTION - all concerned parents and medical professionals -
Merck needs to hear from you now!

Without the separate doses for measles and mumps there will be NO MORAL ALTERNATIVES in the US for these vaccines!

Concerned Catholics
In December 2008, the Holy See affirmed in Dignitas Personae, that “everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.” The Vatican further stated that “there is a duty to refuse to use such “biological material” even when there is no close connection between the researcher and the actions of those who performed the abortion.”
Read the article and the letter we sent to Merck - and let them know how you feel!
www.cogforlife.org/merck1208.htm

God bless,
Debi Vinnedge
Children of God for Life

Here is the article they provided a link to:

Note: Merck's separate dose for rubella, Meruvax, uses aborted fetal cell lines and taints the entire MMR II vaccine. The separate doses of Attenuvax (measles) and Mumpsvax (mumps) use chick embryo. Without these separate doses for measles and mumps, there will be no moral alternative for parents! See contact information for Merck below.
http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/publications/news/news-now/clinical-care-research/20081224merckcombo.html

Merck Focusing on Combination Vaccine
Manufacturer Stops Sales of Monovalents for Measles, Mumps, Rubella
By David Mitchell

12/24/2008

Merck & Co. Inc. has stopped production and sales of its monovalent vaccines for measles, mumps and rubella. The manufacturer instead plans to focus on its combination vaccine, MMRII.
Merck spokeswoman Amy Rose said MMRII accounts for 98 percent of the company's volume for measles, mumps and rubella vaccines, compared to just 2 percent from monovalent vaccines Attenuvax (measles), Mumpsvax (mumps) and Meruvax (rubella).

"The combination vaccine is what's recommended, and it's such a significant portion of the orders we see," said Rose. "It's in the best interest of public health to make more of that rather than dedicate manufacturing capacity to monovalents."

Rose said Merck had not decided when, or if, it might make the monovalent vaccines available for sale in the future.

Doug Campos-Outcalt, M.D., M.P.A., who serves as the AAFP's liaison to the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and is a former member of the AAFP Commission on Clinical Policies and Research, said Merck's decision was insignificant in terms of public health. He added, however, that some parents likely will be unhappy.

"The use of the single antigen is pretty limited," he said. "There's no harm if you need one in getting all three. There are some parents out there that want a delayed vaccine schedule. They want the vaccines spread out over a longer period of time and not so many at once. That's a lot of hooey. Alternative schedules have never been proven to be superior."

In December 2008, the Holy See affirmed in Dignitas Personae, that “everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.”

Let Merck know its not "a lot of hooey" to you!

Write to voice your complaints and send a copy to the CDC

Richard Clark, CEO
Merck & Company
One Merck Drive P.O. Box 100
Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889-0100

Julie L. Gerberding, Director
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
1600 Clifton Rd
Atlanta, GA 30333

Click here to read the letter we sent to Merck.

Click here to read the letter we sent to the CDC

_______________________________

My take, Merck is more concerned about it's bottom line than doing the right thing. It needs to realize that the 2 are not mutually exclusive. But more than this it is a sign of their complete sell out to the "culture of death". So, maybe they realize it, but don't care.

Judie Brown (below) says that their actions might be demonic. Not might be, they are. The "culture of death" is at its heart of demonic origin.

& this is part of why I think the timing of Merck's announcement coming so close on the Vatican's release of Dignitas Personae isn't coincidental. It was intentional. It was a way of telling the Vatican that we don't give a damn about what is morally right & we will do what we want, not what God's law says is right.

Then there is Dr. Doug Campos-Outcalt's statement. I suspect there is some smoke & mirrors in what he is saying. He focuses on what is a non-issue when he says: "There are some parents out there that want a delayed vaccine schedule." & he ignores the real reason a majority of parents want the seperate vaccines to keep from compromising their moral values. What he says is the "Hoooey!" I also suspect you might find a connection to the abortion industry that he doesn't want out right now as it would show the real reason for his comments.

Let's remember that Merck & most other major pharmaceutical companies make money off of birth control & chemical abortion drugs. So, they don't really care about providing something that stands out in moral contrast to what they are doing elsewhere that is evil. They have turned their backs on what is right & are sold out like so much of the medical industry to the "culture of death". Its agenda is their agenda. Judie Brown has it right when she talks about Merck's strategy. It is a part of the agenda to silence opposition to their evil.

Merck's announcement makes what I posted on 31 Dec 2008 all the more pertanant (A Pro-Life Resolution for 2009). The Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute (SCPI) is working to provide the alternatives that these big companies won't. I had already planned on posting more about them in a day or 2 & this just confirms that decision.

I put out a special call to parents to write Merck & the CDC. Their letters will have a greater weight than those from people who aren't parents. If most are from non-parents they will just blow off any results. But if they get an avalance of letters from parents, even if they ignore them, Dr. Campos-Outcalt will be proven wrong in his claims.

_______________________________
As promised here is Judie Brown's take:

MERCK MIRED IN MAYHEM

It was shocking when I saw it; I knew it couldn’t possibly be true, and I prayed it was a New Year’s Eve joke! But indeed, it was factually correct and my heart sank. What in the world could be done? Well, here is the story and an invitation to you to get active and do something now.

An action alert from Children of God for Life arrived in my “in box” moments ago. When you read the headline, please note that the word “monovalent” is defined as an entity “having specific immunologic activity against a single antigen, microorganism, or disease,” such as a monovalent vaccine. Following is the action alert:

Manufacturer Stops Sales of Monovalents for Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccines

ATTENTION - all concerned parents and medical professionals - Merck needs to hear from you now! Without the separate doses for measles and mumps there will be NO MORAL ALTERNATIVES in the US for these vaccines!

Concerned Catholics

In December 2008, the Holy See affirmed in Dignitas Personae, that “everyone has the duty to make known their disagreement and to ask that their healthcare system make other types of vaccines available.” The Vatican further stated that “there is a duty to refuse to use such “biological material” even when there is no close connection between the researcher and the actions of those who performed the abortion.

What is really alarming about the decision is that Merck’s announcement was met with a smug – perhaps bordering on arrogant – statement from the American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP). In the AAFP news account we read,

Doug Campos-Outcalt, M.D., M.P.A., who serves as the AAFP’s liaison to the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and is a former member of the AAFP Commission on Clinical Policies and Research, said Merck’s decision was insignificant in terms of public health. He added, however, that some parents likely will be unhappy.

“The use of the single antigen is pretty limited,” he said. “There’s no harm if you need one in getting all three. There are some parents out there that want a delayed vaccine schedule. They want the vaccines spread out over a longer period of time and not so many at once. That’s a lot of hooey. Alternative schedules have never been proven to be superior.”

Campos-Outcalt just doesn’t get it! This is not about whether or not a particular vaccine mixture is superior. Rather, it concerns the fact, clinically proven and obvious to anyone with eyes to see, that the MMR vaccine is tainted with cells from aborted children! That is immoral, and that is why parents clamor for ethical alternatives.

It is incredible, if not demonic, that a mega-pharmaceutical company would act in way that denies parents the opportunity to select a moral alternative for the vaccines in question. In fact, it makes one wonder if perhaps Merck’s strategy is to quell all opposition to its ongoing attempt to show there is nothing morally wrong with providing children’s vaccines that would not exist today if not for aborting a preborn baby years ago.

If that is what their strategy is, they are soon to realize that they have failed. Parents across this nation are going to be as scandalized as I was upon reading this news, and the hope is that they will make their voices heard by commenting directly to Merck.

Debi Vinnedge, founder and director of Children of God for Life, has made the task of communicating with Merck a simple one. Please note her letter to Merck CEO Richard Clark, which states in part,

On behalf of over 610,000 US citizens, physicians and members of the clergy who have petitioned Merck in the Campaign for Ethical Vaccines and are deeply concerned with the use of aborted fetal cell lines in the rubella portion of your MMR II and other vaccines, I am asking you to reconsider your position.

Our organization has written to your Corporate offices many times in the past regarding this issue. We presented these concerns to former Merck CEO, Raymond Gilmartin at your annual shareholder meeting for two consecutive years as a result of the shareholder resolution filed jointly with Human Life International. Over 60 million votes from Merck stockholders confirmed our position that Merck ought to discontinue the use of WI-38, MRC-5 and PER C6 in future vaccine development. I am enclosing copies of the statements presented at those meetings for your review.

You will note that in 2004 we commended Merck for making Attenuvax and Mumpsvax available to the public so that parents could at least protect their children from these diseases without compromising their moral and religious beliefs. When there have been shortages of these vaccines in the past, parents have waited patiently for the doses to become available, even willing to pay the higher costs in order to avoid the “tainted” MMR II. Once again, many of these families are waiting for you to resume production and their children will be unprotected unless you provide the doses. They are already abstaining from rubella and some have even flown overseas to vaccinate their children. That is, in my view, a disgrace to American healthcare.

Mr. Clark, if you would read the hundreds of thousands of letters we have received, you would understand not only the depth of these families’ convictions, but also the serious need to continue to provide the separate measles and mumps vaccines. As the sole provider of these important immunizations in the US, I believe you have a duty to public health and safety to ensure that as many children as possible are able to be protected from infectious disease. Otherwise, it is likely that we will see an increase in measles and mumps outbreaks as we have experienced in recent years when there were shortages.

Please contact Merck and make your voice heard:

Richard Clark, CEO

Merck & Company

One Merck Drive

P.O. Box 100

Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889-0100

Please send a copy of your letter to

Julie L. Gerberding, Director

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

1600 Clifton Rd

Atlanta, GA 30333

Updates on the situation will be available on the Children of God for Life web site:

http://www.cogforlife.org/merck1208.htm

Judie Brown