Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Health

Ethical Vaccine: Trump nominee Jay Bhattacharya says NIH will not use aborted babies in research

Published

3 minute read

Jayanta Bhattacharya, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be Director of the National Institutes of Health, speaks at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on Capitol Hill

From LifeSiteNews

By Matt Lamb

The use of aborted babies in research is one of the main reasons many Christians oppose the use of several vaccines

The National Institutes of Health will not use abortion fetal tissue in research, according to President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the agency.

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya made the comments on Wednesday during his hearing in front of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in response to a question from Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri.

“In public health, we need to make sure the products of science are ethically acceptable to everybody,” Bhattacharya said during the hearing. “And so having alternatives that are not ethically conflicted with fetal cell lines is not just an ethical issue, but it’s a public health issue.”

Dr. Bhattacharya said it is important to have ethical testing guidelines, sharing his experience answering questions on Catholic radio about the mRNA COVID shots. The jabs are tainted by their development using a fetal cell line derived from an aborted baby, which has caused moral concerns for faithful Catholics and also Protestants.

“Looking forward to voting for him to be our next NIH director,” Sen. Hawley wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

Dr. Bhattacharya is a well-respected medical doctor who gained further fame as a COVID contrarian, rejecting the establishment narrative that widespread lockdowns of the economy and schools were needed to slow the spread of the virus.

As LifeSiteNews previously reported:

Bhattacharya was one of the earliest and most notable critics of the draconian COVID response by most governments around the world. In October 2020 he co-authored The Great Barrington Declaration, which criticized the harmful lockdown policies. Bhattacharya is a professor of medicine, economics, and health research policy at Stanford University in California and the director of Stanford’s Center for Demography and Economics of Health and Aging.

Bhattacharya is the latest high-ranking public health official to affirm the Trump administration will not allow for the use of aborted fetal tissue in federally funded research.

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. previously assured Sen. Hawley he would prohibit the practice when questioned prior to his confirmation.

“Yes,” the nominee said, as previously reported by LifeSiteNews.

President Trump’s administration previously rejected 13 or 14 requests to use aborted fetal tissue, as LifeSiteNews reported in 2020.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Health

Last day and last chance to win this dream home! Support the 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery before midnight!

Published on

Deadline: June 16, 2025

Draw: June 26, 2025

Final Hours. Final Chance. Unlimited Possibility. 

This is it—the final hours of Red Deer Hospital Lottery. 

Without a ticket, the door closes on your chance to win over $1.24 million in prizes, including the stunning Grand Prize Dream Home. Imagine yourself stepping inside your Grand Prize Dream Home: 2,824 sq. ft. of luxury, designer furnishings from Urban Barn, a 65” Samsung Art TV. And it could all be yours.

Don’t miss the moment that could change everything for you.

Get your tickets before 11:59pm tonight online or give us a call at 1-877-808-9005.

THE JACKPOT THAT GROWS WITH EVERY TICKET

BUY NOW

THE JACKPOT THAT GROWS WITH EVERY TICKET
$596,175
WINNER TAKES HALF

The Jackpot That Keeps On Growing!

Add Mega Bucks 50 tickets to your order for even more chances to win life-changing prizes. The jackpot is already over $596,175 and is growing by the hour!

Every ticket you buy helps grow the prize and boosts your chances of winning. 

BUY NOW!

MEGA BUCKS 50

DON’T FORGET!

$10 EACH | 10 FOR $25
25 FOR $50 | 50 FOR $75

GET YOUR TICKETS!

The 2025 Red Deer Hospital Lottery Dream Home, designed by Sorento Custom Homes, continues Sorento’s tradition of award-winning designs. This gorgeous bungalow features 2,824 sq ft of developed living space and showcases a tall, vaulted ceiling.

Located at 128 Emmett Crescent in the neighbourhood of Evergreen, this outstanding home features a screened deck off the dining room, a large family room on the lower level, and of course, a beautiful primary suite. Sorento’s ensuites are always something to behold, and this one features a claw foot tub. There’s an office on the main level, two bedrooms below, and a large fitness room that includes a two-person infrared sauna. Enjoy the convenience of a walk-in pantry, main floor laundry, and chef quality appliances. The design of this unique home is complemented by gorgeous furnishings by Urban Barn.

Our Grand Prize Dream Home package is valued at $1,074,472! You won’t want to miss seeing this outstanding home or your chance to live in it.

 

DON’T MISS OUT!

Buy or gift your tickets today.

Main Lottery

8 FOR $100

15 FOR $150

30 FOR $250

Mega Bucks 50

1 FOR $10

10 FOR $25

25 FOR $50

50 FOR $75

Make a Difference

Right Here in Red Deer

Proceeds from Red Deer Hospital Lottery and Mega Bucks 50 are urgently needed for state-of-the-art equipment that helps doctors and nurses provide exceptional care today. While the hospital expansion is on the horizon, healthcare can’t wait.

Your support is as critical as the equipment you will help fund.

Continue Reading

Aristotle Foundation

The Canadian Medical Association’s inexplicable stance on pediatric gender medicine

Published on

By Dr. J. Edward Les

The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide from its shelves — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs

Physicians have a duty to put forward the best possible evidence, not ideology, based treatments

Late last month, the Canadian Medical Association (CMA) announced that it, along with three Alberta doctors, had filed a constitutional challenge to Alberta’s Bill 26 “to protect the relationship between patients, their families and doctors when it comes to making treatment decisions.”

Bill 26, which became law last December, prohibits doctors in the province from prescribing puberty blockers and hormone therapies for those under 16; it also bans doctors from performing gender-reassignment surgeries on minors (those under 18).

The unprecedented CMA action follows its strongly worded response in February 2024 to Alberta’s (at the time) proposed legislation:

“The CMA is deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care, including the Alberta government’s proposed restrictions on gender-affirming treatments for pediatric transgender patients.”

But here’s the problem with that statement, and with the CMA’s position: the evidence supporting the “gender affirmation” model of care — which propels minors onto puberty blockers, cross-gender hormones, and in some cases, surgery — is essentially non-existent. That’s why the United Kingdom’s Conservative government, in the aftermath of the exhaustive four-year-long Cass Review, which laid bare the lack of evidence for that model, and which shone a light on the deeply troubling potential for the model’s irreversible harm to youth, initiated a temporary ban on puberty blockers — a ban made permanent last December by the subsequent Labour government. And that’s why other European jurisdictions like Finland and Sweden, after reviews of gender affirming care practices in their countries, have similarly slammed the brakes on the administration of puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to minors.

It’s not only the Europeans who have raised concerns. The alarm bells are ringing loudly within our own borders: earlier this year, a group at McMaster University, headed by none other than Dr. Gordon Guyatt, one of the founding gurus of the “evidence-based care” construct that rightfully underpins modern medical practice, issued a pair of exhaustive systematic reviews and meta analyses that cast grave doubts on the wisdom of prescribing these drugs to youth.

And yet, the CMA purports to be “deeply concerned about any government proposal that restricts access to evidence-based medical care,” which begs the obvious question: Where, exactly, is the evidence for the benefits of the “gender affirming” model of care? The answer is that it’s scant at best. Worse, the evidence that does exist, points, on balance, to infliction of harm, rather than provision of benefit.

CMA President Joss Reimer, in the group’s announcement of the organization’s legal action, said:

“Medicine is a calling. Doctors pursue it because they are compelled to care for and promote the well-being of patients. When a government bans specific treatments, it interferes with a doctor’s ability to empower patients to choose the best care possible.”

Indeed, we physicians have a sacred duty to pursue the well-being of our patients. But that means that we should be putting forward the best possible treatments based on actual evidence.

When Dr. Reimer states that a government that bans specific treatments is interfering with medical care, she displays a woeful ignorance of medical history. Because doctors don’t always get things right: look to the sad narratives of frontal lobotomies, the oxycontin crisis, thalidomide, to name a few.

The thalidomide saga is particularly instructive: it illustrates what happens when a government drags its heels on necessary action. Canada was the last developed country to pull thalidomide, given to pregnant women for morning sickness, from its shelves, three months after it had been banned everywhere else — three months during which babies continued to be born in this country with absent or deformed limbs, along with other severe anomalies. It’s a shameful chapter in our medical past, but it pales in comparison to the astonishing intransigence our medical leaders have displayed — and continue to display — on the youth gender care file.

A final note (prompted by thalidomide’s history), to speak to a significant quibble I have with Alberta’s Bill 26 legislation: as much as I admire Premier Danielle Smith’s courage in bringing it forward, the law contains a loophole allowing minors already on puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones to continue to take them. Imagine if, after it was removed from the shelves in 1962, government had allowed pregnant women already on the drug to continue to take thalidomide. Would that have made any sense? Of course not. And the same applies to puberty blockers and cross-gender hormones: they should be banned outright for all youth.

That argument is the kind our medical associations should be making — and would be making, if they weren’t so firmly in the grasp, seemingly, of ideologues who have abandoned evidence-based medical care for our youth.

J. Edward Les is a Calgary pediatrician, a senior fellow with the  Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy,  and co-author of “Teenagers, Children, and Gender Transition Policy: A Comparison of Transgender Medical Policy for Minors in Canada, the United States, and Europe.” 

Continue Reading

Trending

X