HEK 293T is a well known human cell product.

https://www.atcc.org/products/all/CRL-11268.aspx

 This was used in part of Trump's SARS-COV-2 treatment.  A part of it was derived from HEK 293T, and that cell tissue came from an aborted fetus.

 Trump facilitated the ending of fetal tissue testing by the National Institutes of Health in the US:

https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2019/06/05/statement-from-the-department-of-he...


 So if the current SARS-COV-2 treatment the US President used comes from material that was derived from aborted fetal tissue is that hypocritical?  Should the President if informed of the source cell-structure, have refused the treatment?


 Now to be clear, HEK 293T is not by today's standards typically considered aborted fetal tissue because it has replicated itself for decades, thus the "original" tissue is not being used.  But on the other end, none of it would exist if the abortion cell capture had never occurred.  


 Would you refuse this treatment if it was shown to be effective even though it's development has some abortion based cell structure?

"I think that pretty much makes this discussion moot"

 Even if the replicated tissue came from an aborted fetus?  The NIH is told not to do this.  They can not sample aborted tissue today and let it replicate itself for decades, because the source cell tissue is from an abortion.  Literally the exact same thing.  


 
"Would Pelosi, Schumer, Harris, Biden ... refuse a heart transplant if the heart came from a racist, white supremacist, xenophobic, misogynist, republican?"

 I don't know I asked members here about them, not anyone else.

 My question is would You and only the word "you" with the exclusion of all other words, refuse the treatment today knowing an aborted fetus provided the initial treatment tissue?

Good question. First I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt that everything you say is true because I’m not going to investigate it. I’m not aware that you have ever purposely posted anything false so I’m not overly worried about researching this.

After all this time had passed, decades as you say, I would say no, I would not refuse the treatment. If you came to me and said a specific body part was from a recently aborted baby, that I would not do, no to that.

What is the cut off you may ask? I don’t know. I’ll say it’s a bit like the supreme court justice who said he would know pornography when he saw it. I would say the same thing, I would recognize a line  that shouldn’t be crossed when I saw it.

This could be chasing down the rabbit hole.

If it is true I would not go for the treatment.

but
But how far removed?

is the strain used in other products that were based on that are far removed and someone is looking for a link?

Just to say "oh what a hypocrite the president is" ?

Or is it currently requiring harvesting of the unborn for this?

Do we give synetic oils the boot because they were a Nazi invention?

If it is a question of oil? Olive oil comes from olives, Peanut oil comes from peanuts. But if baby oil came from babies ...
We should never use it.  




“Art, like morality, consists of drawing the line somewhere.”
G K Chesterton

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/5901542002

from the link:

"While REGN-COV's monoclonal antibodies do appear to be derived from a B cell line isolated from a human donor who recovered from SARS-CoV-2 and an immunized mouse engineered to have a human immune system, USA TODAY did note a fetal-derived cell line mentioned in Regeneron's early research.

In supplementary material to a paper published in June in the journal Science, HEK293T cells – an immortalized epithelial cell line (cells not normally immortal but altered to be so via spontaneous mutation or in the lab) derived from embryonic kidney cells obtained in 1972 – were described as "briefly" used to create SARS-CoV-2-like viral particles to test mouse and human-derived antibodies against."

"
"This particular discovery program (REGN-COV2) did not involve human stem cells or ESCs," she wrote. "The 293T cell line was originally derived from human embryonic kidney cells but is an immortalized epithelial cell – so not a stem cell. These cells were transfected and used in production of a ‘pseudoparticle’ that mimics the virus’ Spike protein and allowed us to test neutralization ability of our antibodies against the virus."


Looks like the fetal stem cells or their immortalized descendants are not in the medicine anyway.

"Of course you don't really care about that, do you ?

Your original post was really about whether Trump should be condemned as a hypocrite because he took it, even though it's extremely unlikely he had any idea what was in any of the medications he was given by his doctors."


 I don't really care what Trump does regarding his health.  I've never once on here said anything remotely close to condemning Trump on this forum.  I didn't claim he had, or should have had knowledge of anything.

 I proposed that if he did, if, would it be hypocritical.  Second I asked forum members would accept the treatment.  Specifically them and no other human.  


"That's ridiculous. Tell us that you have never been prescribed a medication, or taken a vaccination without knowing precisely what the ingredients were and where they came from."

 I never claimed that.  You are taking what I asked and replacing it with what you think I asked.  I very specifically said "if informed of the source cell-structure".

"Looks like the fetal stem cells or their immortalized descendants are not in the medicine anyway."

 Yeah, I didn't claim they were "in the medicine", they were part of the process of creating the treatment.  

 My comparison is not allowing NIH to conduct any lab study that would allow for the initial collection of cells.  Initial collections.  Just like HEK 293T.  Without initial collection it would not exist.

No matter how we look at it, that was an aborted fetus and decades of research comes from those cells.  

 So would you, knowing that the treatment, be it medicine, a physical therapy, a surgical implant, a contact lens or pair of glasses, use any of those things if you knew the source material came from an aborted fetus?

 I know you answered this already, I am just clarifying I do not intend to say that the exact product must be ingested, just that research that created a treatment process only exists because at one time aborted fetus cell collection was allowed to happen.

"Curious how saying the above,
Is not implying;
"in the medicine""


Read it however you want.   I am asking if you, specifically you and only the word you, would accept treatment if you knew the source material was from an aborted fetus.

 If "treatment" to you means only medicine then that is fine.  This isn't a question for Trump, it is a question for you.