Orthodox Reflections

This response is to information presented on The Spirit of St. Tikhon’s podcast on Ancient Faith Radio, episode entitled Covid and the Vaccines. The podcast may be found here. 

The response is written by a Registered Nurse with a background in both clinical and pharmaceutical (research and educator on post-marketed products) settings. Due to a non-disclosure agreement with work, name and identifying information are being kept confidential.  

---

Commentary on COVID-19 Vaccine Podcast

As a healthcare provider, I am aware that one of the most important aspects of medicine is to be self-aware of your emotions and biases before explaining options to a patient. The purpose of educating a patient is not for them to do what you want them to. It is to provide them with useful information so they can make their own informed decision about their healthcare (Hess, 2009).  The following commentary is based on a recent interview between Fr. John Parker and Dr. Ryan Nash on Ancient Faith Radio. My goal is to provide an overview of current evidence-based practice concerning COVID-19, a data analysis of available C-19 data, and explore the current issues with big data in today’s research settings. The intent behind the following analysis stems from concern about widespread misinformation and manipulation of current data (maybe stemming from good but biased intent) and a further goal is to present information and resources accessible for all to read at their own discretion.

Smallpox Vaccine

Many people, including healthcare providers, compare COVID-19 vaccines (which I will comment on later) to the smallpox vaccine. Let us take a brief look at the history of the smallpox vaccine.  According to the CDC, smallpox disease, “On average, 3 out of every 10 people who got it died” (2021). The first vaccine to be developed (as well as being the first vaccine ever) was the smallpox vaccine in 1796. In the podcast, Fr. John and Dr. Nash begin the vaccine discussion with a story about St. Innocent successfully convincing native Alaskans to convert to Orthodoxy by offering them smallpox vaccines. 

However, what was not conveyed in the podcast was the timing of the smallpox vaccine. St Innocent moved to Sitka in 1834, and it was not until several years later that they were hit with the smallpox pandemic. So, (A) the smallpox vaccine was being used for decades before St. Innocent and the Russian colony introduced the smallpox vaccine to the native population, (B) the Alaskan natives “allowed a doctor from the colonies to vaccinate any who were interested,” (SAINT INNOCENT, n.d.), (C) these vaccines were not developed from aborted fetal cell lines, (D) the smallpox vaccine used was exactly what we would think of as a vaccine prior to 2020.  The smallpox vaccines worked by introducing into the body a harmless piece of the virus (weakened or killed) which triggered an immune response. The COVID “vaccines” relying on mRNA technology are completely different. mRNA vaccines work by introducing a piece of mRNA that corresponds to a viral protein. Using this mRNA blueprint, cells produce the viral protein and it is hoped that an immune response will be triggered. The COVID “vaccines” are not really vaccines. They are a type of injected medical device or therapy, but nothing that previously would have been recognized as a vaccine. 

So to summarize – The smallpox vaccine had serious medical benefit because over 30% of the people infected with smallpox died. (See chart to the right for COVID fatality rates which are not even remotely comparable.) The smallpox vaccine was fully proven by the time St. Innocent recommended it. It had been in successful use for decades. Treatment with the smallpox vaccine was completely voluntary, even though smallpox was incredibly deadly. There were no links between the smallpox vaccine and abortion. The smallpox vaccine was the textbook definition of a vaccine. It was the same technology that was used for every subsequent vaccine in history, until 2020 when mRNA “vaccines” were rolled out. mRNA injections are new and their short-term and long-term effects are totally unknown.

So what does the example of St. Innocent and the smallpox vaccine tell us about the current COVID vaccines? Absolutely nothing.

Who is an Expert?

In the podcast, the word “expert” was frequently brought up. That is a word that is all too commonly tossed around these days. As Dr. Ioannidis observed during the pandemic, “Anyone who was not an epidemiologist or health policy specialist could suddenly be cited as an epidemiologist or health policy specialist by reporters, who often knew little about those fields but knew immediately which opinions were true” (Ioannidis, 2021). So what constitutes being an expert? Dr. Nash was interviewed in this podcast because he is considered an “expert” in vaccine knowledge, but by what standards? His background is bioethics and palliative care, with a focus on oncology. Dr. Nash mentions knowing about ventilators, but that was not discussed any further.  The aim of palliative care is to provide patients “relief from pain and other symptoms of a serious illness” and “to improve the quality of life” (Mayo Foundation, 2017) for patients. This is one of the most bewildering moments for me personally, knowing him as a palliative care doctor, as to why he would encourage someone to take a medicine that has so many unknowns and can cause significant harm and premature death.

Also, Dr. Nash refers to consulting with leading experts (without specifying whom he is referring to). He did not define what he considers a leading expert, but also accused other physicians (whom he did not specify) of saying “questionable things.” How do we know someone who is being interviewed to answer questions about COVID-19 vaccines, who is not an epidemiologist, not a microbiologist, not a virologist, not even an infectious disease doctor, is not just another physician saying “questionable things?”

So what sources of evidence should one consider? It’s easy to find an article or listen to a video and think you have all the evidence. However, an “evidence-based practitioner” is one who “finds out what is known by looking at multiple sources for evidence” (Kovner & D’Aunno, 2017, p.6). When following evidence-based practice, the four types of evidence which need to be accounted for include:

1.       Scientific evidence—findings from published scientific research
2.       Organizational evidence—data, facts, and figures gathered from the organization
3.       Experiential evidence—the professional experience and judgement of practitioners
4.       Stakeholder evidence—the values and concerns of people who may be affected by the decision (Kovner & D’Aunno, 2017, p.6).

For Dr. Nash, what are his sources of evidence for the claims he is making? It may be an informal podcast, but citations would go a long ways towards adding credibility to his assertions. Further, given his medical specialty, how many COVID patients has Dr. Nash successfully treated? How many COVID injections has Dr. Nash administered in his practice? Does he have any firsthand knowledge of this topic?

HEK Cell Line and Modern Medicine

Also very misleading in the podcast was the insinuation we cannot find “morally ethical medicine,” because all medicines are tested using HEK cell lines during production. This is incredibly false. First, let us examine the history of when HEK cell lines came into use and the fact that many medicines we use today were produced prior to their introduction. The HEK cell line “was initially produced in 1973 by a team lead by Alex van der Eb” (Simmons, 2019) in the Netherlands. One of the most used drugs today, Tylenol, was introduced in 1955, so roughly a couple decades before HEK cell lines were used (Tylenol® history, 2019).  Another popular life-saving drug commonly used in today’s modern society is Aspirin, which was “marketed in 1899” (Sneader, 2000).

Also, even in today’s pharmaceutical industry, many medicines use non-human mammalian cell lines to test their products, for example: “several recombinant clotting factor products produced in non-human mammalian cell lines have been used successfully for many years” (Dumont et al., 2015, p. 1115). So if there is evidence which says we did, still do, and can manufacture medicines without using aborted cell lines, why should we continue to accept medicines that are not ethically derived? The best, and most logical, incentive to deter companies from using morally unethical practices would be to refuse these products, not to continue excusing these practices because we “live in a tainted society.”

Is this a reason why we don’t have as many martyrs for our faith today as we had in the past? If they applied the same logic we did today, they would not have attained sainthood and salvation. How is it that so many mass martyrdoms took place in the early days of the church (such as the 20,000 Christians of Nicomedia), yet Orthodoxy continues to thrive today? (20,000 martyrs, n.d.). Because they did not succumb to the “tainted society” which enticed them with temporary pleasures in exchange for their salvation.

Can you imagine if we were to transport ourselves to those time periods? Would we accuse them of not loving their fellow man for not saving the lives of the people in the Church? All they had to do in exchange for leaving the Church was to worship pagan idols…seems a lot less invasive than being forced to take a vaccine tainted by the cell line of an aborted baby. How can society and medicine claim to be progressive, if we are still abiding by pagan-like child sacrificing methods of the controversial 1960-1970s era to produce medicines? To gain what, an empty promise of an extra few years on this temporary life in exchange for eternal life?  Where is the progress when “more than 1.5 BILLION babies have been aborted worldwide in the past 50 years” (Abortion in numbers, 2021)? Meanwhile, the number of lives these abortion-derived cell lines are suspected to have saved, globally from 1960 to 2015, is 10.3 million (Olshansky & Hayflick, 2017).

Perhaps, we should be thankful for this awareness of how medicines are made so that we can change our practices.  Let us follow the example of our Holy Fathers and Holy Martyrs who were able, especially by their death and suffering, to continue the legacy of the One True Holy Apostolic Church for 2,000 plus years while promoting eternal life. 

Scroll Down to Continue

Challenges with Big Data

The following example puts in perspective how much data was being generated across the globe prior to COVID-19:

“IBM estimates that 2.5 quintillion bytes of information are generated each day. That is three times the equivalent of the Library of Congress each second” (Nelson & Staggers, 2018, p. 621).

It’s not difficult to imagine what the challenges are when trying to examine data “across thousands of data points,” which is the fact “that the ability to collect these types of data has outstripped the ability to analyze them” (Nelson & Staggers, 2018, p. 622).  Thus, to make a claim about COVID-19 data and data about the COVID-19 vaccines being sound is both naïve and misleading.  For example, let us examine the veracity— “the accuracy and completeness (the “truth”) of the data or its opposite, the messiness of the data” (Nelson & Staggers, 2018, p.393)—of the CDC’s data on mortality regarding COVID-19.

Example with CDC COVID-19 Data Criteria

The first reasonable question anyone should ask about any piece of data is how did they gather the data/what were the criteria? When looking at mortality data of COVID-19, the CDC site specifically states that the death counts in their report “include laboratory confirmed COVID-19 deaths and clinically confirmed COVID-19 deaths. This includes deaths where COVID-19 is listed as a “presumed” or “probable” cause” (Technical Notes, 2021). We are literally claiming COVID-19 as the cause of death for people without even confirming that they had COVID-19, so how is this data accurate? We also know there were financial incentives for hospital administrations to encourage HCP’s to diagnosis patients with COVID-19 (COVID-19 FAQs, 2020).

Another interesting analysis is how the CDC counts those who are fully vaccinated versus unvaccinated. The CDC states the following: “fully vaccinated refers to a person who is: ≥2 weeks following receipt of the second dose in a 2-dose series, or ≥2 weeks following receipt of one dose of a single-dose vaccine.  Unvaccinated refers to a person who does not fit the definition of “fully vaccinated,” including people whose vaccination status is not known, for the purposes of this guidance” (Updated Healthcare, 2021). The implications of such criteria are obvious. If someone receives a COVID-19 vaccine, and is hospitalized for a reaction or is diagnosed with COVID-19, the CDC can still label such a case as unvaccinated if it has not been 14 days after their completed COVID-19 vaccine series. 

The “Scrutiny” Behind COVID-19 Vaccines

 One of the most untruthful claims during the podcast interview was how the COVID-19 vaccines do not differ from traditional vaccines. This was Dr. Tobias Hohl’s (an infectious disease expert) response to the question if there have been other mRNA vaccines: “These are the first messenger RNA vaccines to be produced and tested in large-scale phase III human trials.”  Even a Times article celebrated the new technology by stating: “The plague year of 2020 will be remembered as the time when these traditional vaccines were supplanted by something fundamentally new: genetic vaccines, which deliver a gene or piece of genetic code into human cells” (Isaacson, 2021).  And for anyone who would like a biology refresher in lay man’s terms on DNA, RNA, and traditional vaccines versus these genetic vaccines, I recommend reading Dr. Marcus De Brun’s updated article ‘Healthy people do not require genetic vaccination.’ Below, we will examine a few key points on why someone would be skeptical about COVID-19 vaccines (and in general, truths about pharmaceuticals today), including information from the actual emergency use authorization (EUA) statements and prescribing information (PI) from the COVID-19 vaccines. 

FDA Approval

There is no magical test or data to predict the long-term effects from these novel COVID-19 vaccines. As Dr. Angell stated so in her book “The Truth About the Drug Companies,” and as I have personally witnessed working in pharmaceuticals:

When a drug company applies to the FDA for approval of a new drug, it is required to submit results from every one of the clinical trials it has sponsored. But it is not required to publish them. The FDA may approve the drug on the basis of minimal evidence. For example, the agency usually required simply the drug work better than a placebo in two clinical trials, even if it doesn’t in other trials. But companies publish only the positive results, not the negative ones.

As one who has worked in providing medical information for the lay public and health professionals, I can attest to Dr. Angell’s statement and provide personal experience of having access to data from clinical trials that we were not allowed to share with patients, only healthcare professionals, and sometimes not even the healthcare professionals. I have worked with FDA approved drugs that were out in the market for years, only to be pulled from the market later due to serious adverse events that manifested after being widely-used by the public (and sometimes, drugs that were continued to be used in the U.S. but pulled from the European market). 

Anyone can easily access the PI of Comirnaty, the recently FDA approved Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine, not to be confused with Pfizer’s ‘Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine’ (which is not FDA approved and is the vaccine that is readily available in U.S.). The FDA quietly re-issued the EUA for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine on August 23, 2021 (the same day they publicly announced the FDA approval of Comirnaty, the vaccine which was tested in Europe). In the FDA’s Reissued Letter of Authorization for Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is the following disclaimer in fine print: 

The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns. The products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness. (FDA, n.d.) 

However, nowhere is it stated how the two products are legally distinct and what the certain differences are.

Ingredients

A concerning aspect the public needs to be aware of regarding pharmaceutical companies is their protection under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA). The UTSA enables pharmaceutical companies to keep information, such as their formulations (ingredients) of a product, secret to the public (Nealey, Daignault, & Cai, 2014).  Dr. Nash claims independent groups (whom he does not specify) have studied the vaccine and determined the safety of the content (but does not share what the results were).

Reporting Adverse Events

Speaking from experience, prior to working in pharmaceuticals, my colleagues (nurses and physicians) and I were not taught to report adverse events related to vaccines via the FDA’s VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). The only people I spoke with who were aware of VAERS, previous to COVID-19, were pharmacists. Although “healthcare providers are required by law to report to VAERS,” (VAERS, n.d.) an alarmingly small percentage of health care providers are aware of the system. Of those that are, few take the time to report adverse events related to vaccines via VAERS (McNeil et al., 2013). Even during COVID-19, I have colleagues, who are physicians, who say they are the only ones in their practice reporting events via VAERS because the rest of their colleagues: are not aware of how to report, ridicule them for being “anti-vaxx” if they report, or find the VAERS reporting system too complicated. Another disturbing mentality related to me by my colleagues is how patients suffering possible adverse events related to the vaccines (including cardiac events) would ask their physicians to report the event, but the physicians would refuse and reassure them that the events are not related. However, per the EUA’s of COVID-19 vaccines, “irrespective of attribution to vaccination,” it is illegal for these healthcare providers not to report events, especially serious adverse events resulting in death, hospitalization, etc. 

My colleagues (physicians and professors at teaching institutions, including cardiologists and oncologists) have witnessed a large number of serious and even deadly cardiovascular related events. Some of them have even estimated a five-fold increase of myocarditis cases this year. Ironically, all of the physicians (including cardiologists) I spoke with strongly recommend against the Moderna vaccine, but have admitted also seeing thrombotic and other cardiovascular cases with patients receiving some of the other COVID-19 vaccines.

Natural Immunity & Early Treatments

Recently, there are many studies surfacing proving that natural immunity against COVID-19 is superior to receiving COVID-19 vaccines (Gazit et al., 2021). These disprove Dr. Nash’s statement of there not being evidence showing superiority of natural immunity over vaccine-induced immunity.  Also, I found it interesting that Dr. Nash did not mention (maybe he was not aware) how the “best evidence comes from a controlled study.” Meanwhile from the control group of the COVID-19 vaccine trials, “many people who had been in the placebo group have now opted to take the vaccine” (Harris, 2021).  

Further, Dr. Nash failed to mention the success of all the people overcoming COVID-19 with early, preventative treatment.  All he mentioned was Alex Jones, a media personality who seems to sell supplements. I personally have never heard of him. This was such an odd comment to hear from Dr. Nash considering there is an expert collaborative team of physicians (ranging from pulmonologists, critical-care physicians, and many professors of medicine) that developed effective protocols treating COVID-19 which have saved many lives (The FLCC Physicians, n.d.).

As a fellow Orthodox Christian, one of the most disappointing aspects of this podcast interview was the failure to mention this natural, preventative approach to COVID-19, especially since this is the example set out before us by The Holy Unmercenaries – physicians who in their lives on earth worked to heal all without concern for gain; and who since their repose continue to heal by their prayers those who call on them in faith.  The Holy Unmercenaries had a tremendous respect for God’s creation and for the natural resiliency of the human body. These physicians were also known to address both the spiritual and physical needs of their patients through both natural and spiritual methods. St. Luke the Surgeon, Archbishop of Simferopol, is a 20th Century saint famous for saying, “Drink Holy Water, the more often, the better. It is the best and most effective medicine. I’m not saying this as a priest, I’m saying it as a doctor, from my medical experience.”

 I have yet to read of any of the Holy Unmercenaries who became sanctified and healed others by means of using immoral medicine.  There is no need to lower our standards spiritually for a world that can not give us eternal life.  

Conclusion

People ask me, colleagues included, which COVID-19 vaccine to take. From an ethical and legal standpoint, I am not comfortable answering that question. I am comfortable sharing information that I know about the products and providing resources for them to research on their own.  Even with my position as a nurse in the pharmaceutical industry, I am not allowed to provide medical information or persuade patients to make one decision over another. I will refer them to their health care provider. Discernment is not easy when one (expert or non-expert) must sift through impossible mountains of messy data.  We can improve our discernment by reading the Lives of the Saints to put everything in a truly “ethical” and Godly perspective, and to help us not be confused by worldly snares and delusions. People utilizing fallacious ad hominem attack methods such as labeling people “skeptics” and “anti-vaxx” does not help anyone learn anything beneficial or relevant.  As an Orthodox Christian and nurse, as recommended by my spiritual father, the best advice I could give anyone is to pray.

By an Orthodox RN who is not a theologian and does not claim to be a subject matter expert (SME) on COVID-19 or COVID-19 vaccines. 

References

Abortion in numbers. Life Institute. (2021). https://thelifeinstitute.net/learning-centre/abortion-facts/issues/the-numbers#.

Angell, M., & Angell, M. (2006). The truth about the drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. Scribe.

BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine(also known as BNT162B2). Pfizer. (n.d.). https://www.pfizer.com/products/product-detail/pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine.

Brun, M. D. (2021, April 11). ‘Healthy people do not require genetic vaccination’. Cassandra Voices. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://cassandravoices.com/science-environment/science/healthy-people-do-not-require-genetic-vaccination/.

Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. (n.d.). Fluarix quadrivalent. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/fluarix-quadrivalent.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, April). Updated healthcare infection prevention and control recommendations in response To COVID-19 Vaccination. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/infection-control-after-vaccination.html.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, August 25). Technical notes: Provisional death counts for Coronavirus Disease (covid-19). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/tech_notes.htm.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021, February 20). History of smallpox. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/history/history.html.

COVID-19 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) Billing. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/03092020-covid-19-faqs-508.pdf. (2020)

COVID-19 map. Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. (n.d.). https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html.

Darslan. (2018, August 1). A controversial life. The Biomedical Scientist. https://thebiomedicalscientist.net/science/controversial-life.

Dumont, J., Euwart, D., Mei, B., Estes, S., & Kshirsagar, R. (2015). Human cell lines for biopharmaceutical manufacturing: History, status, and future perspectives. Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 36(6), 1110–1122. https://doi.org/10.3109/07388551.2015.1084266

Falasca, F., Sciandra, I., Di Carlo, D., Gentile, M., Deales, A., Antonelli, G., & Turriziani, O. (2020). Detection of sars-cov n2 gene: Very low amounts of viral rna or false positive? Journal of Clinical Virology, 133, 104660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2020.104660

FDA. (n.d.). Comirnaty and Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/comirnaty-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine.FDA. (n.d.). Comirnaty and Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19/comirnaty-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine. 

Gazit, S., Shlezinger, R., Perez, G., Lotan, R., Peretz, A., Ben-Tov, A., Cohen, D., Muhsen, K., Chodick, G., & Patalon, T. (2021, January 1). Comparing sars-cov-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: Reinfections versus breakthrough infections. medRxiv. Retrieved September 13, 2021, from https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1.

Gorvett, Z. (2020, November 4). The controversial cells that saved 10 million lives. BBC Future. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201103-the-controversial-cells-that-saved-10-million-lives.

Harris, R. (2021, February 19). Long-Term studies of COVID-19 Vaccines hurt by Placebo Recipients Getting Immunized. NPR. Retrieved September 13, 2021, from https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/969143015/long-term-studies-of-covid-19-vaccines-hurt-by-placebo-recipients-getting-immuni.

Hess, C. Incorporating patient education into your plan of care, Nursing: April 2009 – Volume 39 – Issue 4 – p 62 doi: 10.1097/01.NURSE.000034 8423.03172.42

Ioannidis, J. (2021, September 9). How the pandemic is changing the norms of science. Tablet Magazine. Retrieved September 13, 2021, from https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/science/articles/pandemic-science.

Isaacson, W. (2021, January 11). How mRNA technology gave us the FIRST COVID-19 Vaccines. Time. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://time.com/5927342/mrna-covid-vaccine/.

Kovner, A. R., & D’Aunno, T. A. (2017). Evidence-based management in healthcare: Principles, cases, and perspectives. Health Administration Press.

Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. (2017, August 15). Palliative care. Mayo Clinic. https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/palliative-care/about/pac-20384637.

McNeil, M. M., Li, R., Pickering, S., Real, T. M., Smith, P. J., & Pemberton, M. R. (2013). Who is unlikely to report adverse events After vaccinations to the vaccine adverse event reporting System (vaers)? Vaccine, 31(24), 2673–2679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.04.009

Nealey, T., Daignault, R. M., & Cai, Y. (2014, November 20). Trade secrets in life science and pharmaceutical companies. Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4382727/.

Nelson, R., & Staggers, N. (2018). Health informatics: An interprofessional approach. Mosby.

Olshansky, S. J., & Hayflick, L. (2017, March 2). The role of the wi-38 CELL strain in saving lives and REDUCING MORBIDITY. AIMS public health. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689800/.

Past targeted distributions. Official web site of the U.S. Health Resources & Services Administration. (2021, August 20). https://www.hrsa.gov/provider-relief/past-payments/targeted-distribution.

SAINT INNOCENT, APOSTLE TO AMERICA. St Innocent OCA. (n.d.). http://www.saintinnocent.org/p/our-patron-saint.html.

Shepherd, I. (2021, August 28). Mrna vaccines: The silent weapon. LewRockwell. Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/08/no_author/mrna-vaccines-the-silent-weapon/. 

Simmons, H. (2019, January 8). Hek293 cells: Applications and advantages. News. https://www.news-medical.net/life-sciences/HEK293-Cells-Applications-and-Advantages.aspx.

Sneader, W. (2000). The discovery of aspirin: A reappraisal. BMJ: British Medical Journal. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1119266/.

The embryo Project Encyclopedia. Leonard Hayflick (1928- ) | The Embryo Project Encyclopedia. (n.d.). https://embryo.asu.edu/pages/leonard-hayflick-1928.

The flccc physicians – FLCCC: Front Line covid-19 critical Care Alliance. FLCCC | Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance. (2021, July 26). Retrieved September 12, 2021, from https://covid19criticalcare.com/about/the-flccc-physicians/.

Tylenol® history. TYLENOL®. (2019). https://www.tylenol.com/news/about-us.

Wadman, M. (2017, March 2). Henrietta lacks wasn’t the only woman who unknowingly contributed to medical history. Slate Magazine. https://slate.com/technology/2017/03/the-woman-whose-aborted-fetus-helped-create-the-rubella-vaccine.html.

World Health Organization. (2016). Smallpox vaccines. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/smallpox-vaccines.

Velimirović Nikolaj. (2008). The prologue Of Ohrid: Lives of Saints, hymns, reflections And homilies for every day of the year (Vol. 2). Sebastian Press, Western American Diocese.

20,000 martyrs of Nicomedia. Orthodox Church in America. (n.d.). https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/1999/12/28/103664-20000-martyrs-of-nicomedia.