USA: FDA Bought Fetal Organs, Heads and Tissue for ‘Humanized Mice’ Project
Judicial Watch has uncovered more documents detailing the evil activities of your federal government – the trafficking of the remains of unborn human beings killed by abortion.
We received another 198 pages of records and communications from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involving “humanized mice” research with human fetal heads, organs and tissue, including communications and contracts with human fetal tissue provider Advanced Bioscience Resources (ABR).
We received the records through a March 2019 FOIA lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, of which the FDA is a part (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department Health and Human Services (No. 1:19-cv-00876)).
Our lawsuit asks for all contracts and related documentation on disbursement of funds, procedural documents and communications between FDA and ABR for the provision of human fetal tissue to be used in humanized mice research. After we successfully opposed the FDA’s redaction of certain information from its records, a federal court ordered HHS to release additional information about its purchases of organs harvested from aborted human fetuses – including “line item prices,” or the price per organ the government paid to ABR. The court also found “there is reason to question” whether the transactions violate federal law barring the sale of fetal organs. Documents previously uncovered in this lawsuit show that the federal government demanded the purchased fetal organs be “fresh and never frozen.”)
The records include an FDA generated contract with ABR, based on a “requisition” it issued on July 27, 2012, for $12,000 worth of “tissue procurement for humanized mice,” which indicates the requisition was for a “non-competitive award.” Although the initial award was for $12,000, the total estimated amount of funds allocated for the requisition was $60,000. Under “Justification for Other than Full and Open Competition,” the FDA writes:
Scientists within the FDA and in the larger field of humanized mouse research have searched extensively over the past several years, and ABR is the only company in the U.S. capable of supplying tissues suitable for HM research. No other company or organization is capable of fulfilling the need.
Costs are estimated [for the fetal parts] at $230 per tissue x two tissues per shipment = $460 plus $95 shipping = $555 per shipment. A total of 21 shipments = $11,655.00.
An April 1, 2013, “Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract” form that shows the FDA purchased fetal livers and thymuses from ABR going back to at least October 2012, billing $580 per liver/thymus set, but later paying a unit price of $685.
A January 1, 2013, “Fees for Services Schedule” provided by ABR to the FDA includes:
FETAL CADAVEROUS PROCUREMENT – SERVICE FEE
2nd trimester D&E [Dilation and Evacuation abortion] (13-24 weeks) – per specimen $275
1st trimester aspiration [abortion] (8-12 weeks) – per specimen $515
Intact Calvarium [baby’s skull] (8-24 weeks)” – per specimen $515
The fees for services schedule also includes “Special Processing/Preservation” of the fetal parts, such as “Tissue ‘Cleaning,’” “Snap freezing,” and “Passive freezing (Dry ice).”
In a September 9, 2014, “Order for Supplies or Services,” the FDA writes regarding a $9,900 order:
The Contractors shall ship 2nd Trimester thymus $325, 2nd Trimester liver $325. Overnight deliver $150 and EFT wire transfer fee $25, for a total per delivery of $825. Total of this contract not to exceed $9,900.00.
As the result of an August 21, 2015, “Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract,” ABR bumped up the price of baby livers and thymuses from $325 each to $340 each.
A “Tissue Acquisition Quote” sent by ABR to Howard on July 5, 2017, provided a quote of $5,440 each to provide 16 sets of second trimester (16-24 weeks) livers and 16 sets of second trimester (16-24 weeks) thymuses at $340 per “sample.” The request for the quote notes that “tissue known to be positive for HIV, HepA, HepB, HepC or chromosomal abnormalities are not acceptable.”
On June 28, 2017, a redacted FDA contract specialist sends Larton at ABR a request for a quote(RFQ) of pricing for human fetal tissue, aged “16-24 weeks,” including a “Statement of Needs”:
The HM [humanized mice] are created by surgical implantations of human tissue into mice that have multiple genetic mutations that block the development of the mouse immune system at a very early stage. The absence of the mouse immune system allows the human tissues to grow and develop into functional human tissues…. In order for the humanization to proceed correctly we need to obtain fetal tissue with a specific set of specialized characteristics.
A May 2018, report from a company named “LABS,” which was employed by ABR to test fetal parts and their mothers for hepatitis and HIV, notes in its “methodology description” that they are approved by the FDA “for living and cadaveric donor screening.”
The records include a recitation of requirements by the FDA for “Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer,” in which ABR must adhere to regulations relating to “Convict Labor” and “Child Labor-Cooperation with Authorities and Remedies.”
On September 24, 2018, the Trump FDA terminated its contract with ABR for human tissue purchases and began an audit of its acquisitions of baby body parts. The records include the FDA’s letter terminating the contract:
Based on the terms and conditions of the Purchase Order as awarded to Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc. (“ABR”) on July 27, 2018, the Government is not sufficiently assured that the human tissue provided to the Government to humanize the immune systems of mice will comply with the prohibitions set forth under 42 U.S.C. § 289g- 2. Furthermore, the Government has concerns with the sufficiency of the sole-source justification. Therefore, pursuant to FAR [Federal Acquisition Regulation] clause 52.213-4(f), the Purchase Order is being terminated effective September 24, 2018.
Here’s some background.
In February 2020, we first uncovered through this lawsuit hundreds of pages of records from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) showing that the agency paid thousands of dollars to a California-based firm to purchase organs from aborted human fetuses to create “humanized mice” for HIV research.
In May 2021, this lawsuit uncovered FDA records showing the agency spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to buy human fetal tissue from ABR. The tissue was used in creating “humanized mice” to test “biologic drug products.” The records indicated the FDA wanted tissue purchases “Fresh; shipped on wet ice.”
On August 3, 2021, we announced that The Center for Medical Progress (CMP) and Judicial Watch, through a separate lawsuit, received 252 pages of new documents from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that reveal nearly $3 million in federal funds were spent on the University of Pittsburgh’s quest to become a “Tissue Hub” for human fetal tissue ranging from 6 to 42 weeks’ gestation. The Pitt scientists note that, “All fetal tissue is collected through a collaborative process including Family Planning, Obstetrics and Pathology.” Pitt anticipated “being able to harvest and distribute quality tissue and cells … [and] do not anticipate any major problems related to the acquisition and distribution of the tissues.” Pitt’s target goal “is to have available a minimum of 5 cases (tissues and if possible other biologicals) per week of gestational age for ages 6-42 weeks.”
Chopping up aborted human beings for their organs and tissue is a moral and legal outrage. This issue should be front and center in any debate about America’s barbaric abortion industry.
DC Police Seek Second Delay in Responding to Ashli Babbitt Records Suit
Nancy Pelosi is using events at the U.S. Capitol on January 6 to attack those who oppose the tyranny of the Left. What gives her political game away is the wholesale concealing of facts about that day.
The latest: The District of Columbia asked a court for an additional delay to respond to our FOIA lawsuit for records related to the U.S. Capitol Police shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6. 2001.
In our opposition to the second requested 30 day delay, we argue that DC “has brazenly violated the law on an issue of significant public interest,” and “seeks delay for nothing more than delay’s sake.
We filed our May 2021 FOIA lawsuit filed after DC failed to respond to two FOIA April, 2021 requests to the Metropolitan Police Department and the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner for records related to Babbitt’s death (Judicial Watch v. The District of Columbia (No. 2021 CA 001710 B)).
In August, our lawsuit led to the release of records from the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner revealing that it submitted a request for permission to cremate Babbitt only two days after taking custody of her body and that ‘due to the “high profile nature” of Babbitt’s case, Deputy Chief Medical Examiner Francisco Diaz requested that a secure electronic file with limited access be created for Babbitt’s records.
The Metropolitan Police Department has yet to provide any records.
Babbitt was shot and killed as she climbed through a broken interior window in the United State Capitol. She was unarmed, and a 14-year Air Force veteran. The identity of the shooter was kept secret by Congress, and federal and local authorities for eight months until U.S. Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd went public to try to defend his killing of Ms. Babbitt.
Now that the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt has finally been identified – and has gone public – there is no reason for the DC Police to hide records on the homicide of Babbitt. America deserves to have the full details of what really happened on January 6.
We are pursuing several investigations into the events of January 6.
We recently asked the court for discovery in its lawsuit against the United States Capitol Police for emails and videos concerning the disturbance at the U.S. Capitol.
In March, we filed a FOIA lawsuit against the District of Columbia for records about the death of Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick. Pressure from this lawsuit helped lead to the disclosure that Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes.
In May, we sued both the Department of the Interior and the Department of Defense for records regarding the deployment of armed forces around the Capitol complex in Washington, D.C., in January and February of 2021.
We also filed a lawsuit for Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s communications with the Pentagon in the days after the January 6 incident.
(Update: The Court granted the extension of time but Judicial Watch will continue the legal pressure for full disclosure about the Babbitt killing and other January 6 information that Nancy Pelosi and her allies are hiding.)
Delaware Supreme Court Considers Case on Biden Senate Records Secrecy
Our quest to learn what Joe Biden is hiding about his Senate career has reached the Supreme Court of Delaware, which heard arguments this week in our state Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit. We sued on behalf of the Daily Caller News Foundation for access to records about President Joe Biden’s Senate records held by the University of Delaware. (You can view the arguments here.)
Biden’s papers include more than 1,850 boxes of archival records from his senate career. The university is withholding the alleged agreement with President Biden to keep them secret as well as communications between the university and representatives of the president about keeping them secret.
We and The Daily Caller filed requests on April 30, 2020, for all of Biden’s records and for records about the preservation and any proposed release of the records, including communications with Mr. Biden or his representatives.
Our appeal challenges a Superior Court of Delaware’s January 4, 2021, ruling upholding the Delaware state attorney general’s opinion that the records are not “public records” because, the opinion concludes without evidence, no public funds are used to support the Biden records project at the University of Delaware.
We argue that it is impossible for the housing of Biden’s senatorial records in the University of Delaware’s Library to not be supported by or have an effect on any public funds. We note that the University admitted that “[t]he State of Delaware provides the University with approximately $120 million each year through an appropriation in the state budget,” but has yet to show how any of these funds are not used to support the papers.
We also point out that “archival storage space and professional staff members’ time are things of value that it can be inferred are paid for with public funds,” and notes that the requests even listed the “University personnel who maintain the Senatorial Papers whose salaries, it can be inferred, are paid with State funds.”
“The University of Delaware’s argument that a public university housing public records is not subject to public disclosure requirements would be comical if all this weren’t so serious. We are hopeful that the court will not allow this attempt to hide President Biden’s rightfully public information to stand,” Daily Caller News Foundation President Neil Patel said.
We filed the July 2020 FOIA lawsuit after the University denied its April 30, 2020, request for:
- All records regarding the proposed release of the records pertaining to former Vice President Joe Biden’s tenure as a Senator that have been housed at the University of Delaware Library since 2012. This request includes all related records of communication between the University of Delaware and any other records created pertaining to any meeting of the Board of Trustees during which the proposed release of the records was discussed.
- All records of communication between any representative of the University of Delaware and former Vice President Biden or any other individual acting on his behalf between January 1, 2018 and the present.
Also on April 30, the Daily Caller News Foundation submitted its FOIA request to the university for:
- All agreements concerning the storage of more than 1,850 boxes of archival records and 415 gigabytes of electronic records from Joe Biden’s senate career from 1973 through 2009.
- Communications between the staff of the University of Delaware Library and Joe Biden or his senatorial, vice-presidential or political campaign staff, or for anyone representing any of those entities between January 1, 2010, and April 30, 2020, about Joe Biden’s senate records.
- Any logs or sign-in sheets recording any individuals who have visited the special-collections department where records from Joe Biden’s senate career are stored between 2010 to the date of this request.
- All records from Joe Biden’s Senate career that have been submitted to the University of Delaware Library.
It is more than a little bit curious that President Biden refuses to make not one page of his Senate records available to the American public. Delaware law requires state entities, including the University of Delaware, to provide public access to these records.
Obama Program to Expand Migrant Youth Entry Returns with Broadened Eligibility
Joe Biden’s minions are looking for every opportunity to open our border to any and all comers, and our Corruption Chronicles blog has details on their latest move.
A revived Obama program to allow more migrants under the age of 21 to come to the U.S. legally will begin accepting new applications this week and has been expanded to assure more candidates qualify, the Biden administration announced via the State Department. Known as the Central American Minors (CAM) Refugee and Parole program, it was initially launched in 2014 so youths from Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras with a relative in the U.S. could qualify for asylum without having to apply in person as is customary. The Trump administration terminated the program in 2017 and earlier this year the Biden administration said it was “reinstituting and improving” it.
The new version, which officially begins accepting new applications today, will broaden eligibility and reopen cases that were closed when CAM was shut down, according to the State Department announcement that says “resettlement support center partners were trained to support families during the process” throughout August. That means it is highly likely the government paid leftist nonprofits to assist the illegal immigrants and their relatives. “The reopening of CAM coupled with eligibility expansion are components of President Biden’s multi-pronged approach to address the challenges of irregular migration throughout North and Central America,” the State Department further writes, adding that “a greater number of qualifying individuals now have access to this program.”
In addition to parents, eligibility to petition will now be extended to include legal guardians who are in the United States, pursuant to any of the following qualifying categories: lawful permanent residence; temporary protected status; parole; deferred action; deferred enforced departure; or withholding of removal. The expansion of eligibility will also include “certain U.S.-based parents or legal guardians who have a pending asylum application or a pending U visa petition” filed before May. “We are firmly committed to welcoming people to the United States with humanity and respect, and reuniting families,” the Biden administration writes in the press release, adding this: “We are delivering on our promise to promote safe, orderly, and humane migration from Central America through this expansion of legal pathways to seek humanitarian protection in the United States.”
The Obama administration enacted CAM in 2014 to allow youths from the three impoverished Central American nations with parents or relatives in the U.S. legally to apply for protective status from home. Typically, foreigners seeking asylum must apply in person. Originally, CAM only offered the perk to the children of “certain parents who are lawfully present in the United States.” To qualify the “child” had to be unmarried, under he age of 21, and a national of El Salvador, Guatemala, or Honduras. In some cases, the government allowed an “in-country parent of the qualifying child” to also qualify for access. Those determined by the U.S. government to be ineligible for refugee status, were considered for parole, which does not lead to a permanent immigration status but allows illegal immigrants to lawfully enter and live temporarily in the U.S. and apply for work authorization. Under the original CAM, the U.S. generally approved parole for a three-year period.
Reinstating CAM will make tens of thousands of minors eligible to come to the U.S. even though the country is already overwhelmed with an influx of migrant youths, mainly from Central America, that have shown up at the Mexican border. The government classifies them as Unaccompanied Alien Children (UAC) and there are approximately 14,319 in taxpayer-funded shelters throughout the U.S., according to the latest figures released by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the agency charged with caring for the UAC. The overwhelming majority (72%) are not young children but rather adolescents over 14 years of age, the government figures show, and 68% are boys. Most come from Guatemala El Salvador, and Honduras. Last fiscal year the U.S. released 75,165 UAC to “sponsors” around the country, with four states—Texas, Florida, California, and New York—absorbing the biggest chunk. Thousands also went to relatives in Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia.
Until next week …
Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.
Join: 👉 https://t.me/acnewspatriots
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.