Anthony Fauci’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases sent millions of tax dollars to the University of Pittsburgh to conduct grisly experiments with body parts from aborted babies — some of whom potentially may have been born alive, a panel of pro-life and political leaders said Tuesday.
The university is facing growing scrutiny after Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress exposed evidence of babies potentially being born alive in abortions and other disturbing practices at the university earlier this summer. The evidence came from documents they obtained from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Pro-life leaders, along with state and federal lawmakers, are calling for an investigation, and the panel reiterated those calls this week at an event hosted by the Pennsylvania Family Council in Pittsburgh, The Federalist reports.
SUPPORT LIFENEWS! If you want to fight abortion, please help LifeNews.com with a donation!
David Daleiden, founder of the Center for Medical Progress, said Fauci’s agency and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) gave the university more than $3 million in taxpayer funds for research involving aborted baby body parts.
One horrific experiment involved scalping second-trimester aborted babies and then implanting their scalps onto rodents to study the human immune system. University of Pittsburgh researchers published the results of the study in 2020 in the journal “Scientific Reports,” as well as photos that show tufts of babies’ hair growing on the rodents.
Here’s more from the report:
In a House Appropriations hearing in May, Fauci was asked about the NIAID’s funding of Pitt experiments grafting scalps from 18- to 20-week aborted fetuses onto rats, and if the agency is aware of where the fetuses come from. Fauci replied that the study went through “all the appropriate guidelines and oversight.”
Daleiden skewered Fauci’s response as “outrageous,” [saying] intact scalps used, which can be seen in pictures included in the study, are only obtainable at the size shown through a partial-birth abortion. “Intact heads” would not be obtainable through “dismemberment abortion where the skull is going to be crushed,” Daleiden explained.
Other documents obtained through their FOIA request suggest some babies may have been born alive before their organs were harvested, he continued.
“When they say they ‘track and record the warm ischemia time,’ that means they know the time at which fetuses lose their circulation and lose their blood supply,” Daleiden said, citing one of the documents provided by HHS. “They specifically say labor induction, not just a forceps extraction abortion, but a labor induction abortion where they induce labor and the mom pushes out a baby at 24 weeks.”
The evidence suggests “clear, classic cases of partial-birth abortion or this is just straight-up infanticide,” Daleiden said, according to The Federalist. “If they’re maintaining blood flow to the kidneys … extracting the baby up to the level of the kidneys and then kill the baby … it’s a clear pattern for criminal violation.”
He said the university may have broken several state and federal laws, including legislation prohibiting late-term and partial-birth abortions and infanticide. Daleiden also pointed to the Pennsylvania Abortion Control Act, which prohibits any financial “consideration whatsoever for fetal tissue” and bans “any experimentation on a living fetus, whether inside or outside the womb.”
Another panelist, retired Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge Cheryl Allen said the university’s racial quotas for aborted baby body parts also are disturbing.
The report continues:
Pitt’s grant application stated its fetal harvesting program would choose “individuals on the basis of sex/gender, race, and ethnicity,” setting quotas of 50 percent white patients and aborted fetuses, and 50 percent minority patients and fetuses, with 25 percent of those minority fetuses to come from black women. …
The study’s quotas could lead to abortion providers pushing women to have abortions depending on their race, one panelist suggested. “That’s what putting profits before people does,” Allen said.
University officials have denied any wrong-doing. In August, a University of Pittsburgh spokesman called the allegations “irresponsible and false” in a statement to Fox News. He said the university and its partners comply with all laws, and the university itself does not perform abortions.
In September, university officials announced plans to conduct an investigation to ensure its scientific research programs are complying with the law, The College Fix reports.
Around the same time, a group of U.S. House and Senate Republicans sent a letter to the Biden administration, urging a full investigation of the University of Pittsburgh’s GenitoUrinary Developmental Molecular Anatomy Project (GUDMAP).
The program involves obtaining kidneys, bladders and other organs from aborted babies for scientific research, according to the FOIA documents. In its funding application to the federal government, the university said it wanted to become a “tissue hub and collection site” for “fetal tissue,” meaning aborted baby body parts.
In their letter, the federal lawmakers expressed numerous concerns about the university project, including the possibility that abortions may be being altered illegally for the sole purpose of harvesting aborted babies’ organs and that babies may be being born alive in some cases.
“Exploiting the body parts of aborted children for research purposes is repulsive and should stop, regardless of the outcome hoped for by researchers,” the lawmakers wrote. “Research using abortive fetal tissue is unethical, wrong, and has also been proven ineffective.”
Pennsylvania state lawmakers also are calling for an investigation into the allegations.
The university has been using Americans’ tax dollars to become a “tissue hub” for aborted baby body parts for scientific research for years. According to the documents obtained by Judicial Watch and the Center for Medical Progress, the university requested $3.2 million over a five-year period in 2015, and it has received at least $2.7 million so far.
