Gatsby

From Dr. Robert Malone, m**A v*****e pioneer: (The full article is a long read, but well worth your time.)

I woke up that Sunday morning with an aha moment. I said, “I know what I can do for this guy. I can write a piece about bioethics, the bioethics of v******tion under e*******y use a***********n.”

So, I dug into the rich literature that exists, as well as federal law that goes back to The Helsinki Accords, and The Belmont report, and looked at what are the fundamental principles of bioethics as they relate to use of an experimental product.

So point number one, just to summarize; you can find it in The Code of Federal Regulations. It’s referred to as the Common Rule. So this is actually Federal Law. It’s not just words that academicians agree to. The first thing is that an e*******y use a***********n product, which is what all these v*****es are, as well as many of the drugs, is an experimental product. It’s not yet licensed. So that’s point number one. They’re all experimental products.

Point number two; if you’re going to be administering experimental products to patients, that falls under clinical research, and medical research. And so you have to follow the guidance for medical research. I mentioned the Common Rule is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.

The first clause, importantly, in the Common Rule, is there has to be complete disclosure of risk. Intuitively, what that means is, when you buy a bottle of aspirin, you pull out this little piece of paper. You look at that, and you go, “Holy Moly, this aspirin is going to k**l me.” If you read all the way through, it says it could cause heart attacks or gastric erosions. You look at that and you say, “Oh, I don’t know if I want to take that aspirin.”

But the t***h is that the ones that are common are up at the top. We all take aspirin or Tylenol or some version of that. That’s the level of disclosure of a*****e e***t risk that must be provided to patients participating in clinical research. That level of information, as we’ve just been discussing, is censored. It’s not available. So we are not meeting the criteria for full disclosure of risk.

Second key principle is that that full disclosure has to be comprehensible and comprehended. Earlier on, I referred to Thrombocytopenia, and you said, “What the heck was that?” And I said, “Low platelets.” That’s a great example. The first one was scientific jargon that was incomprehensible to you. The second one you could understand. So these risks have to be conveyed using language that people can comprehend.

Third key principle; you cannot coerce. You cannot entice. The patient or the subject has to freely accept the experimental medicine of their own volition. All this messaging about, “You must take the v*****e. You must take the v*****e because otherwise Aunt Mary could get infected.” All of this messaging that the v*****e is safe, and all the peer pressure that’s happening around the v*****e is coercion.

Now it gets even more florid with other nations. I don’t think we’ve done it here in the States, but Canada has. “We are going to give out ice cream cones to get the kiddies to come and take the jab.” That’s been done. That’s coercion and enticement.

Then there’s the last little codicil in all this. We call it the age of consent. So we here in the States generally agree that the age of consent is 18. If you are at or below the age of consent, you need to have approval or consent from your parent or guardian to take an experimental medicine. They act as your agent because you’re not able to provide consent by definition.

We cannot, by law, have infants, children, and adolescents receiving experimental products without authorization of their parents.

Now, listening to this, [one] might say, “Well, we have this special case of an epidemic, and we all have to get the v*****e.” Why do we all have to get the v*****e? What’s the logic behind that? What we’re told is, “We all have to get v******ted so we will reach herd immunity.” That’s the logic.

The problem is that this is a fallacy. We have not even gathered the data to be able to calculate in these clinical trials what would give us herd immunity. What would herd immunity mean? It would mean that we have what’s called sterilizing immunity, or in some way, if we get infected, that we don’t spread it to somebody else. That means that we’re not producing v***s and shedding v***s.

Just today, the World Health Organization made an announcement clearly and unequivocally. You’ve got to start using masks because none of these v*****es are preventing infection. They’re preventing disease. They’re not preventing t***smission. They may be reducing t***smission, but by how much we don’t know. So we can’t calculate what percent uptake is required to reach herd immunity, if we could reach herd immunity with these v*****es.

There’s an underlying logic that’s been pushed out globally about why we have to take v*****e and how many of us have to take v*****e. It’s not actually supported by data. To my mind, that’s a problem. It’s gone all the way through this outbreak where key public health officials have felt comfortable substituting their opinion for evidence-based medicine.

That always has to happen at the start of an outbreak because there’s no data. Somebody’s got to have expert opinion. We’re past that point. We have a lot of data, and it’s time we start relying on evidence to make public health decisions. We’re not doing it.

To my eye, from bioethics, we appear to be failing to meet the Code of Federal Regulations and Federal Law, let alone fundamental precepts that go back to the end of World War II. We’re not providing full disclosure of risk. We’re not doing so in a way that’s readily comprehended by the public. And we are enticing, compelling, coercing, and otherwise not respecting the rights of the individual to choose what happens to their body.

In my mind, the bedrock we all have in Western society is the right to choose. The State does not own our body, particularly for an experimental product.

I argue that we’ve crossed a line. It’s a bioethical line. It may actually be Federal Law that we’ve crossed, inadvertently, I’m sure for all the best reasons. But if you go back, read the Nuremberg Code. What we’re doing is not aligned with fundamental principles. And as you know, this happens from time to time during war and crisis.

Cultures decide that it’s okay to bend the rules on some fundamentals of ethics, whether it’s torture or internment of populations. I believe they almost universally end up regretting it. So, I’m trying to responsibly, ethically, and with the credibility that I have in my CV, and because of my role in inventing this technology, to alert people that I believe that we’re pushing and crossing some key lines here that we really should be respecting.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/dr-robert-malone-m**a-v*****e-inventor-on-the-bioethics-of-experimental-v*****es-and-the-ultimate-gaslighting_3889805.html?&utm_medium=email2&utm_source=promotion&utm_campaign=EET0710&utm_term=1for4M-EpochTV&utm_content=trend2

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Remember "operation warp speed"? I guess you're ready to admit that trump was a moron.

Gatsby

That's your job title.

debeda

EXCELLENT, thank you!!!

nonalien1 Loc: Mojave Desert

E*******y use a***********n can only be used if no other cure is available. It should never have been approved. That is why the MSM downplayed Hydroxycloraquine .there are others but talking about them would show the illegality of the f**e v*****e that is actually gene manipulation therapy. And designed as a bioweapon .People taking the v*****e should be made aware that it is experimental and the drug companies are not liable for any damages This discloser and disclaimer isn't being relayed to the recipients. The drug companies can't be held to account but our federal govt. can.They are breaking several laws just administering this drug.
Nothing new here with Presidents being international drug dealers. And our CIA being the largest importer of Heroin and cocaine and the sole supplier of Crack cocaine War on drugs my ass. It's all about cash flow

EmilyD

You can call him that, but you don't know the man.....Trump knew that a v*****e can only be mandated if there is no cure for the disease it is aimed at. That’s why every single cure for c***d has been suppressed. When was the last time you heard about Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine? Two very effective, approved and tried and tested over many years drugs which have been completely suppressed by our government. You are not hearing about them any more because they have been taken off the market for c***d treatment. Also, many medical doctors, who have successfully treated c***d patients, have been censored and have not been allowed to talk about these drugs or prescribe them for c***d any more! The g*******ts (not just Biden) desperately need to hide the cures for c***d, because they wanted to succeed in mandating the v*****es, both now and forevermore. It would have given them total control over the population. Trump knew this!

And Trump did something to once and for all prevent the v*****e mandates: he rushed the development of the v*****es so ridiculously fast, that they ended up being not a real v*****e, but an experimental medical product. A medical experiment can not be mandated! So he sabotaged the plans of the power grabbers (g*******ts) to impose v*****e mandates. Also, he knew fully well that the educated part of the world would be greatly alarmed by the idea of v*****e mandates. By making the v*****es experimental products, he gave all of us the perfect tool in our hands to legally (and safely) opt out of having to get innoculated or be ousted from society (or maybe even jailed??)

older and wiser

Very telling and sure to raise a few democrat cackles!

older and wiser

And liberals like to say Trump was dumb! They need to look in the mirror to find real dumb!

peg w

I really think you people are missing the fqct 5hat there is a plethora of misinformation out there. You can't make a informed decision 7f you hear on some hslf baked TV show that getting the v*****es is an overreach of the federal government. As far as incentives to get v******ted, since logic hasn't worked, msbe perks will.

Gatsby

Your bioethics score is 0.

EmilyD

There is misinformation on both sides of the issue. Just as there is good information on both sides. It is up to the individual person to make the decision for themselves...and they would be wise to read up all the information they can gather and decipher what is true for them. Ask for the fact sheets that is supposed to be given out when and where someone goes to get the v*****e. And READ it! Read all the disclosures and warnings. Read about how your body might or might not react to it. Read about C***d and what it does to you...how your body might or might not react to it.

And ABOVE ALL ELSE....take into consideration your own personal medical history. Is there anything going on with you that might weaken your i****e s****m? If so, you might want to consider what that is, and if it is something that might be more weakened by either taking the v*****e, which taxes your i****e s****m greatly, or C***d, which also taxes your i****e s****m. Cancer? Diabetes? Heart disease? Pulmonary disease? Obesity? All of those and more can affect how you react to the v*****e and/or C***d. Do get yourself informed before you make this extremely important decision!