Wouldn’t it be Nice to Have Medical Protection like This?
Al Ritter
1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is
absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent;
should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without
the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching,
or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient
knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as
to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter
element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the
experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and
purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted;
all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon
his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the
experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests
upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is
a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with
impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield
fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or
means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based
on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history
of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will
justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to
avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted, where there
is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur;
except, perhaps, in those experiments where the
experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never
exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be
solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and
adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even
remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by
scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should
be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage
in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment, the human
subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has
reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment
seemed to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment, the
scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage,
if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith,
superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of
the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the
experimental subject.
Well
actually we do have this Code of Ethics signed into law as part of the
Nuremberg Trials of 1949, as a result of the atrocities perpetrated by the
Nazis in WWII.
It’s
clearly shown in the website of the National Institute of Health. Funny how
this moral code has been ignored in 2019-2021. Why aren't they adhering to this Code of Ethics?
View it
here: https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Nuremberg+Code
2 comments:
Too bad they are not following their own guidelines and letting the government scare people telling them athat everyone needs to be vaccinated!
We are seeing very troubling side effects of this unapproved Vaccine
Post a Comment