Latest posts by Nancy Thorner (see all)
- Democrats’ Student Debt Con Job Exposed - November 16, 2022
- Yet More to Worry About – Food Shortages? - October 9, 2022
- CONSERVATIVE GROUPS DEBATE WHETHER OR NOT TO FEED THE CHICAGO BEARS - October 7, 2022
Peter McCullough is not alone. There are over 10,000 doctors who have joined over 1,000 lawyers in a lawsuit to prosecute, in a Nuremberg-style trial, those who have pushed the Covid shot.
Dr. McCullough is board certified in internal medicine, cardiovascular diseases, and clinical lipidology. He cares for advanced patients with common medical problems including heart and kidney disease, lipid disorders, and diabetes. He has become an expert on COVID-19 illnesses and welcomes recovered patients into his practice.
The Nuremberg Code on informed consent – not that this will matter to the intellectually dishonest – is here:
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, overreaching, 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 code also states that the scientist in charge must be willing to terminate the experiment when injury, disability or death is likely to occur.
However, as Einstein said, “The Nuremberg Trial of the German war criminals was tacitly based on the recognition of the principle: Criminal actions cannot be excused if committed on government orders; conscience supersedes the authority of the law of the state.”
The Nuremberg Code also comports with UNESCO’s Article 6 of UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, which declare:
Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law.
Guidelines when facing vaccine mandates
As to what Biden mandated in late July 2021, and to which the DOJ concurred, where a vaccination can be forced:
Ask your employer if they can guarantee if there will be no harm. Ask if they will take responsibility for any injury that may result. Ask if they can force you to take something that is NOT FDA approved, and only in Phase IV trials. Get them to put in writing that they are aware this shot is in trial only. Note that this is not something you are willing to take under informed consent – and, in fact, there is no informed consent because no one knows what is in the vaccine — some ingredients are “trade secrets”; nor do we know the full extent of injuries and deaths, because they are all kept hidden, except for VAERS, which may only capture as little as 1% of adverse reactions.
Ask them if you can see the data on the injuries the vaccine has caused – and if they won’t provide, that, why are they not providing data showing it is safe and effective? Ask them, formally, to indicate if you will be fired for not taking an experimental vaccine that is not FDA approved. Ask them how you can give informed consent when you don’t really know how dangerous this shot is. Ask them if this is a vaccine (most will say it is; but it is gene therapy).
Ask them to provide documentation of possible side effects for informed consent (hint: it doesn’t exist, and they won’t). They have a legal obligation to provide this. Ask them if they are following the handbook from the American Medical Association on informed consent – and when they tell you they don’t have them, graciously offer it to them by going to their website here, here, here and here. This puts them on the hook for possible damages.
Tell them as this is only under EUA, the shot is not approved by the FDA. Ask if they are following, in writing, the guidelines for EUA. Ask to see the long-term studies; tell them you’ll take the shot as soon as you have informed consent relative to the 12 government systems that contain the exact number of deaths and injuries there have been. Since they supposedly have nothing to hide, you are all ears and that would allow you to make informed consent.
Ask them if they are aware that the excuse “I was just following orders” was not an allowable excuse at Nuremberg, and, in fact, could not extricate them from death by hanging.
Ask them if they feel the person pressing the button in the Stanley Milgram experiment of May, 1962 at Yale University when told, “You must continue”, was culpable or not. The Milgram experiment is here. The link to the Nuremberg trials is here.
[Originally posted on Illinois Review]