"Jacinda Ardern and the NZ government are rapidly moving towards the inhumane policy of a Vaccine Passport, which is medical apartheid and will rip our society apart"
By Kiwi4Justice
On September 24th the NZ Herald published this article called ‘The 90% Project: 10 of the biggest vaccine myths debunked’. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/the-90-project-10-of-the-biggest-vaccine-myths-debunked/J3GAVRTRTG2KH3RC5GLGTULAIA/
This is Part 2 of a response to that article. Part 1 can be seen here:
https://truthwatchnz.is/cv-injection-nz/a-response-to-the-nz-herald-s-vaccine-debunking-part-1
In Part 1 we provided some detailed background information around why this piece of so called ‘journalism’ was so out of order for a mainstream media outlet to be acting as the personal PR department for Jacinda Ardern to help with damage control around the avalanche of information and evidence pouring out in contradiction of everything that she and the NZ government are saying and doing regarding COVID-19 and the mass vaccination campaign. We also provided background information on why the claims of vaccine ‘misinformation’ were so misplaced.
Here in Part 2 we will focus on specifically addressing the NZ Herald’s 10 points of supposed ‘misinformation’ around the issue of COVID-19 and vaccines. Because Jacinda Ardern and the NZ government are rapidly moving towards the inhumane policy of a Vaccine Passport, which is medical apartheid and will rip our society apart, we will deal with points 5, 10, and 8 first and in that order. In Part 1 we showed just how destructive the Vaccine Passport strategy has been in other countries, in particular Australia at the moment where it has literally created a civil war.
5. The- No, natural remedies and immunity are not more effective against Covid
An entire book can be written on this, and it is far too big a topic to be able to do it proper justice here other than a few key points and links to start with. People can do their own research.
But let’s just start by saying this to the NZ Herald. Every government who has blocked and demonised the numerous scientifically proven, cheap, over the counter treatments such as Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), Vitamin D, and many others, are quite simply guilty of crimes against humanity, and any mainstream media outlets, like the NZ Herald, who support them to push that message, and to suppress the truth of those treatments, are wilfully complicit in those crimes against humanity.
For the sake of time, we will look mostly at Ivermectin here. It can all be researched and found on-line and in peer reviewed scientific studies all over the world. Here are a few starting points about Ivermectin, which has been absolutely demonised by governments and the mainstream media:
-
Ivermectin is a very cheap treatment that has been FDA approved as safe and effective decades ago. It has been used for decades as an extremely effective treatment for a variety of human illnesses without any adverse side-effects. Yes, it has also been used as a parasitic treatment for horses, which is all that the mainstream media and governments have focussed on with their demonising campaigns by labelling Ivermectin as nothing more than a horse de-wormer.
-
Ivermectin has been so successful a ‘wonder drug’ that the creator of it was awarded a Nobel Prize in 2015
-
Right from the start of COVID-19, doctors around the world have used Ivermectin (and HCQ, Vitamin D and others) very successfully to treat COVID-19
-
There are now more than 60 peer reviewed scientific studies around the world proving the success of Ivermectin in treating COVID-19. Here is the latest very large scientific study in Argentina on Ivermectin as a successful treatment for COVID-19 just published a few days ago Safety and efficacy of a MEURI Program for the use of high dose ivermectin in COVID-19 patients | Zenodo
-
In June 2021 India was being absolutely ravaged by COVID-19 and was the worst COVID hot-spot in the world. Now very quickly most parts it are nearly COVID free. What did they do? The regions of India that are now almost COVID free rolled out a mass distribution of Ivermectin. El Salvador and many other countries around the world have been doing the same with huge success and have relatively little problem with COVID.
-
The Tokyo Director of Medicine recently publicly advised all doctors in Japan to start using Ivermectin at the same time as Japan halted the use the vaccines due to major health concerns with them when the contents of them was properly analysed
Ivermectin has almost a 100% success rate when used as an early treatment, however, most western governments have refused to acknowledge or endorse it, and are now actively banning, blocking it, and criminalising it. Why? Australia has now outlawed the use of Ivermectin, and in May 2020 Jacinda Ardern blocked any further research into HCQ in NZ. Why? Does it have anything to do with the fact that by openly endorsing and promoting these treatments it would instantly end a global COVID vaccine industry that is worth hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars, to Big Pharma? How much financial support and funding does Big Pharma pump into governments and mainstream media around the world to ensure its stranglehold on the COVID treatment narrative? That is another topic that requires an entire book. If you want to more fully understand COVID-19, just follow the money.
Other treatments such as HCQ and Vitamin D have similar success. HCQ has been proven as a powerful COVID-19 treatment all over the world. One of the leading doctors in the use of HCQ is Dr Zalenko. He is a leading GP in New York who has been nominated for the Presidential Medal of Freedom and the Nobel Prize. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak he and his team have successfully treated over 6,000 COVID patients, as well as being an advisor on his HCQ protocols to President Trump during 2020. Many of those 6,000+ patients were in a state near and/or expected death as he specifically sought out these extreme patients in very poor health so he could fully test his treatment protocols, and because those patients were the most in need of it. Not one of his 6,000+ patients has died so far. Here is a link to an interview with Dr Zalenko. Dr. Zelenko – Forget Class Action Lawsuits There Will Be Tribunals, What If Cures Already Exist? (x22report.com).
Also just published on September 24th is further peer reviewed scientific evidence published in the ‘Review of Cardiovascular Medicine’ of the success of HCQ for effectively treating COVID-19 (See Appendix 1).
These various cheap and (normally) easily accessible treatments can be saving lives right now, and could have saved millions of lives if previously endorsed and supported by certain governments. To still not do so despite the overwhelming evidence, and to now be actively criminalising them or blocking and demonising them, is a crime against humanity. The COVID-19 global catastrophe could be stopped tomorrow with these treatments. Why is that not happening? That is a question that governments need to be asked every single day, and is the question that the NZ Herald should be asking the NZ government every single day. Not doing articles like the one being addressed here which is wilfully and actively supporting a crime against humanity.
Another important point to note here. If there are effective, proven treatments for a disease, it is then not legally permitted to distribute a vaccine for that disease. Does that have anything to do with governments and media blatantly demonising, blocking, and criminalising these scientifically proven treatments? The point needs to be emphasised again here. Particularly for our NZ politicians and media. To do this is a crime against humanity and a clear breach of the 1947 Nuremberg Code that they are complicit in.
The NZ Herald’s claim that there are no effective treatments available for COVID-19 is a disgraceful piece of medical disinformation.
10: NZ Herald said - No, vaccines don't just reduce symptoms
The inference here by the NZ Herald is that the COVID vaccines also stop people from catching and passing on the virus. These are points of crucial importance with regards the issue of vaccine mandates and Vaccine Passports which the NZ government are increasingly committed to implementing. If the vaccines do not prevent people catching COVID-19 or transmitting it, then something like a Vaccine Passport would be a complete waste of time, not to mention an absolutely abhorrent breach of basic human rights.
Well, the real-life evidence once again does not seem to match with the statement that the NZ Herald has made here.
Firstly, let’s look at whether people who are vaccinated are still testing positive and are still having COVID deaths recorded. While Ashley Bloomfield has just claimed that most of the current positive tests in NZ are unvaccinated, let’s see how that matches up with official health statistics in other countries.
In the UK, according to the latest official health data that covers from February to August 2021, there were 117,115 vaccinated people who subsequently tested positive (44% of all positive tests were vaccinated). During that period, of the total deaths in the UK that were attributed to COVID-19, 66% of those people were vaccinated (481 out of 734). https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1009243/Technical_Briefing_20.pdf
In Wales, the number of positive tests in vaccinated people is now even higher at two thirds. Incredibly, the BBC even tried to spin that statistic to still try to demonise the unvaccinated.
As discussed in Part 1, Israel is the most vaccinated country in the world with 80% of the population now double vaccinated. Let’s just remind ourselves of the incredible developments there at the moment as the Dose 3 booster shot takes effect following the effects of the initial double jab apparently wearing off and the country recording the sorts of statistics for the vaccinated that have just been highlighted as now also occurring in the UK.
In Australia we see a very similar outcome developing unfortunately. As announced in a recent government press conference, of the people in hospital in Victoria with COVID, 78% were double vaccinated and 17% single vaccinated. Just 5% of hospitalisations were unvaccinated. It is hardly a ‘pandemic of the unvaccinated’ as governments around the world are trying to characterise it as. A reminder that the Victorian government is now firing critical health workers from their jobs for refusing the experimental vaccines, and the NZ government is also firing people in certain occupations for refusing the experimental vaccines.
In New South Wales the picture sadly is the same, as recently announced in a government press conference that of the recent spate of deaths attributed to COVID-19, six out of the seven people who died (86%) were vaccinated.
Is it any wonder that the people in Victoria and New South Wales are in outright rebellion at the abhorrent ‘no jab, no job’ mandates being enforced? Even more reason why the brutal crackdown on those protests by the Victorian police is so disgraceful and misplaced. How can governments around the world possibly even consider compulsory vaccine mandates and Vaccine Passports when we see these kind of figures? How can Jacinda Ardern possibly justify the direction that she is clearly going with NZ? It is absolutely obscene and will rip NZ apart just as it has in Victoria and other parts of Australia. All absolutely unnecessary and avoidable.
On the issue of whether the COVID vaccines halt or reduce transmissibility, the official position of the vaccine manufacturers is that they do not stop transmission of the virus as they were not produced for that function, and they were not tested on the issue of transmissibility. They were created with the objective of minimising the negative effects of the virus and hence reducing mortality and hospitalisations. Here is a video clip with the Director of the CDC, Rochelle Walenskey, admitting that the vaccines do not stop transmission.
The NZ government was questioned on this specific issue through a ‘Freedom of information’ request, and below is a segment of the letter of response:
Reducing transmission was not an outcome measured in trials of the Pfizer vaccine. Therefore your request is refused under section 18 (g)……. (see full letter in Appendix)
Here is a peer reviewed scientific study just published on October 1st, 2021 showing no difference in the ‘viral load’ between vaccinated and unvaccinated people.
The vaccines do not stop people catching or transmitting COVID-19. The vaccinated have the same amount of the virus inside them as unvaccinated people. As the vaccine manufacturers have always stated, the objective of the vaccines is to reduce the negative impact that the ‘viral load’ has on people, not stop them catching it or passing it on.
So it would seem from a variety of data that A LOT of vaccinated people are still being reported as testing positive to COVID-19 and A LOT are still being reported as dying from COVID-19 unfortunately. There is also no evidence that transmission is stopped or reduced by the vaccine because it was never designed or tested to achieve that function, as admitted by the manufacturers and by the NZ government. The mRNA ‘vaccines’ are a completely different type of medical technology to traditional vaccines and were designed to reduce the severity of symptoms.
So once again the NZ Herald’s position on these points is outright disinformation and political/corporate propaganda.
If vaccinated people can still catch COVID and can still transmit it to others, what would be the health advantage of introducing the barbaric and inhumane policy of medical apartheid through Vaccine Passports? That is unless the purpose of the threat by Jacinda Ardern of a Vaccine Passport was to provide fear and coercion to try to force Kiwis into taking the vaccine against their will. Or to punish those who are disobedient to her orders. Either way, the Vaccine Passport, or threat of one, is a breach of the 1947 Nuremberg Code, making it officially a crime against humanity and a war crime.
9: The NZ Herald says - No, the vaccines aren't still 'experimental'
To properly and scientifically determine safety and effectiveness of a vaccine, it requires appropriate testing and data collection in relation to short term, medium term, and long term effects. In terms of medium term and long term data on safety and effectiveness, there literally is none because this testing and analysis has to be done over many years. So nobody knows what the medium and long term effect of these vaccines will be on things like cancer, auto-immune disorder, fertility, the nervous system etc. So from this point of view there is no other way of describing these vaccines than experimental. The trials are happening right now on everyone who is taking these vaccines, and we won’t know the true outcome of this experiment for many years. Maybe even decades.
In terms of the short term situation of whether or not the vaccines are officially authorised or are still officially in a state of ‘experimentation’, it seems that there is some major deception at play on this. All of the various vaccines were initially only given Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA) by the FDA. In theory EUA status severely restricts the use of the vaccine to a very limited number of people who are in critical danger without it. EUA is absolutely not intended for the purposes of mass vaccination programmes as is currently underway. But governments around the world have just ignored this legal fact. Vaccines being under EUA makes it extremely difficult to justify to the public (and highly illegal) the introduction of mandatory vaccines and ‘Vaccine Passports’. So, on August 23rd 2021, it was reported that the FDA had upgraded the Pfizer vaccine from the status of EUA to full FDA approval. Governments around the world seized upon that change as giving them greater legal justification, and greater ‘ethical authority’, for imposing much stricter vaccine mandates for the roll out of ‘Vaccine Passports’. It must
be pointed out here that in the history of the vaccine industry, a rapid fire full FDA authorisation like that had never been seen or attempted before.
However, it would seem that there was major deception at play and that the original Pfizer vaccine, called the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, that is currently being used around the world was not in fact upgraded from EUA to full authorisation. It would seem that a slight of hand ‘bait and switch’ operation was implemented between Pfizer and the FDA and that only a newly branded vaccine called ‘Cominaty’ was given FDA approval. That Cominaty vaccine doesn’t even exist yet in terms of the vaccine company having any quantity of it manufactured that could be used with the public. Seemingly the original Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine that is the one still being used around the world, is still under EUA. And according to the principles of EUA, it should still only be used in very limited situations of imminent risk of death or harm to specific people. Not mass vaccination of an entire population.
For reference to confirm this point, here is a link to the FDA website where the two different letters can be seen. One letter under the ‘Cominaty Vaccine’ heading and labelled Cominaty ‘Approval Letter’ (August 23rd), and the other letter under the Pfizer-BioNTech header and labelled Pfizer-BioNTech ‘Concurrence Letter’ (August 22nd). The Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which is the one that is currently being used all around the world on millions of people was only given a ‘Concurrence Letter’ on August 22nd which allowed it to maintain and continue its initial EUA status. It is therefore technically and legally still only experimental and is still only approved for emergency use, and very limited use, which is clearly not what is happening in reality by the NZ government and other governments. That is a high crime.
Here is a video clip of US Senator Ron Johnson admitting this fact that the Pfizer vaccine did not receive full FDA authorisation and is still under EUA.
Sen. Ron Johnson: There is not an FDA approved COVID vaccine in the US | Fox News
This is a medical scandal/crime of monumental proportions if this is indeed what has occurred. But when literally trillions of dollars are at stake for Big Pharma, then major criminal behaviour sadly goes hand in hand. Bribery and blackmail are extremely powerful tools.
Any way you try to portray the official definition of approved or experimental with these vaccines, the reality is that there is zero data available on medium and long term safety and effectiveness, which means the experiment is underway as we speak. The real life data we are getting right now on short term safety is absolutely shocking, to say the least. The graph below shows the official CDC data for vaccine related deaths since 1990.
It is a crime of the highest order for governments around the world, including the NZ government, to now be rolling our vaccine mandates on the threat of ‘no jab, no job’, and to be proposing to exclude the ‘un-vaxxed’ from basic elements of society as if they are a sub-human element of society.
Medical apartheid and medical tyranny is the only way to describe it and should be utterly abhorrent to every decent human-being on the planet. It is why the Nuremberg Code was created in 1947.
1: The NZ Herald says - No, vaccine-related hospitalisations aren't being hushed up
This depends on what is being said about hospitalisations, and will no doubt be different across different hospitals. But what is clear from a huge number of whistle-blowing doctors and nurses is that in general there is huge number of people in hospitals as a result of an adverse reaction to taking the COVID vaccine, and that the majority of COVID patients in hospitals are vaccinated rather than unvaccinated.
Here is a whistle-blowing nurse at a large protest of doctors and nurses in Toronto speaking out about this.
Whistleblower Nurse: Hospitals Are Full Of Vaccinated Patients, Official Narrative is A Lie (redvoicemedia.com)
Here is the link again, also featured in Part 1, with Dr Anne McCloskey, a GP in Ireland, talking about how they are being overwhelmed with patients who have been double vaccinated and are having a serious adverse reaction to the COVID vaccination.
As mentioned in Part 1, Dr McCloskey was immediately suspended for posting that video, and the nurse whistle-blower in the first link also mentions how it is only a matter of time before he loses his job, and he mentions that nearly 3,000 doctors and nurses (from just his hospital alone) are ready to walk out and leave due to the vaccine mandates being rolled out. They can see what the vaccines are doing to people and consequently they do not want to take those same vaccines themselves. This is consistent with what is now in the process of happening in New York where 83,000 doctors and nurses are about to lose their job rather than take the COVID vaccines. If anyone knows what the true effect of these vaccines is on people it is these doctors and nurses at the frontline who are seeing it, and living and breathing it every day. So it is extremely significant that so many of them would rather lose their careers than be forced to take the vaccines.
2: The NZ Herald says - No, vaccines don't affect womens' fertility
There is mixed information regarding the effect of COVID vaccines on miscarriage, menstruation, and fertility. Here is an article suggesting a potential problem with miscarriages;
But there is also plenty of research suggesting there is not clear evidence of a problem at this stage;
Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons | NEJM
The important point to consider here is that no one knows what the long term effect will be on fertility because the vaccines are experimental. With the experimental vaccine now being pumped into 12 year olds, it will be many years before we know what the effect on fertility is for these youngsters. It is an enormous risk to take when there is no medium to long term safety data on this, and when those youngsters are at virtually zero risk from COVID-19.
3: The NZ Herald says - No, vaccines can't harm children
How does the NZ Herald possibly know this, and how can they say this? Youngsters have already been harmed in many countries according to the official data for adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines. As previously stated, there is also zero safety data for medium to long term effects. From the relatively limited amount of official short term data we have so far on adverse reactions to the COVID vaccine for 12+ year olds, it is alarming. The most common problems being myocarditis, other heart related problems, and various issues with blood clots. Let’s not forget here that youngsters aged under 20 years are essentially at zero risk from COVID-19. So to virtually force them to be vaccinated with such an uncertain and dangerous experimental vaccine is a shocking crime of medicine.
The article below reports on a 47% increase in the death of teenagers in the UK since the start of the COVID vaccine roll out for this age group.
Investigation: Deaths among Teenagers have increased by 47% in the UK since they started getting the Covid-19 Vaccine according to official ONS data – The Expose
It is absolutely outrageous for the NZ Herald to make a claim/statement such as this.
4: The NZ Herald says - No, vaccines don't cause magnetism
This needs further scientific investigation to get a definitive position, but it certainly seems like something strange like this may be happening due to metallic substance allegedly contained in the vaccines. Here is an article published on September 27th, 2021 about this issue by the group NZDSOS ‘NZ Doctors Speaking Out With Science’.
Magnetism? Say What? | NZ Doctors Speaking Out With Science (nzdsos.com)
Here is a video of a young NZ woman demonstrating how she is now allegedly magnetic following the COVID vaccine.
https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2021/09/28/a-young-nz-woman-magnetic-after-taking-the-covid-mrna-experimental-injection/
6: The NZ Herald says - No, Covid-19 vaccines can't alter your cellular DNA
Whether it can alter your cellular DNA or not is a matter of more in-depth scientific discussion and analysis. However, what is clear is that the mRNA vaccines are designed to have some kind of impact at a gene based level.
Dr Michael Yeadon, former Vice President and former Chief Scientist at Pfizer describes the mRNA vaccines as ‘experimental gene based procedures’. Dr Sucharit Bhakdi, one of the leading medical microbiologists and immunologists in the world says “Gene-based vaccination of children is something that is so criminal that I have no words to express my horror……”
Here are several quotes from the ‘Alliance for Science’
“…….some of them (mRNA vaccines) do use genetic engineering, and all of them use genetics more broadly”.
“……….it (mRNA vaccine) does reprogram some of your cells, in a manner of speaking. And that’s not a defect — it’s intentional”
https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2020/12/yes-some-covid-vaccines-use-genetic-engineering-get-over-it/
It seems incredible that this point even needs to be made. To roll out an experimental gene based technology that has never been done before, and for governments around the world to essentially attempt to force or coerce the majority of the world’s population to take that experimental gene based technology is beyond comprehension. Even the inventor of that experimental technology has said this himself and is one of the strongest critics of what is now occurring across the world.
7: The NZ Herald says - No, the vaccine can't cause cancer
The NZ Herald claims that it is not possible for any vaccine to cause cancer. This article in ‘New Scientist’ about the Polio vaccine in the US suggests otherwise.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg15120442-400-science-polio-vaccine-linked-to-cancer/
How can the NZ Herald possibly make the statement that these experimental COVID vaccines cannot cause cancer? How do they know what could happen in 5 years time, or in 10 years time? Many leading scientists have great concerns about the negative impact these types of COVID vaccines could have on a person’s natural immune system. A strong immune system is what helps to safeguard people from cancer.
So once again, it is just an outrageous piece of false or misleading information put forward by the NZ Herald.
8: The NZ Herald says - No, vaccine companies aren't exempt from all liability
The NZ Herald states that “If every person who believed they had been injured by a vaccine sued the vaccine manufacturer, nobody would make vaccines because it costs millions to deal with these things. In New Zealand, ACC provides this cover.”
Somebody has to cover the compensation fees if vaccine injury or death does occur. The vaccine companies are making hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars out of the global COVID vaccine industry. Yes it can cost millions when something goes wrong, but why should the tax payers have to pay this and not the vaccine companies who are making mind blowing amounts of profit out of it? The vaccine companies therefore have no accountability, either legally or financially, if their product is not as safe as they say it is and if it then kills or maims a lot of people. They receive their massive profit no matter what, and without any repercussions.
Conclusion
Through Part 1 and Part 2 of this article it should hopefully be clear to those with an open mind that the NZ Herald have engaged in a shameful piece of political and medical propaganda with their article. It is wilful (paid for by the NZ government) complicity with an outrageous process that is unfolding of medical tyranny that is being rolled out across the world, including here in NZ. NZ is seemingly about to be thrown into a state of medical apartheid through Vaccine Passports which will rip this country apart it will be so abhorrent.
Those who have already taken the COVID vaccine have made their personal choice, and that is their human right to make that personal choice. Those who would rather not take that risk should be free to also make that personal choice without coercion and without being forced or mandated through threat of losing their job and being locked out of society. That is what the 1947 Nuremberg Code clearly states and was created for (see Appendix 3). That choice to not take the experimental vaccine will not put their fellow Kiwis at increased risk, as has been clearly shown in this article. Our ‘leaders’ will try to say that it does, but they will not be being truthful.
This is a pivotal moment in human history. Perhaps the most pivotal moment ever. It seems that our political and corporate ‘leaders’ around the world, including NZ, are in the early stages of attempting to demonise a certain segment of society, remove their basic human rights, and attempt to get the other segment of society to turn against them. We have seen this horrific type of process occur in other times in our human history, with very tragic results. Right now is when the human race needs to step up and demonstrate to itself that it has learned and evolved from difficult and tragic previous times in our history. Right now is when society needs to not consent to the old tactic of being split, divided, and set against each other. Right now is when society needs to collectively say that we are now better than that. We have evolved, we have grown up, and we no longer consent to those destructive ways being thrust upon us.
We need to agree to disagree on the specific issue at hand regarding whether or not to take the vaccines, and then we need to agree to unite against the appalling abuse of human rights that is being perpetrated on all of society in one way or another at the moment around the world.
It is time right now that the human race needs to unite together and collectively says NO, we do not consent to this medical tyranny.
Appendix
-
New evidence supporting the effectiveness of HCQ in treating COVID-19
2. Freedom of Information letter from NZ Ministry of Health regarding COVID vaccines and transmission
3. The Nuremberg Code (1947)
THE NUREMBERG CODE
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.
["Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10", Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.]
Comments powered by CComment