Hmmmm? Experimental biochemistry on Humans - Not tested on Animals
(media.greatawakening.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (22)
sorted by:
this is clearly against the Nuremberg Code, use it to your advantage. maybe a good pede can post both proof of it having not been tested on animals and the Nuremberg Code with a sticky
see #3, among others that qualify all to refuse teh jab:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372006
additionally, I also think that because it's an "emergency use" it can't be forced upon the people
Forcing masks (and Vaccines) is a violation of the Nuremberg Code and a Human Rights violation. The US is a signatory of the Nuremberg Code and the 2005 UNESCO update. The US and the major nations of the world made the Nuremberg Code after seeing the medical experiments and atrocities of the Nazi's.
A VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 6 OF THE UNESCO 2005 STATEMENT ON BIOETHICS AND HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 6, section 1: 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 The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason WITHOUT DISADVANTAGE or prejudice. (caps mine)
Article 6, section 3: In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.
Read more: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001461/146180E.pdf
Nuremberg Code: http://legal.un.org/ilc/documentation/english/a_cn4_5.pdf
Article 6 Informed Consent https://www.ajol.info/index.php/sajbl/article/download/113690/103409
https://history.nih.gov/display/history/Nuremberg+Code
Let's go over these.
Article 6, section 1: 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.
No one has asked for my consent! No one has given me adequate information! In fact, myself and millions like me have had to do our own research and share it with risk to being deplatformed from our social media accounts for 'mis-information' and 'Violating Community Standards' because that factual and sourced information goes against the deliberate lies and propoganda of the WHO and CDC.
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.
I have never stated that I give my consent to wear a mask in order to shop, work, travel, or anything else necessary to live my life. Even if I had, the term WITHOUT DISADVANTAGE means I can revoke that consent at any time for any reason and there is nothing anyone can do about it!
Read this again carefully. Article 6, section 3: In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.
The CDC and WHO guidelines DO NOT overrule my informed consent! No one has that authority! Anyone forcing any mandate (or vaccine) upon your person without your consent is guilty of Human Rights Abuse and should be treated accordingly. I will take all measures including self defense to protect my bodily autonomy and human rights as needed.
Remember that it is against the law to discriminate against someone for a medical condition including a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Being "healthy" is the default medical condition and they have no evidence otherwise you aren't therefore they cannot force you to wear a mask.
It is a Federal Crime to Arrest you for not wearing a mask or not abiding my unconstitutional mandates! https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law
Section 242 of Title 18 makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States. For the purpose of Section 242, acts under "color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.
great comment. unfortunately the usual situation like when Marsha at Target asks you to put on a mask we need to dumb it down big time for her and any sophisticated argument will go right over her head. how often can you find anyone that's insisting on a mask that could possibly comprehend what you're saying? sad state of affairs but true
Yes, I like how they list Nuremberg Code right underneath it.
ha, nice catch
“I don’t think proving this in an animal model is on the critical path to getting this to a clinical trial,” said Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna, a Cambridge, Mass.-based biotech that has produced a Covid-19 vaccine candidate at record speed. He told STAT that scientists at the National Institutes of Health are “working on nonclinical research in parallel.” Meanwhile, the clinical trial started recruiting healthy participants in the first week of March.
“That isn’t how vaccine testing normally happens. Regulators require that a manufacturer show a product is safe before it goes into people, and while it isn’t enshrined in law, researchers almost always check that a new concoction is effective in lab animals before putting human volunteers at potential risk.”