Category: Health Tips

Posted on

Nuremberg code turns 60

Bioethics experts Paul Weindling and Volker Roelcke suggest that current bioethical thinking may use an incomplete picture of the historical context of the Nuremberg code. Volker Roelcke writes: “rather than being the result of a coercive state, Nazi medicine illustrates how medical researchers and their representative bodies […] co-operated with and even manipulated a totalitarian state and political system relying on expert opinion, in order to gain resources for the conduct of research without any moral and legal regulation.” He states that Nazi doctors “followed the intrinsic logic of their scientific disciplines and used the legally and ethically unrestricted access to human beings created by the context of the political system and the conditions of war.”4 By centring exclusively on the war crimes and not on their broader context, the judges at Nuremberg issued the code in order solely to set the boundaries for “permissible experiments” and tackle the difficult question of the biomedical research conducted on human subjects outside Germany during the war. The court thus failed to produce a broader legal doctrine protecting individuals against harm induced by scientific practices at large, including not only human beings as subjects of medical experiments but also as consumers and beneficiaries of science’s outcomes.

https://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/85/8/07-045443/en/

Posted on

Government Mandated Trail Mix

Government: Your child needs to eat this trail mix. It is very healthy. If they don’t eat it, we have the right to deny them basic government services.Moms: Oh! Ok. What’s in it?Government: You don’t need to know that. It is very healthy. It will make them healthy. The entire scientific community agrees.Moms: (looks up nutritional facts label online) WHOA. There’s aluminum, formaldehyde, known carcinogens and aborted fetal stem cells in that trail mix. How can that be safe?Government: Don’t look at that. Trust us. It’s very safe. Trail mix makes your kids healthy AND as a result, the whole world healthy.Moms: Oh! So there’s been safety studies?Government: …………Moms: Like, studies that show that each ingredient is safe? That maybe compare children long term who have and have not eaten the trail mix? That have made sure that children with compromised immune systems or common genetical differences won’t have any short or long term issues as a result of eating this trail mix?Government: ………Moms: Ok, so if my kid DOES have a reaction to this trail mix, can I sue the manufacturer for liability?Government: No. We have exempted them from all liability.Moms: Wait…who IS the manufacturer of this trail mix?Government: Just the top four snack manufacturers. They make all snacks.Moms: Don’t those guys get sued all the time? Haven’t they been convicted of falsifying research? Bribing government officials? And now you have exempted them from all liability on this trail mix?!?Government: Yes. But this product is healthy and very safe.Moms: But what if my kid DOES have a reaction? The nutritional label lists all sorts of horrible possible side effects.Government: They won’t. Or if they do, we’ll try our best to convince you it was just a coincidence. If you’re REALLY persistent, we might award you some money.Moms: How much money have you given so far to parents of children who had reactions?Government: Eh…4 billion or so.Moms: 4 BILLION?!? What percentage of reactions do you think are reported?Government: About 1%, we figure.Moms: Wait, wait, wait. So kids ARE having reactions….there have been NO unbiased, double blind placebo tested safety studies, the manufacturers have been exempted from all liability, those same manufacturers have been convicted of bribing officials & falsifying research, the ingredients (once I found them on my own since you wouldn’t provide me the nutritional label) are concerning, and you STILL WANT MY KID TO EAT THIS TRAIL MIX?Government: Yes. It is very healthy.#justasking#believemothers#trueinformedconsent#somethingsmellsfishy#educatebeforeyouvaccinate#learntheriskscopy and pasteSpread the word Everyone needs to know

Posted on

Flu Shot = Fatal Infection

Flu Shot = Fatal Infection

In 1972, Dr. John Anthony Morris reported his research findings on the influenza vaccine to his superiors at the FDA. A distinguished doctor and government researcher, Dr. Morris had been comissioned 13 years earlier to scientifically justify the FDA’s plans to widely expand the flu vaccination program.

To his expectant audience, however, his results were thoroughly disappointing. Dr. Morris reported that the flu shot provided no measurable net benefit, in part because the injected product failed to stimulate antibody production in the lungs, thus allowing for viral replication in this sensitive area.

It was later realized that the lack of benefit also derives from the flu shot’s ability to increase vulnerability to viruses not covered in the shot, including unmatched strains of flu and different respiratory viruses dangerous in their own right.

Dr. Morris’ finding of no net benefit of the influenza vaccine has been repeatedly verified with contemporary data, including a study by Simonsen et al. (2005) that found that the large increase in flu vaccination of the elderly between 1980 and 2001 failed to decrease flu season mortality, and a study in Britain which found that the vast increase in flu shot uptake by those who had just turned 65 (vs. those who were just a bit younger) provided no decline in hospitalizations or deaths.

Important data on flu-shot coverages & C0VID mortality:

https://homevaccineeducationnetwork.com/flu-vaccine-and-covid-19