So there’s a statement I never thought I would write. Not because I’m never wrong, but because…oh who are we kidding, I AM never wrong. But there are exceptions that make the rule, and this is one of them. Now before my biggest trolls who've been telling me for two years to just stay in my own lane and stop disseminating misinformation which will surely get people killed wet yourselves at the thought that I was wrong about something material (masks, lock downs, vaccines, moronic leaders and imbecilic talking heads, etc), sorry not the case. No, this is about a post from mid-December 2021 entitled “THE VAX AND THE NUREMBERG CODE” (we switched webpage hosts earlier this year and I haven’t yet reloaded all my old posts for reference; sorry) in which I argued that compulsory vaccination which was all the rage at the time was a violation of Nuremberg despite what the “fact-checkers” were saying. Their argument was that it was not a violation because the vax wasn’t “experimental”. Although my response to that was:
“Oh, now I understand. They’re not experimental and therefore it’s not a problem. So let’s see, the people who are trying to force you to take a brand new chemical concoction delivered by a heretofore never successfully used technology and who are not only shielding the manufacturers of said concoction from liability but are also attempting to withhold the data on the concoction’s creation and potential adverse effects from the public for some 75 years, are also telling you it is NOT a violation of the Nuremberg Code because the people trying to force you to take this new concoction have decided it is NOT experimental and as such, the Nuremberg Code does not apply, moron. OK, now I get it.”
But my argument focused on Informed Consent:
“Let’s take a quick look at the actual Nuremberg Code shall we? It begins with; the VERY FIRST WORDS are (sort of like that dopey FIRST AMENDMENT that talks about freedom of speech and the exercise of religion and the right to assemble and all that nonsense that we no longer pay attention to) ‘THE VOLUNTARY CONSENT OF THE HUMAN SUBJECT IS ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL’ I put it all in caps ‘cause that’s how important it is. The Code goes on to say ‘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;’” I then go on to discuss the various forms of coercion being applied to people to force them to get vaxxed.
But then I came upon this presentation from the FDA in October of 2020 on the approval process for the Emergency Use Authorization for the jab. Here’s where I was wrong:
Oh, sorry I didn’t know. You see the same people who told you you were wrong because it’s not EXPERIMENTAL (it’s “investigational” you idiot, NOT “experimental”) are the same people who decided that it is also “not subject to informed consent requirements”. See how that works? By the way, how many of you jabees got the “fact sheet” which among other things would apprise you of your “option to refuse” the vax? Ask all those people who lost their jobs or got expelled from school because they exercised their “option” how that worked out.
By the way, if you don’t already know, you might be interested to learn that some of the criteria for EUA of this vaccine were:
The prevention of symptomatic COVID-19, infection and/or disease. That seems reasonable. If you’re going to approve a vaccine, it should prevent infection and/or disease of the thing for which you’re approving the vaccine, right? Just one problem. It is known far and wide throughout the land that the vaccine has essentially zero ability to stop infection or transmission (or serious illness or death as I showed you yesterday), so I’m just curious why it’s still allowed to be used. Seems to me that if approval for sale and usage of my tiger-repelling rock was predicated on it’s ability to actually repel tigers, and then it turned out that lots of people walking around with one of my tiger-repelling rocks in their pocket were getting eaten by tigers; in fact it appeared my tiger-repelling rock actually ATTRACTED tigers, my tiger-repelling rock which clearly did not repel tigers would be removed from the market; which again, seems reasonable. But then again, my name is not Pfizer, so there’s that.
Also, this FDA confab on Emergency Use Authorization for the vaccine stated additional considerations for licensure to be things like “Durability of protective immunity elicited by the vaccine”. How’s a whole three months of durability sound? Hey you know what's cool? In the original trials to approve the vax the government only required TWO months of follow-up. That's what you call a coincidence. And a concern of “Potential risk of enhanced respiratory disease (ERD) associated with waning of vaccine-elicited immunity” Oops. There was also a bolded bullet point that said “Widespread deployment of a weakly effective COVID-19 vaccine could result in more harm than good…” Oops again.
But just keep “trusting the science” and our almost unfathomably incompetent government institutions. That seems to be going swimmingly…