Pandemic Timeline

Law

The National Research Act is signed into law.

Tags:

If you are feeling pressured to take a vaccine, DO NOT QUIT YOUR JOB! Make your boss fire you. Please see the statement from America’s Front Line Doctors about this.

As of August 23, 2021, the Pfizer-BioNTech inoculation is now approved under the brand name Comirnaty. The Comirnaty/Pfizer-BioNTech Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine clearly states that pre-authorization Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine and the Comirnaty vaccine are equivalent. Any objections based on the experimental status of this vaccine are now moot. The argument now becomes whether that approval was legal. Dr. Jane Ruby and Karen Kingston both have concerns about the legality of the approval. See the post about the approval for details.

The National Research Act was enacted by the 93rd United States Congress and signed into law by President Richard Nixon on July 12, 1974 after a series of congressional hearings on human-subjects research, directed by Senator Edward Kennedy. The National Research Act created the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research to develop guidelines for human subject research and to oversee and regulate the use of human experimentation in medicine. The National Research Act issued Title 45, Part 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations [45 CFR 46]: Protection of Human Subjects. The National Research Act is overseen by the Office of Human Research Protections. The Act also formalized a regulated IRB process through local institutional review boards, also overseen by the Office of Human Research Protections.

The National Research Act gained traction as a response to the infamous Tuskegee syphilis study.

Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccines, explains the protections provided by the National Research Act this way:

So point number one, just to summarize; you can find it in The Code of Federal Regulations. It’s referred to as the Common Rule. So this is actually Federal Law. It’s not just words that academicians agree to. The first thing is that an emergency use authorization product, which is what all these vaccines are, as well as many of the drugs, is an experimental product. It’s not yet licensed. So that’s point number one. They’re all experimental products.

Point number two; if you’re going to be administering experimental products to patients, that falls under clinical research, and medical research. And so you have to follow the guidance for medical research. I mentioned the Common Rule is codified in the Code of Federal Regulations.

The first clause, importantly, in the Common Rule, is there has to be complete disclosure of risk. Intuitively, what that means is, when you buy a bottle of aspirin, you pull out this little piece of paper. You look at that, and you go, “Holy Moly, this aspirin is going to kill me.” If you read all the way through, it says it could cause heart attacks or gastric erosions. You look at that and you say, “Oh, I don’t know if I want to take that aspirin.”

But the truth is that the ones that are common are up at the top. We all take aspirin or Tylenol or some version of that. That’s the level of disclosure of adverse event risk that must be provided to patients participating in clinical research. That level of information, as we’ve just been discussing, is censored. It’s not available. So we are not meeting the criteria for full disclosure of risk.

Second key principle is that that full disclosure has to be comprehensible and comprehended. Earlier on, I referred to Thrombocytopenia, and you said, “What the heck was that?” And I said, “Low platelets.” That’s a great example. The first one was scientific jargon that was incomprehensible to you. The second one you could understand. So these risks have to be conveyed using language that people can comprehend.

Third key principle; you cannot coerce. You cannot entice. The patient or the subject has to freely accept the experimental medicine of their own volition. All this messaging about, “You must take the vaccine. You must take the vaccine because otherwise Aunt Mary could get infected.” All of this messaging that the vaccine is safe, and all the peer pressure that’s happening around the vaccine is coercion.

Now it gets even more florid with other nations. I don’t think we’ve done it here in the States, but Canada has. “We are going to give out ice cream cones to get the kiddies to come and take the jab.” That’s been done. That’s coercion and enticement.

Then there’s the last little codicil in all this. We call it the age of consent. So we here in the States generally agree that the age of consent is 18. If you are at or below the age of consent, you need to have approval or consent from your parent or guardian to take an experimental medicine. They act as your agent because you’re not able to provide consent by definition.

We cannot, by law, have infants, children, and adolescents receiving experimental products without authorization of their parents.

Now, listening to this, [one] might say, “Well, we have this special case of an epidemic, and we all have to get the vaccine.” Why do we all have to get the vaccine? What’s the logic behind that? What we’re told is, “We all have to get vaccinated so we will reach herd immunity.” That’s the logic.

The problem is that this is a fallacy. We have not even gathered the data to be able to calculate in these clinical trials what would give us herd immunity. What would herd immunity mean? It would mean that we have what’s called sterilizing immunity, or in some way, if we get infected, that we don’t spread it to somebody else. That means that we’re not producing virus and shedding virus.

Sources:

Related:

See also, on this site:

Comments are closed.