Breaches of Ethics Codes – Intentional Withholding of Information by US Health Regulators and medics =Denial of Informed Consent
All institutions – public and private – have Codes of Ethics that govern the behaviour of individuals who work for those institutions.
We are all too aware that these Codes, from Congressional to Banking and all points in between are breached with relative impunity – with prosecution and sanctions imposed even less often than violent crimes in general across the length and breadth of the country. Crime pays.
After some pre-amble, I show three points in time when Codes of Ethics were breached by the CDC, FDA and WHO. These breaches also apply to every government and health authority that approved the roll-out of C19 mRNA injections.
All are guilty of maliciously withholding information that was vital for informed consent. People would not have injected themselves in anywhere near the same numbers (5 billion people injected with 13.4 billion doses so far) with the toxic injections had they had access to such information.
This has important ramifications for the International Health Regulations and a Pandemic Treaty forcing any “vaccination” protocol for, say, international travel via digital health passports. The idea may be attractive, but the application is deadly because of poor quality and denial of information required for consent to experimental treatments.
EU Phase 4 clinical trial results of 10,000 are not due until 31 December 2024 (I am not sure about the US, but I thought I saw they were due any time now, but before the end of 2023?)
The first date that information was available for consent was at the end of the clinical trials and BEFORE emergency use authorization – 10 December 2020.
The FDA and CDC had the results of Phase 3 clinical trials which indicated FAILURE.
The second date is the 30 April 2021 post-marketing authorization report presented on 30 April 2021 covering the period from 11 December 2020 to 28 February 2021 where the injections markedly exceeded safety parameters.
The third date is in September 2022 when the FDA itself reported serious concerns with the manufacturing of Moderna doses.
REGULATORY AGENCIES CODES OF ETHICS
Let’s start with the WHO.
“Integrity: To behave in accordance with ethical principles, and act in good faith, intellectual honesty and fairness.
Accountability: To take responsibility for one’s actions, decisions and their consequences.
Independence and impartiality: To conduct oneself with the interests of WHO only in view and under the sole authority of the Director-General, and to ensure that personal views and convictions do not compromise ethical principles, official duties or the interests of WHO.
Respect: To respect the dignity, worth, equality, diversity and privacy of all persons.
Professional Commitment: To demonstrate a high level of professionalism and loyalty to the Organization, its mandate and objectives.”
Check out the statement “: To conduct oneself with the interests of WHO only in view and under the sole authority of the Director-General..” Only the interestof the Who and no-one else??? Sole authority for the ethics of a dictator with a track record of terrorism in his native country???? Sounds totally U.N.ethical.
The FDA and the CDC have their own Codes.
The FDA Code of Ethics was first drawn up here – at a time when it was not required to mention the female or any of the other 57 genders:
“The following code of ethics, adopted by Congress on July 11, 1958, shall apply to all Food and Drug Administration employees:
Code of Ethics for Government Service
Any person in Government service should:
1. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government department.
2. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regulations of the United States and of all governments therein and never be a party to their evasion.
3. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought.
4. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economical ways of getting tasks accomplished.
5. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not; and never accept, for himself or his family, favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties.
6. Make no private promises of any kind binding upon the duties of office, since a Government employee has no private word which can be binding on public duty.
7. Engage in no business with the Government, either directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the conscientious performance of his governmental duties.
8. Never use any information coming to him confidentially in the performance of governmental duties as a means for making private profit.
9. Expose corruption wherever discovered.
10. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that public office is a public trust.”
Pretty straightforward. The CDC only has “guidance” over 34 pages:
The ethical behaviour of medics is derived from other Codes and Treaties.
The key question is “Are C19 mRNA injections an experiment?”
The answer is, of course, a resounding YES.
Messenger RNA has never been proven to work anywhere for any condition or disease. PERIOD.
The FDA/CDC did not authorize the C19 mRNA injections for Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna, they granted “Emergency Use Authorization” when other treatments with proven success were denied use. The Pfizer/BioNTech injection branded Cominarty was given full authorization in August 2021, but was never administered in the USA.
As such, the mRNA injections had no proven safety or efficacy or temporal characteristics – quite aside from the lack of any information on administering doses to pregnant women, children or those with severe existing conditions or a previous/current SARS-COV2 infection.
Here’s the Nuremburg Code:
I will detail what should have been told to each individual getting a C19 mRNA injection in the context of Informed Consent, Here’s the first article of the Nuremberg Code:
“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, overreaching, 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.”
The movie “The Great Awakening: Plandemic 3” reminded me of the politicians, talking heads, celebrities and others who breached this first article – by directly intervening with “force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching and other ulterior forms of constraint and coercion – from pizzas for kids to hookers for adults, from denial of access, to house arrest, from lies about the safety and efficacy of the injections, overreach by POTUS with executive orders, and the apartheid practised throughout the education system and society at large.
The breaches of this first article of the Nuremburg Code are “crimes against humanity”. The anti-human defence is that “well the Nuremburg Code does not mention “vaccines”, so it does not apply.”
Article 1 goes on.
“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 possible harms and risk of death were discovered in the clinical trials. They were known IN ADVANCE of the roll-out and Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA/CDC and by the WHO.
“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.”
This applies to each and every person that injected another or persuaded, cajoled or forced another person to get injected WITHOUT INFORMED CONSENT.
Other “codes” or “accords exist.
There is a link to the 1964 WMA Declaration of Helsinki – amended up to 2013:
Informed Consent is covered in much the same way as the Nuremburg code, starting at point 25 of 37.
Point 37 permits unproven interventions that the medic thinks might work!
Informed consent should have, at least, taken the form of a presentation of the results of the clinical trial. In Pfizer/BioNTech’s case, the person being injected should have been told the results in the table below AND should have been told that these results were from a clinical trial that was terminated 2 months earlier than its 6 month schedule trial period AND that there would be no attempt to follow-up on the health of patients after the trial concluded.
Here's another link referred to as the Declaration of Geneva:
The end-point of the Phase 3 Pfizer/BioNTech clinical trial was the reduction of symptoms. Not transmission or infection and not hospitalization and death.
For 21,900 or so in each of the injected group, these were the results of the clinical trial:
That is the first part of delivering informed consent.
People should have been told that they were three times more likely to suffer a related adverse event (though I don’t see how anyone in the placebo group could have a “related adverse event” unless it was an injection site reaction).
They should have been told that there was a 75% increase in suffering a severe (life changing) event and a 10% increase in suffering a serious (life threatening) event OVER AND ABOVE THAT FROM C19 ITSELF.
This information was known BEFORE THE ROLL-OUT OF THE PFIZER/BIONTECH C19 mRNA injections.
That is the first part of “Informed Consent” that was denied to victims of the injections.
The next denial of informed consent was the Post Marketing Authorization Report covering the period from 10 December 2020 to 28 February 2021 – 80 days.
The report was delivered on 30 April 2021. It makes no mention of any Under Reporting Factor.
There is this table
Note: these are not VAERS reports – the reported deaths to 28 February 2021 to VAERS were 4,665)
42,086 reports (remember, no estimate of under-reporting) with 1,223 deaths.
Note the 9,400 “Unknown” case outcomes and the 11,361 “Not Recovered”.
Now, let’s check out a sleight of hand by Pfizer in this report. The first report Pfizer produced had the number of “doses shipped” redacted for commercial reasons. The “revised” report linked here had this:
“3.1.1. General Overview
It is estimated that approximately 126,212,580 doses of BNT162b2 were shipped worldwide from the receipt of the first temporary authorisation for emergency supply on 01 December 2020 through 28 February 2021. “
Leave aside the reference to 01 December 2020, instead of 11 December 2020, the point is that “safe” injections are usually viewed as a rate of one death per million doses.
1,223 deaths from 126,212, 580 doses shipped = 9.69 deaths per million. But it’s worse. Here’s the trick.
“Doses shipped” does not equal “doses administered”. How many doses were actually injected?
Most of the doses were administered in the US and Europe. We can work that out from this:
“Most cases (34,762) were received from United States (13,739), United Kingdom (13,404) Italy (2,578), Germany (1913), France (1506), Portugal (866) and Spain (756); the remaining 7,324 were distributed among 56 other countries.”
Now, the UK government makes it almost impossible to access its Yellow Card system for adverse events. Nonetheless from here and here, we have the number of doses for the US and EU as at end February 2021.
US on the left, EU on the right:
There were 38.43 + 29.07 million 67.5 million Pfizer/BioNTech doses administered v the 126.6 million doses shipped.
Some adjustment would need to be made for UK and other countries, 20,728 – but I am betting that of those “other countries” at least 90% were for other EU countries – leaving just the UK to be added.
Ignoring the UK and other countries, we have (a maximum of) 1,223 deaths amongst 67.5 million doses administered in the US and UK.
1,223 deaths from 67.5 million doses administered = 18 deaths per million.
Now, some wiggling needs to be done to correlate the roll-out of injections to the elderly, most at risk and medical staff with the risk of death from C19 for those same cohorts.
But the point is, compared to a generally accepted premise that “safe” = one death per million doses, the figure of 18 per million needs to be part of informed consent.
A final part of informed consent that was omitted was manufacturing quality. This surfaced early on with Moderna.
From this article dated 21 September 2022:
The FDA issued this report download (fda.gov) covering the period 1 August 2022 to 1 September 2022.
I covered it here:
Denial of informed consent has resulted in tens of millions deaths and billions of harms.
This complete lack of quality is what the WHO and bureaucrats in Geneva are seeking to cement into the laws of 194 countries. They have no track record of success - in fact, they have a track record of abject failure.
So when they say “Vaxx passport, peasant” …
Please upgrade to paid, or donate a coffee (I drink a lot of coffee) - “God Bless You!” if you can’t or don’t want to contribute. Coffee donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan - Buying just one Ko-Fi a week for $3 is 50 bucks more than an annual $100 subscription!