THE NUREMBERG CODE (1948)
“On December 9, 1946, an American military tribunal began criminal proceedings against 23 German physicians and administrators for their willing participation in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Among the charges were that German physicians experimented on thousands of concentration camp prisoners. The experiments were sadistic and often lethal, and the prisoners did not give their consent.
The American judges and physicians who were present at the trial wrote the Nuremberg Code in 1948. This code was the first international document outlining the absolute importance of voluntary participation and informed consent. The influence of this code on global human-rights law and medical ethics has been immense.
Nuremberg Code Directives for Human Experimentation 1. 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, over-reaching, 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.
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 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.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study, that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgement required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.”
Source: “Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10,” vol. 2 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949), 181–182.
Relatert lesing:
Vitenskapen er det beste verktøyet vi har til å finne sannheten med, men hvis de som bruker dette verktøyet ikke har rent mel i posen, så vil dette verktøyet bli deretter, i verste fall så kan det brukes til å fremme usannheter og propaganda. Vitenskapen vil være særlig utsatt for dette når økonomien sitter i førersetet, og når vitenskapsmenn og kvinner vet at de kan miste jobben hvis de ikke viser til resultater som støtter det oppdragsgiveren forventer seg. Og at forskningen mere og mere har blitt et verktøy for politisk og økonomisk vinning og ikke et verktøy for å finne sannheten, det finnes det dokumentasjon på i bøtter og spann: https://olehartattordet.blogg.no/nar-forskning-blir-et-verktoy-for-politisk-og-okonomisk-vinning.html
Her har jeg tatt et tilbakeblikk på svineinfluensavaksinen og dokumentert hvor mange som ble syke av den. https://olehartattordet.blogg.no/noen-saers-gode-og-relevante-sporsmal-rundt-covid-19-viruset-og-corona-krisa.html
Korona kavalkade – hvor mye av dette har du glemt? https://olehartattordet.blogg.no/korona-kavalkade.html
Koronavaksine og transhumanisme – en advarsel https://olehartattordet.blogg.no/korona-vaksine-og-transhumanisme-en-advarsel.html
