Well, we sure need one when there’s a medical emergency. And the reason we hasten to call one is because we know that they are bound by an oath to save our lives and restore our health (& not hasten our demise).
The oath by which they’re bound has primacy over the directives of government, an oath which upholds the dignity of every patient they treat and their right to the best medical care possible irrespective of government policy, race or creed.
But what about in a pandemic, does this oath still apply? After all a pandemic is a national emergency not just an individual medical emergency. Should the doctor waiver his moral obligation to an individual patient in order to achieve the so-called greater good of the nation?
Well let’s take a look at this question.
Origin of the Nuremberg Code.
Please excuse the following crass simplification for I’m sure a detailed historical account of the origin of the Nuremberg Code is not what you want to read right now, so let’s do a succinct one instead.
After the enormity of the atrocities committed by Adolf Hitler’s Eugenics Program came to light, the victors of WW2 decided that the practice of medicine was extremely dangerous and harmful to humanity, when the State determines medical policy.
I think you’d agree that following the genocide of 6 million Jews on an industrial scale and then 9 million other people groups, together with the murder of the handicapped, the intellectually impaired, and the elderly (all of whom the State deemed ‘worthless eaters’) at the hands of medical doctors rightly warrants putting some restraints on doctors, whose medical skills were employed to achieve this despicable genocide.
And so, the Nuremberg Code was conceived in the womb of medically inflicted atrocities at the behest of the Third Reich. Since that time, it has been recognised as the most advanced, universally accepted and authoritative document designed to regulate doctors in the practice of medicine.
Let’s take a look at Principle One.
Principle one of 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.
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.
Now you need to know that this code has been incorporated into international Criminal Law and many other international conventions, to which Australia is a signatory.
The Australian Government’s role out of mandatory vaccines is clearly in violation of these laws. You know ‘no jab, no job’, couldn’t possibly be regarded as duress, could it? And I’m absolutely sure your doctor sat with you and explained that these vaccines use an untested technology and there is no long-term clinical data to support their efficacy, nor safety. Do you remember having that conversation with the person who jabbed you?
And yet the AAP fact check, which is graced by contributions of academics (paid patsies of the State) with more letters after their names than you’ll find in a phone book, have the temerity to contend that mandatory vaccination is not in breach of the Nuremberg code because the vaccines have been granted TGA approval. Oh well there you have it! Now we know they’re safe.
Wait a minute, hold your horses. They were given ‘provisional and emergency approval only’ not final approval, which means that they remain an experimental medical treatment, and consequently mandating them violates the Nuremberg Code. We weren’t given a free choice, without coercion, in the company of full medical disclosure of their efficacy and safety.
Moreover, the TGA being the lickspittle of big Pharma providing their unqualified approval for the use untested mRNA vaccines on the population is like Dr Mengele giving approval to use Zyklon B gas on the Jews. So much for academic endorsement.
And what of our beloved doctors
It gives me no pleasure in telling you that our doctors (apart from a handful) let us down badly through this pandemic. They obsequiously complied, they did not dare question the Government driven vaccine mandates. They unquestioningly threw their support behind an untested vaccine without data to corroborate their efficacy and safety.
Given the unaccounted for16.5% increase in the morality over 2022 here and abroad, it is hard to not conclude that the medical profession’s failure to abide by their oath has led to many unnecessary deaths.
The constraint of 1,000 words, prevents me from elaborating on the Transgender pharmacal and surgical mutilation of young children, who are developmentally incapable of giving consent to the irreversible damage done to them again at the hands of doctors, under the protection and sponsorship of Government.
The Nuremberg Code is founded on the biblical principles that every human being is of intrinsic worth, imbued with dignity and therefore has the right to freely given informed consent and not to be bullied by the State. And in the case of children, God has placed them under the care of their parents and State has no authority over them.