Violations of Nuremberg Code in Covid-19 Control Program

Part One

View of the defendants in the dock at the International Military Tribunal trial of war criminals in Nuremberg, Bavaria, Germany
Raymond D’Addario, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Introduction By Patrick Barron

In keeping with the medical theme of the following essay by Dr. Nicholas Bednarski and Phil Duffy, their conclusion about damage done by the response by government, the media, and the drug companies to the Covid 19 “pandemic” may be a bitter pill indeed for most Americans to swallow. Since the end of WWII and the revelations of the horrendous Nazi “crimes against humanity”, Americans have assumed that their leaders would never commit such acts. This essay shows that America’s leaders did perpetrate such horrendous crimes, crimes that may even eclipse those of the Nazi leaders due to the worldwide damage they inflicted. This essay is written for serious readers, not for the squeamish. Perpetrators included members of both political parties plus the mainstream and social media. The drug companies colluded with these powerful political people not only to hide dangerous side effects of their drugs but also to lie about the very nature of the drugs. In other words, the rot in America’s elite was deep and pervasive.

Executive Summary

As death camp after death camp was liberated by the Allied forces in the first half of 1945, world opinion was shocked and appalled by what had happened in Germany during the Nazi era.  There were calls for justice, the first of which led to the Nuremberg Tribunal of the top Nazi leadership.  Twelve additional tribunals were conducted by the United States.  One did gain international attention-the trial of the Nazi physicians. 

The Doctor Trial, as it was popularly called, included crimes conducted against German nationals considered “undesirables as well as nationals of conquered nations.  Sixteen of the defendants were found guilty and seven were executed.  The decision in the case includes ten points that have been called the Nuremberg Code, addressing acceptable medical experimentation on human subjects.  All ten were violated by what might be called the Covid 19 Control Program.

Item 1 deals with the doctrine of informed consent to any experimental treatment. Voluntary informed consent was denied under the Covid 19 Control Program.  None were informed of the nature or duration of the experiment, or what hazards might be expected.

Despite its experimental nature, the Covid 19 Control Program also violated Item 2 of the Code.  It was not set up in any way to study the effects, adverse events, or outcomes of the vaccination program or societal restrictions, but rather applied in a random and arbitrary way, even after many of the measures were found to be unnecessary.  

Since no full animal studies were done prior to the application of the artificial mRNA vaccine and societal restrictions, and there was no knowledge of the natural history of Covid 19 and artificially produced virus, Item 3 of the Code was violated as well.

No efforts were made by the mandating governmental and private public health authorities to avoid unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury, breaking Nuremberg Code Item 4.

Since the mandating authorities had done no longer term animal or human studies of the artificial mRNA vaccine, neither they nor medical practitioners nor the public could know if there were risks of disabling injury or death; thus, violating Nuremberg Code Item 5.

The overall risk from Covid 19 was not known, but massively overblown estimates of risk were endorsed by the authorities and media in a kind of public health hysteria to convince all of the humanitarian importance of complying with all the unstudied and unproven measures they dictated.  This breaks the 6th item of the Code.

Under Item 7, we show that virtually no preparations or facilities were or are available to protect the public against even the remotest possibility of injury, disability, or death.  

In noncompliance with Item 8, NO scientifically qualified persons were involved in conducting any stage of this vast international experiment on a national or international level.  

Item 9 details the right of any human experimental subject to stop participation at any time for any reason.  Yet governmental and societal coercion worked hand-in-glove to prevent such.

Item 10 finishes the Code, noting that there must be a supervising scientist in charge, ready to terminate the experiment at any time if probable cause exists that harm may come to the experimental human subjects.  As we note, there was no scientist in charge, rather political and media advocates untrained in the science and technology, violating prior international standards of pandemic policy.

Short-term and long-term adverse outcomes continued to evolve from this unwarranted, unplanned, unstudied experiment on the world’s populations.  Given that all ten of the Nuremberg Code’s standards were broken, some accountability for what could be described as a crime against humanity should be sought.  But no venue for judgment of these allegations exists currently.  Our response to this betrayal must for now be individual and personal, and possible methods are prescribed.  Responses to future such totalitarian movements are recommended.

Part I

As death camp after death camp was liberated by the Allied forces in the first half of 1945, world opinion was shocked and appalled by what had happened in Germany during the Nazi era.  Wasn’t Germany the land of Bach and Beethoven, Goethe and Schiller, and Kant and Schopenhauer?  How could such things happen in such a civilized nation?

There were calls for justice, the first of which led to the Nuremberg Tribunal of the top Nazi leadership.  The National World War II Museum describes the event:

After the war, Allied powers—United States, Great Britain, France, and the Soviet Union—came together to form the International Military Tribunal (IMT). From 1945 to 1946, Nazi Germany leaders stood trial for crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes.

24 individuals were indicted and 21 appeared before the court:

On October 1, 1946, the Tribunal convicted 19 of the defendants and acquitted three. Of those convicted, 12 were sentenced to death. Three defendants were sentenced to life imprisonment and four to prison terms ranging from 10 to 20 years. On October 16, executions were carried out by hanging in the gymnasium of the courthouse. Hermann Göring committed suicide the night before his execution. In 1947, the prisoners sentenced to incarceration were sent to Spandau Prison in Berlin.

There were twelve additional tribunals conducted by the United States in Nuremberg’s Palace of Justice.  Most did not get the attention of the initial trial, but there was one exception – the trial of the Nazi physicians.  The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum relates the charges against the Nazi physicians and medical administrators:

In Nazi Germany, German physicians planned and enacted the Euthanasia Program, the systematic killing of those they deemed “unworthy of life.” The victims included the institutionalized mentally ill and physically impaired. Further, during World War II, German physicians conducted pseudoscientific medical experiments utilizing thousands of concentration camp prisoners without their consent. Most died or were permanently impaired as a result.

Whereas the focus of the initial trial had been on war crimes and crimes against humanity involving invaded nations, the Doctors Trial, as it was popularly called (officially United States v. Karl Brandt et al.), included crimes conducted against all nationals, including Germany’s own.

Sixteen of the defendants were found guilty and seven were sentenced to death.  The decision in the case includes ten points that have been called the Nuremberg Code, addressing acceptable medical experimentation on human subjects.  All ten apply to what might be called the Covid-19 Control Program.

Item 1

This is how Item 1 of the Nuremberg Code reads:

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 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.

John Allison, JD has written extensively on informed consent and is quoted in Chapter 16, Covid-19 Vaccines and Informed Consent of Robert Malone’s book, Lies My Government Told Me.  He notes that a requirement for informed consent is that the person or their legally recognized agent be informed about the risks and benefits of, and alternatives to, the proposed treatment.

The FDA and CDC established Emergency Use Authorization for the mRNA products based on what they knew was incomplete safety and efficacy testing and withheld this information from the public and the scientific community at large until forced to reveal Pfizer and Moderna’s “proprietary data ”.  Meanwhile they conducted, along with fellow travelers in Mainstream Media and other government agencies as well as “influencers” at large, a campaign of disinformation and censorship as medical scientists around the world began to examine,

  • actual natural history of Covid in various age groups and medical conditions
  • adverse events that rapidly began to arise due to the mRNA vaccine and the spike protein it caused the body to produce, and the “lipid nanoparticle envelope” (LNP) containing the artificial mRNA
  • actual degree of protection from infection, serious illness, and death in various groups of persons
  • actual degree of reduced transmission of the virus to others
  • duration of any such protection against infection or transmission
  • comparison of actual protection from the artificial mRNA “vaccine” to the natural protection from actual viral infection, and
  • effects of this artificial mRNA genetic “immunization” on changes of the virus and follow-up infections with new resistant versions of the Covid virus.

The incomplete safety testing included the total absence of any knowledge of how and where the artificial mRNA and its lipid nanoparticle envelopes went in the body and how long they lasted in the body.

The absence of all this information on safety and effectiveness was withheld from all, and the error in logic of Appeal to Authority (the NIH, FDA, and CDC) was used to deny any need to provide it to the public or to medical practitioners.  As the pandemic progressed information about the product’s limited ability to prevent infections, serious illness, death, or transmission was clearly seen (no vaccine is 100% effective in all these factors).  Various levels of government, along with the NIH, CDC, FDA, and Mainstream Media and social media influencers, continued to insist that the “vaccine” was “completely effective and completely safe”.  Deliberate spreading of false or misleading information continued as all scientific dissent was canceled.

The main alternative to the proposed treatment, NOT getting the mRNA “vaccine”, was forbidden.   Even those previously infected or found to be at virtually no risk of serious illness, hospitalization, or death (children, young or healthy adults) were required to be vaccinated on pain of social and governmental penalties. For many categories of essentially “safe” persons, the treatment was mandated by law or administrative or corporate fiat without Constitutional authority. Voluntary informed consent was denied.

Alternatives for treatment were purposefully ignored and censored.  Treatments with high risk of damage or death were not only recommended by these same authorities but virtually required. Remdesivir, an antiviral with no known prior uses fitting FDA criteria for safety and effectiveness was effectively mandated in hospitals despite the high death rate and episodes of kidney failure known to be associated with its use.  Artificial machine ventilation, soon found associated with an excessive death rate for hospital patients with Covid-associated pneumonia, was essentially mandated for continued use by a reverse “greenmail”—hospitals got paid much more than their usual fees for any patient who had a positive Covid test, whether or not that was responsible for their hospitalization and illness, and even more if they were placed on an artificial ventilator.

Meanwhile, many other physicians, medical scientists, and academics worldwide began to publish findings about the association between use of the old drugs Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine in usual doses as used for other diseases safely and effectively for millions over decades.  The response by the NIH/CDC/FDA was to conduct studies using known toxic doses of Hydroxychloroquine late in the course of disease in severely ill hospitalized patients and then conclude that it was of no positive benefit and had caused toxicity.  Similar high dose/late course studies were done with Ivermectin as it was publicly dismissed by the FDA as “horse dewormer”.  Despite the long-established legal and medically ethical doctrine of “off label” use of drugs proven relatively safe for their primary treatment conditions, physicians were threatened and disciplined all over the United States if they dared to use treatments developed internationally using Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, or other inexpensive medications found to be helpful.  Even speaking about the use of these medications for Covid was considered a violation of a new absolute standard of care, the “scientific consensus” arbitrarily enforced by our public health authorities.

Further parts of Item 1 in the Code:

… before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him/her 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/her participation in the experiment.

The nature and purpose of the Covid pandemic experiment was implied; to stop the spread of the disease, reduce serious illness, hospitalization, and death, and achieve “herd immunity” (a high enough percentage of the overall population immunized so that further spread or continued existence of the virus was prevented).  The duration of the experiment was never revealed or discussed, and now seems endless, with continuing boosters for a now endemic (always present) virus.  The violation of every prior “pandemic wargame” that led to WHO’s policy of no universal lockdowns was not revealed and quickly denied.  The avowed goal of the experiment, full worldwide vaccination with an untested product never used in humans, kept shifting from flattening the curve to saving everyone else as the definition of “herd immunity” shifted ever upward under Dr. Fauci’s version of “the Science”.  True scientific methods specifically disallow changing the protocols of an experiment during the experiment.

The final part of Item 1 in the Code:

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.

Our medical community, answering the siren call of governmental public health authorities, immediately and persistently violated this paragraph.  Multiple individuals at the NIH, CDC, and FDA started and directed the requirement for total population vaccination with a completely experimental artificial mRNA vaccine.  This is, in fact, a genetic therapy, and those organizations violated their own guidelines regarding such therapies.  Those requirements rapidly became mandates with punishments for physicians or other health entities that did not comply and for subpopulations and individuals who refused to be participants in the experiment.  Most physicians, whether under duress or not, violated their personal duty and responsibility to obtain true informed consent from each individual they vaccinated, delegating the authority and use of their medical license to public health authorities.


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Therefore please feel free to share.

  1. Nicholas E. Bednarski, M.D. is a physician with forty years clinical experience in Internal Medicine, Nephrology, and Critical Care Medicine. Residency and fellowship was at LAC-USC Medical Center and UCLA, with Chief Residency in Medicine at Wadsworth VA Medical Center.  During his career he has achieved four Board certifications as well as teaching interns and resident physicians.  He has practiced in several cities in mainly civilian hospitals but also USAF Scott Medical Center.  In retirement he maintains his medical licensure and actively follows the scientific literature on controversial subjects in medicine and public affairs.  His writing can be found on Substack as “A Jaundiced Eye”.
  2. Phil Duffy, an instructor of the Constitution, is a weekly contributor to WFYL’s We the People – The Constitution Matters.  His book, A Tale of Four Cities(soon to be published), contains a chapter on the Nazi era.

By (1)Nicholas Bednarski, M.D. with (2)Phil Duffy

© Patrick Barron 2023 Website