Violations of Nuremberg Code in Covid-19 Control Program

*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.

Part II

This is the second part of a three-part series, The Nuremberg Code and Covid-19 Control. The first part demonstrated that virtually all aspects of Nuremberg Code were violated within the Covid-19 Control Program for Item 1. This part of the series will explore violations of items 2 to 5.

Item 2

Item 2 reads:

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.

Quoting our federal health authorities, the artificial mRNA “vaccine” was Emergency Use Authorization. It was not, nor has it yet been approved for use under FDA regulations. This confirms its use as “an experiment”, falling under the full meaning of the Nuremberg Code.

The experiment was intended to yield fruitful results for the good of society, but as noted above, those fruits kept shifting in type and ripening or spoiling. Given the multiple and changing endpoints of this unprecedented vast experiment wherein no attempt at designing the “study” to learn if it was providing any social good rather than largely destroying the economy and condemning large populations of youth to irrecoverable social and educational deficits, we cannot know if the random and changing benefits were procurable by any “other methods or means of study”. We know now that the principles of The Great Barrington Declaration, largely followed in Sweden and Florida, did result in a greater good for those societies measured in age-adjusted lives lost, educational and social benefits, and preservation of economic welfare. Other methods of Covid-19 treatment were being pursued by physicians, including treatment with Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine and other medications. These were dismissed as ineffective despite good evidence of safety and effectiveness. That evidence was censored, leaving individuals with the impression that only two choices were available –

(1) receive the vaccine shots or

(2) accept the deadly consequences of being unprotected against Covid-19 and be responsible for the deaths of others by harboring and transmitting the virus.

The minimal rate of serious illness, hospitalization, and death except in very small well-defined populations (those over 70 and/or with multiple chronic health problems) was rapidly apparent in the early phases of the pandemic, showing the experimental use of population-wide immunization unnecessary. These findings were ignored and denied.

HERE AGAIN ALL ASPECTS OF ITEM 2 WERE VIOLATED.

Item 3

Item 3 of the Nuremberg Code reads:

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.

The artificial mRNA “vaccines” were tested in rodents with the endpoint being their production of “neutralizing antibodies” against the Covid 19 virus. These studies did not evaluate distribution in the body of the artificial mRNA or lipid nanoparticle envelopes or the “spike protein” that the artificial mRNA instructed the body to make, the duration those substances persisted in the animals, or any long-term side effects (rodents do not live that long). These same aspects were ignored in early human studies. Under the Operation Warp Speed program human studies ended earlier than designed, again violating true scientific method. The control group of unvaccinated persons were then offered and for the most part given the vaccine, ending their usefulness as a control group over any longer period of observation—another gross violation of scientific protocol. No longer term follow-up for possible adverse effects was done. When the raw data was finally revealed after FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) lawsuits, that data revealed the vaccinated population fared worse than the unvaccinated population in various respects. The chosen endpoint again was primarily the level of “neutralizing antibodies” raised using the artificial mRNA. No studies have been done to date to try to correlate the level of neutralizing antibodies with

protection from infection
protection from serious illness or hospitalization
protection from death
preventing transmission of infection to others.

No studies were done regarding the safety of the lipid nanoparticle envelopes that contain and transport this artificial mRNA in animals or humans. These particles contain Polyethylene glycol, and several other chemicals labeled by their manufacturers as “not for human use”. The artificial mRNA in the “vaccine” has large amounts of pseudouridine substituted for what would naturally be uridine in its structure, which suppresses immune reaction to the mRNA and delays the mRNA breakdown by the body. Additionally, the pharmaceutical companies changed the manufacturing method of the artificial mRNA for vaccination from that used in the initial studies. The current artificial mRNA has been found to be contaminated (adulterated) with DNA from SV-40, a simian virus known to cause cancer. No such artificial mRNA constructed with modified pseudouridine or adulterated with foreign DNA has been tested for safety in humans or animals.

The natural history of the disease, and its fatality ratio, were obscured by computer models from Neil Ferguson’s Imperial College of London laboratory, infamous for its prior multiple failures to provide accurate information or predictions. His predictions were of a fatality rate of 3.4% of cases; the observed rate overall was less than 0.5%, like influenza. His estimates predicting mass death on a worldwide scale failed to materialize even in areas that did essentially no vaccination, lockdowns, or masking (Africa, for example). Yet our public became convinced by government propaganda that the death rate remained much higher, even for younger people, long after observation showed Covid 19’s more benign nature. Given substantial evidence suggesting that the virus was manufactured under NIH grants and accidentally released at the Wuhan Virology Institute, no natural history of the infection in animals or humans was or is known. Thus, the results of the experimental use of the artificial mRNA vaccine could not be anticipated.

THE EXPERIMENT COULD NOT BE JUSTIFIED UNDER THIS RULE OF THE NUREMBERG CODE.

Item 4

Item 4 reads:

The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

The mandated use of the vaccine, without proof of which one could be dismissed from employment or service in the military, or prevented from traveling, seeing loved ones, or going to school, caused irreparable physical and mental suffering and injury that is still being tallied. Those are aside from the many adverse effects observed, such as myocarditis/pericarditis (inflammation of the heart or its membrane), heart rhythm disorders (occasionally fatal), blood-clotting disorders, autoimmune diseases (the body attacking itself), nervous system disorders including ascending paralysis (Guillain-Barre Syndrome), and multiple abnormalities in female reproductive processes such as irregular periods, infertility, and miscarriages. The voluntary online site for reporting these, VAERS, has received many times the reports of serious adverse events after this vaccine compared with any other vaccine or medication. The FDA and CDC admit VAERS markedly underreports such problems. Finally, as reported by actuaries of several insurance companies in the U.S.A. and by the national statistical agency of the U.K. government, very large increases in excess deaths in the non-elderly have begun occurring since the widespread use of the experimental vaccine was mandated. These are not just persons who did not receive needed care during the lockdowns, or “late” victims of Covid 19. They are mostly younger individuals not known for health problems. The cause of this phenomenon is undetermined; its coincidence with use of the vaccine is noteworthy.

ITEM 4 OF THE NUREMBERG CODE IS CLEARLY VIOLATED.

Item 5

Item 5 reads:

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.

Certainly, neither the researchers nor the public health officials behind the Covid 19 mRNA “vaccines” had any reason to believe that death or disabling injury would occur, although it has. Rather they had no reason NOT to believe that such might occur. No short term or long-term safety studies were done in animals or humans, despite the unprecedented technology being used. As noted above, almost all physicians became experimental participants, and subjects, disregarding their individual and several duties and responsibilities.

OUR PUBLIC HEALTH AND GOVERNMENTAL AUTHORITIES CHOSE TO IGNORE THIS PART OF THE NUREMBERG CODE, THUS FAILED TO MEET ITS CRITERIA.

* * *

It is important at this point to note that there is no “passing grade” with the Nuremberg Code. Failure to meet just one of the ten criteria should be interpreted as overall failure. Part I and Part II of this series have already identified five failures according to the first five criteria that have been explored. The next article in this series will explore violations of Nuremberg Code items 6 to 10.

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

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”.
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