Modern Josef Mengele: What The World Medical Community is Not Telling You

At the end of WWII, the world discovered the existent of the depravity of man. The world would call it a holocaust, but that was just the tip of the iceberg. Upon further investigation it was determined that far more atrocities were committed.

In 1947, the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg set up the 10 standards, in the hopes to rein in the depravity the medical and scientific communities were capable of committing. These standards are to be followed when conducting experiments on human subjects. These standards were accepted and codified worldwide.

These codes were instruct the medical and scientific communities to weigh the risk and benefit of their experiments. These codes were an attempt to avoid unnecessary pain and suffering. The Nuremberg Code has become the standard set of codes for medical practice worldwide.

The following is the Nuremberg Code’s 10 standards, in their entirety. As you read it, for yourself, reflect on the way the world medical community has implemented their polices in light of what is written. Do you notice the way they have violated the code?

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448, 7 December 1996.

The Nuremberg Code (1947)

Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

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, 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.

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. Theexperimentshouldbesodesignedandbasedontheresultsofanimal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results 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.

8. Theexperimentshouldbeconductedonlybyscientificallyqualifiedpersons. 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. Duringthecourseoftheexperimentthehumansubjectshouldbeatlibertyto bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems 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 judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

For more information see Nuremberg Doctor’s Trial, BMJ 1996;313(7070):1445-75.

Author: C Norman Hocker

As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: