***The Iowa Standard is an independent media voice. We rely on grassroots financial supporters to exist. If you appreciate what we do, please consider a one-time sign of support or becoming a monthly supporter (even just $5/month would go a long way in sustaining us!) We also offer advertising options for advocacy groups, events and businesses! If you’ve ever used the phrase “Fake News Media” — this is YOUR chance to do something about it! You can also support us on PayPal at [email protected] or Venmo at Iowa-Standard-2018 or through the mail at: PO Box 112 Sioux Center, IA 51250 Thank you so much for your support and please invite your friends and family to like us on Facebook, sign up for our email newsletter and visit our website!***

The so-called “vaccines” against COVID-19 have only been approved for experimental and investigational use, and as Liberty Counsel pointed out, the government mandates are violating federal law. Interestingly, the FDA includes on its website the Nuremberg Code which emphasizes that people cannot be forced to take experimental drugs without their full consent. However, neither the federal law nor the Nuremberg Code mean anything to Joe Biden and the Department of Justice (DOJ).

All of the COVID-19 mRNA injections (Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson) have received only authorization of emergency use (EUA) and not full FDA approval. The EUAs for both the Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna mRNA experimental injections and any other EUA shot require fact sheets to be given to vaccination providers and recipients. These fact sheets state clearly that getting the “vaccine” is optional. For example, the one for recipients states, “It is your choice to receive or not receive the COVID-19 vaccine,” and if “you decide to not receive it, it will not change your standard of medical care.”

The issue of forced medical experimentation in Germany during the 1930s and 1940s and the related trials of doctors and public health officials led to the adoption of the Nuremberg Code.

The Nuremberg Code was created in 1947 in Germany because Nazi doctors were conducting inhumane and often deadly experiments on prisoners in concentration camps without their consent. Those doctors involved in these horrible crimes attempted to excuse themselves by arguing that there were no explicit rules governing medical research on human beings in Germany during the period. During the Nuremberg trials, those doctors and Nazis were found guilty of crimes against humanity. Therefore, the Nuremberg Code was developed in response to this experimentation to protect humans in medical research.

The Nuremberg Code consists of 10 principles. The first principle states the voluntary consent of the human subject is essential in any experiment on people. Other principles include experiments should be for the good of society, that all unnecessary physical and mental suffering or injury should be avoided, and no experiment should be conducted if there is good reason to believe it may result in death or a disabling injury. The Nuremberg Code also states that people should be free to withdraw from the experiment if they are suffering, and that scientists must be prepared to end the experiment if they have good reason to believe it may cause injury, disability or death to the subject if it continues.

The Nuremberg Code (from the National Institutes of Health website):

  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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.

[“Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10”, Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949.]

Liberty Counsel Founder and Chairman Mat Staver said, “Forcing people to receive one of these experimental COVID injections is a violation of federal law and ethical principles set forth in the Nuremberg Code. The Nazi doctors were found guilty of crimes against humanity. Why are we repeating this dark history in America by forcing people to inject an experimental drug into their bodies? The history of the Nazi regime forcing people to undergo medical experiments cannot be forgotten and must not be repeated. Businesses, schools and governments that require these experimental shots have learned nothing from this dark history or the failed Swine and Anthrax vaccines. We will not let Joe Biden and the DOJ twist the law and hurt people.”

Author: Liberty Counsel