BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448, 7 December 1996.
CIRP Introduction
The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide.
This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body.
This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided.
This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients.
The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extened into general codes of medical ethics.
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. 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 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. 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.
9. 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 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.
The Nuremberg Code (1947) In: Mitscherlich A, Mielke F. Doctors of infamy: the story of the Nazi medical crimes. New York: Schuman, 1949: xxiii-xxv.
(File revised 09 June 2002)
[The following is Hickenlooper’s response. Please note that it does not address anything in the original email, but immaturely diverts to his own anti-American agenda.]
Office of U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper <donotreply@hickenlooper.senate.gov>To:klocekws@sbcglobal.netWed, Aug 11 at 12:10 PM
August 11, 2021Dear William,
Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the election, the events of January 6th, and the impeachment process. Civic engagement and communication with your representatives is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy. I appreciate any and all dialogue as it enables me to better represent Colorado.Let me be clear, on November 3, 2020, the American people – in a free and fair election – chose Joe Biden as the next president of the United States. Independent experts, judges, governors and state election officials from both parties have repeatedly said that there is no evidence of widespread fraud.Some have argued that the events of January 6th, in response to a legitimate election, were an unpredictable anomaly – the result of a peaceful protest gone awry. The reality appears that they were the culmination of the work of a president who has spent the past four years catering to humanity’s worst tendencies and deepening dangerous divisions in our nation. On January 12th , the U.S. House of Representatives voted on a resolution to urge former Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove former President Trump from office, but the former Vice President stated that he would not do so. On January 13th, the House voted 232-197, with the support of 10 Republican members, to impeach former President Trump for inciting violence against the government of the United States.On February 9th, the U.S. Senate began the impeachment trial, and on February 13th, the Senate voted to allow witnesses, which led to Rep. Jamie Herrera Beutler’s statement conveying a conversation between Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and former President Donald Trump on January 6th being submitted to the record. That same day, 57 senators – including myself and seven Republicans – voted to convict. While this vote fell 10 votes short of the 67 needed and the former President was acquitted, the bipartisan nature of the vote, and the trial itself, clearly demonstrated that the former President committed reprehensible acts and violated his oath of office. Former President Trump should have resigned and saved the country from this painful exercise.Now is not the time to look backwards, we have so much to do. I’m grateful for the trust and faith Coloradans have placed in me, and will continue working every day to bring your voices to Washington to tackle our country’s most pressing issues. The challenges ahead are grave, but with hard work, common sense, and collaboration we can move forward together and deliver on important issues like the pandemic, jobs, health care, immigration reform, and climate change. We’re excited to get to work and deliver for Coloradans in every corner of the state.We always value hearing directly from Coloradans and hope you will continue to share your thoughts as we work together for Colorado and our country. For more information about our priorities, please visit our website at www.hickenlooper.senate.gov . Again, thank you for reaching out.Sincerely, John Hickenlooper United States Senator
I got my response from Bennett. Bennett’s response was a thank you for writing to him about animal abuse, and as a dog owner he supports my position. Crow’s website does not allow sending him an email (HD 6 CO). USPS has a many month delay to members of congress in order to do a security check.
Literacy, what a concept.
Constituent representing, democracy, what not U.S. gov’t concepts.
Justplainbill's Weblog 
Harris/Biden/Fauci guilty of War Crimes
Nuremberg Code
Please read and pass along to friends and family.
http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL No 7070 Volume 313: Page 1448,
7 December 1996.
CIRP Introduction
The judgment by the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg laid down 10 standards to which physicians must conform when carrying out experiments on human subjects in a new code that is now accepted worldwide.
This judgment established a new standard of ethical medical behavior for the post World War II human rights era. Amongst other requirements, this document enunciates the requirement of voluntary informed consent of the human subject. The principle of voluntary informed consent protects the right of the individual to control his own body.
This code also recognizes that the risk must be weighed against the expected benefit, and that unnecessary pain and suffering must be avoided.
This code recognizes that doctors should avoid actions that injure human patients.
The principles established by this code for medical practice now have been extened into general codes of medical ethics.
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. 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 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. 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.
9. 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 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.
Cite as:
(File revised 09 June 2002)
[The following is Hickenlooper’s response. Please note that it does not address anything in the original email, but immaturely diverts to his own anti-American agenda.]
Office of U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper <donotreply@hickenlooper.senate.gov>To:klocekws@sbcglobal.netWed, Aug 11 at 12:10 PM
August 11, 2021Dear William,
Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the election, the events of January 6th, and the impeachment process. Civic engagement and communication with your representatives is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy. I appreciate any and all dialogue as it enables me to better represent Colorado.Let me be clear, on November 3, 2020, the American people – in a free and fair election – chose Joe Biden as the next president of the United States. Independent experts, judges, governors and state election officials from both parties have repeatedly said that there is no evidence of widespread fraud.Some have argued that the events of January 6th, in response to a legitimate election, were an unpredictable anomaly – the result of a peaceful protest gone awry. The reality appears that they were the culmination of the work of a president who has spent the past four years catering to humanity’s worst tendencies and deepening dangerous divisions in our nation. On January 12th , the U.S. House of Representatives voted on a resolution to urge former Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove former President Trump from office, but the former Vice President stated that he would not do so. On January 13th, the House voted 232-197, with the support of 10 Republican members, to impeach former President Trump for inciting violence against the government of the United States.On February 9th, the U.S. Senate began the impeachment trial, and on February 13th, the Senate voted to allow witnesses, which led to Rep. Jamie Herrera Beutler’s statement conveying a conversation between Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy and former President Donald Trump on January 6th being submitted to the record. That same day, 57 senators – including myself and seven Republicans – voted to convict. While this vote fell 10 votes short of the 67 needed and the former President was acquitted, the bipartisan nature of the vote, and the trial itself, clearly demonstrated that the former President committed reprehensible acts and violated his oath of office. Former President Trump should have resigned and saved the country from this painful exercise.Now is not the time to look backwards, we have so much to do. I’m grateful for the trust and faith Coloradans have placed in me, and will continue working every day to bring your voices to Washington to tackle our country’s most pressing issues. The challenges ahead are grave, but with hard work, common sense, and collaboration we can move forward together and deliver on important issues like the pandemic, jobs, health care, immigration reform, and climate change. We’re excited to get to work and deliver for Coloradans in every corner of the state.We always value hearing directly from Coloradans and hope you will continue to share your thoughts as we work together for Colorado and our country. For more information about our priorities, please visit our website at www.hickenlooper.senate.gov . Again, thank you for reaching out.Sincerely,
John Hickenlooper
United States Senator
I got my response from Bennett. Bennett’s response was a thank you for writing to him about animal abuse, and as a dog owner he supports my position. Crow’s website does not allow sending him an email (HD 6 CO). USPS has a many month delay to members of congress in order to do a security check.
Literacy, what a concept.
Constituent representing, democracy, what not U.S. gov’t concepts.
Share this:
Related