Similar Posts
Clinical Trial Ethical Underpinnings: reflecting on a pediatric anthrax vaccine trial / Sci Am Blogs
In her third excellent Scientific American blog post, Infectious Disease doctor Judy Stone has delved into the ethical and regulatory framework under which clinical research must be conducted. Dr. Stone provides a succinct historical overview of the important documents, and how they were enshrined in regulations guiding the conduct of research in humans. For readers…
Grassley seeks full accounting of H1N1 purchase by government/ Senate website
Press Release from Senator Grassley, asking many previously unasked questions about the vaccine supply; its cost; safety studies; efficacy data; and government oversight, given the PREPA liability shield: WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley has asked the Secretary of Health and Human Services for additional information about the government’s supply of the H1N1 vaccine, based on…
CDC: Chloroquine works against SARS: 2005 International Virology Journal
US CDC proved efficacy of chloroquine for SARS 15 years ago. Virol J. 2005; 2: 69. Chloroquine is a Potent Inhibitor of SARS Coronavirus Infection and Spread Published online 2005 Aug 22. doi: 10.1186/1743-422X-2-69 Martin J Vincent,1 Eric Bergeron,2 Suzanne Benjannet,2 Bobbie R Erickson,1 Pierre E Rollin,1 Thomas G Ksiazek,1 Nabil G Seidah,2 and Stuart T Nichol1 PMCID: PMC1232869 PMID: 16115318 1Special Pathogens Brach, Division of Viral…
The US is not an honest broker: a) impenetrable last-minute legalese, b) a history of making reservations that enable the US to dodge compliance, and c) scuttling carefully negotiated agreements
3 Examples of how the US avoids the traps it sets for others Meryl Nass May 29, 2024 Example #1. Here is a resolution the US and a handful of its hangers-on proposed for the WHA to approve today. It is so full of references to other documents (by number) that it is impossible to…
CDC and its captured physician researchers trick the public into believing myocarditis is more common after the disease than the vaccine
Eight of the authors are CDC employees. One author is Grace Lee, the chairperson of the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), whose committee is asked to approve the rollout of all vaccines. I guess she gets research money in return. Other ACIP members also coauthor similar bogus research articles in CDC’s self-published, non…
Science Magazine/ ANTHRAX INVESTIGATION: FBI Discusses Microbial Forensics–but Key Questions Remain Unanswered
Science 22 August 2008:Vol. 321. no. 5892, pp. 1026 – 1027 excerpted from the body of the article: (my apologies that a free link is not available) …The FBI disclosed earlier that only eight samples had all four mutations; on Monday, it said that all but one of these came from USAMRIID. And all eight…
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
'THOUGHTS ON HOW TO FIGHT THEM ON VAX MANDATES'
The Religious Exemption is the incorrect approach.
Subsection bbb-3(e)(1)(A)(ii)(III) of section 360 of Title 21 of the USC demands that employees are given the "option to accept or refuse administration" of EUA drugs.
Doe #1 v Rumsfeld, 297 F.Supp.2d 119 (DDC 2003) prohibits the military from requiring experimental drugs.
Griswold v Connecticut (1965) ruled everyone has a Constitutional right to bodily integrity.
US v Stanley (1987) ruled military personnel cannot be forced to take experimental drugs.
Cruzan v Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990) ruled you have the right to refuse medical treatment, even if that treatment would save your life.
Washington v Harper (1990) decided "The forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person's body represents a substantial interference with that person's liberty."
US v Charters (4tth Circuit, 1987) decided "The right to be free of unwanted physical invasions has been recognized as an integral part of the individual's constitutional freedoms."
Religious exemptions will fail because the courts do not view this as a religious issue. There is enough precedent to win on the issue the drugs are EUA only. The only drug approved by the FDA, Comirnaty, is not available in the US. And per a memo to the FDA from Pfizer last month, Comirnaty will not be produced for the US.
Conclusion: there is not a vaccine available in the US that is approved and not under an EUA authorization.
It's just a matter of time before the FDA fraudulently removes the EUA, then what?
Would not the Big Pharma owned FDA have already done that by now if they could?
Not ruling it out in the future?
ABA ASSOC COMMENTS ON US SUPREME COURT/JACOBSON CASE!
A BIG WIN FOR THOSE FIGHTING VACCINE MANDATES!
'THE HIGHWIRE WITH DEL BIGTREE: CENTURY-OLD JACOBSON VS. MASSACHUSETTS RULING AFFECTS VAX MANDATES' [13 min video]
https://thehighwire.com/videos/century-old-ruling-affects-vax-mandates/
PLUS!
'Judge rules in favor of St. Paul unions over COVID Vaccination mandate'!
https://www.twincities.com/2022/06/02/ramsey-county-judge-rules-in-favor-of-st-paul-unions-over-covid-vaccination-mandate/
Plus:!
"Non FDA approved covid vaccines"?
They weren't vaccines: U.S.C. 26 §§4132(a)(2) defines a vaccine as "a substance that prevents one or more diseases".
None of these in their documentation say "prevent" they say "reduces symptoms". Hence, no one is vaccinated. FDA and CDC could be tried for the Medical Fraud for both the shots, PCR tests and masks.
These shots, PCR tests and masks were forced in violation of U.S.C. 21 §'s 360bbb-3 in conjunction with 50.20.
This is the embodiment of the Nuremberg Code in the U.S. Code.
Great Attorney On Fighting Mandates has a lot of INFO, Stats, from DOD, Medicare, and HHS. Etc.
Attorney Tom Renz
https://renz-law.com/