15

The Era of Informed (Medical Care) Consent is Over

Posted by freedomforall 1 month ago to Government
18 comments | Share | Flag

Excerpt:
"n a significant blow to patient autonomy, informed consent has been quietly revoked just 77 years after it was codified in the Nuremberg Code.

On the 21st of December 2023, as we were frantically preparing for the festive season, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a final ruling to amend a provision of the 21st Century Cures Act. This allowed

…an exception from the requirement to obtain informed consent when a clinical investigation poses no more than a minimal risk to the human subject…

This ruling went into effect on January 22nd, 2024, which means it’s already standard practice across America.

So, what is the 21st Century Cures Act? It is a controversial Law enacted by the 114th United States Congress in January 2016 with strong support from the pharmaceutical industry. The Act was designed to

…accelerate the discovery, development, and delivery of 21st-century cures, and for other purposes [?]…[emphasis added]

Some of the provisions within this Act make for uncomfortable reading. For example, the Act supported:

High-risk, high-reward research [Sec. 2036].

Novel clinical trial designs [Sec. 3021]

Encouraging vaccine innovation [Sec. 3093].

This Act granted the National Institutes of Health (NIH) legal protection to pursue high-risk, novel vaccine research. A strong case could be made that these provisions capture all the necessary architecture required for much of the evil that transpired over the past four years.

Overturning patient-informed consent was another stated goal of the original Act. Buried under Section 3024 was the provision to develop an

Informed consent waiver or alteration for clinical investigation.

Scholars of medical history understand that the concept of informed consent, something we all take for granted today, is a relatively new phenomenon codified in its modern understanding as one of the critical principles of the Nuremberg Code in 1947. It is inconceivable that just 77 years after Nuremberg, the door has once again opened for state-sanctioned medical experimentation on potentially uninformed and unwilling citizens. "
SOURCE URL: https://brownstone.org/articles/the-era-of-informed-consent-is-over/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Abaco 1 month ago
    It started being over when the military forced the GIs to take that squirrely vaccine in the 70s for that odd flu. They stopped forcing it even though it really wasn't any worse than the current mRNA platform products. Now, take whatever they tell you or you lose your job....But, that's not "forcing you to take it".

    Informed consent it loooooooooooong gone. Has been for a while. But, like the boiling frog, almost nobody saw it happening. California's open, brazen attack on it and their violations of the Nuremberg Code have really helped my real estate values in a nearby, more libertarian, state. I firmly believe California's actions on this have pumped real estate way up in price all over the nation as Californians have left for higher ground to raise their kids. If you're not in California it's basically the current inflation storm along with Governors Brown and Newsome that you can thank for your equity explosion...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mccannon01 1 month ago
    Shakes head slowly. Can't make this crap up!

    "…an exception from the requirement to obtain informed consent when a clinical investigation poses no more than a minimal risk to the human subject…" The last word "subject" says a lot of how we are viewed. OK, I have to ask, who decides when a clinical investigation poses no more than minimal risk? Who decides "minimal"? Who decides "risk'?

    Too late to save Mengele's ass, but just in time for [name your Mengele wanabe here].
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mhubb 1 month ago
      who decides?
      the person NOT getting the shot

      i asked one of my doctors to help me not get the damn shot. she said i needed to talk to my primary care and she said i should take it, dismissing my concerns


      i later learned she was the last to get it, waiting for others in the practice to show it was safe
      i've been trying to find a replacement for what she does that insurance will take

      not happy with her a
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mhubb 1 month ago
    WTF???

    WHO votes for this????
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_Ce...

    so this was BEFORE COVID???!!!!

    there are a lot of people in DC that need to be asked a lot of questions, including Faux-Faucci (Trump will face a pandemic before he leaves office)

    each and every person that voted for this violated their Oath and the Nuremberg Code and should face a trial for Crimes against Humanity, along with 0bama the il-legal alien POTUS who signed it
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ katrinam41 1 month ago
    The piling on of nastiness upon nastiness (substitute for the word s..t) in so many nooks and crannies in every law passed sickens my soul. The only way to get rid of these loathsome additions is to dump every law in existence and start over , according to a Constitution that clarifies every word, evey meaning.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 1 month ago
    In California there is "Prop 65". It was passed long ago and it mandates that any establishment and any product that might have mercury in it needs to have a big sign saying it or a big label on the product. They don't have it on the entrance to doctor's offices, even though many vaccines have mercury in them - about half of the common preservative. Why don't pediatricians have to post this to comply with the proposition? Because the courts were approached on this and decided that "since the pediatrician will educate the parents about the ingredients of the childhood vaccines they are exempt". No...I'm not joking. Think they give a s%#t about you and your kids?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mhubb 1 month ago
      mercury in the small amount needed to be effective is safer than the vaccines themselves and the replacement preservative
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Abaco 1 month ago
        The amount of mercury in the childhood vaccine schedule well-exceeded the EPA MCL. That's the problem. They never did the math. Have they tried to fix that? Reportedly. But, I really doubt it. They never do the math. I mention the MCL because that's the only attempt at setting the bar at what's an "acceptable" level for mercury. But, there is no acceptable level because we're not all the same, genetically. May sound complex. But, it's basic. And, the only thing the mercury is "effective" at in this use is as a preservative. Has nothing to do with how the vaccines work. That can't be said for the adjuvants which are....wait for it....often aluminum! Aluminum is highly bioaccumulative and is a known neurotoxin. Surprised we're not still putting leaches on people to cure migraines... The problem with informed consent is that almost nobody takes the effort to become informed. I sure did once my kid was disabled. Too damned late...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CTYankee44 1 month ago
    To any and every bureaucrat that believes that there is a "minimal risk" of experimenting on free people without their consent:

    Let it be stated here and now that that there is a minimal risk that you will survive the attempt.

    Consider yourselves to be duly notified.

    This is all that shall be required for history to judge that you will be operating with informed consent.

    "I am John Galt!"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 1 month ago
    We are not subjects. We are free citizens.
    Subjects serve puffed-up all into themselves control freak pretenders to an upper class.
    Viva the equality that used to be all about the USA.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 month ago
      Free sovereign people would be a better description, imo.
      I think a "citizen" is a subject of the government.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ allosaur 1 month ago
        Me dino was thinking of how French citizens addressed each other when they first copied our republic.
        Well, come to think of it, up to a point. They were also madly cheering while lopping off the heads or royalty and nobility at that time.
        Or did they have the right idea when it comes to traitors?. We have a Schiff load of those.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 3 weeks, 6 days ago
    The big thing here is that Congress gave an executive bureaucracy the power to create LAW. That is the fundamental flaw in ALL delegations of power from the Legislative to the Executive Branch. In a proper check and retention of power, ALL proposed rule-changes should have to be proposed and passed by Congress (both Houses) AND signed by the President before they may take effect.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo