Folks, this is coming from Yahoo News, an oligarch agitprop hub.
Here is a handy crosspost from NonVeniMark regarding informed consent with helpful links and citations to save and share.
Tuskegee: NEVER AGAIN!
Well, maybe just ONE more time…
Informed Consent: How many people understand the vaxx is an unapproved, experimental jab? Is calling it “safe” a criminal act?
How many of your family and friends really understand that by taking the vaxx, they are part of an experiment? How many of them actually read the pamphlet they were handed, maybe, at their injection appointment, and probably after they had already been jabbed? You know, the pamphlet that states in several places that these are unapproved, experimental vaccines that “may” prevent Covid. And while we are at it, didn’t they make this sort of thing a federal crime after the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study?
Feel free to pass on these handy links:
Pfizer fact sheet for recipients and caregivers, U.S.
Pfizer fact sheet for healthcare providers administering the vaccine, U.S
AstraZeneca information leaflet, UK
Moderna fact sheet for healthcare providers administering the vaccine, U.S.
Moderna information leaflet, EU
Since COVID Vaccines Are Experimental, Vaccine Administrators Must Inform You of Risks
In the U.S., vaccines granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna COVID vaccines, are considered experimental. Administrators of emergency use vaccines are required by law to inform vaccine recipients of the potential risks.
With the mass vaccination program now in full swing, we are hearing of more and more reports suggesting this fundamental right and legal requirement is not being respected. The vast majority of people are simply not being given the opportunity to exercise this right that is a foundational principle of medical ethics and central to the concept of patient autonomy. Most people likely don’t even know what information they should be able to receive prior to vaccination.
You don’t need to sign something to give consent — baring your arm is sufficient. In the case of vaccination, this is, in essence, your gesture that gives the vaccinator permission to touch you and inject you. Failure to seek your permission would typically be regarded, legally, as assault or battery. The real problem therefore isn’t with the consent itself, but with the information that should precede the issue of consent.
Do health authority vaccine claims constitute deceit?
Health authorities around the world continue to claim that COVID-19 vaccines are “safe.” However, according to the Collins dictionary, this means that:
“Something that is safe does not cause physical harm or danger.”
“Safe” claims are routinely made by organizations like the UK NHS, the Centers for Disease Control in the USA and the World Health Organization.
A search we carried out of the VAERS database in the U.S. shows that nearly 8,000 adverse events have been reported to date (note: as many as 90% of adverse reactions often go unreported), and over 1.5% of these involved death. It is then arguably deceitful to refer to these experimental vaccines as “safe.”
Given the lack of vaccine transparency, vaccinators themselves are not properly informed so are generally not in any position to offer accurate information that might be available in the public domain, but is generally not well known.
Information that should be freely communicated includes the fact that the vaccines are experimental and unproven. Those considering giving consent should be told about the vaccines’ reliance on synthetic biology that has never been tested at scale. But it also includes information on known risks and benefits from Phase 3 trials, and that these trials are still under way and some won’t be complete for over 18 months (e.g. Jan. 31, 2023, for Pfizer mRNA vaccine)...