New Law Could Eliminate Informed Consent for Human Experimentation With Vaccines and Drugs

Published March 30, 2017 | Best in Video

They’re talking about a bill here, they’re talking about Section 3024 of this bill and they’re talking about informed consent, and I will play for you what they had to say having to do with vaccines and the 21st Century Cures Act.  

This speaks to informed consent waiver or alteration for clinical investigations. There, I have to say, are still a lot of discussions going on whether this really will
apply to two vaccines for the following reason, this the 21st Century Cures would amend the Food and Drug Act to add an exception from informed consent requirements for those clinical trials that pose no more than minimal risk and there are appropriate safeguards protecting the rights, safety, and welfare of the exam place. Now, for vaccine trials we always have taken the position that these trials do involve more than minimal risks, so this may not be applicable but, again, we have our lawyers, everybody, engaged to really help guide this along.

Snow Time!

Snow Time!

 

Death At Your Door: Knock-And-Talk Police Tactics Rip A Hole In The Constitution

by Tyler Durden

Mar 29, 2017 11:20 PM

 

Authored by John Whitehead via The Rutherford Institute,

“It’s 4 in the morning, there’s headlights that are shining into your house; there’s a number of different officers that are now on the premises; they’re wearing tactical gear; they have weapons; and they approach your front door. Do you think that the ordinary citizen in that situation feels that they have an obligation to comply?”— Michigan Supreme Court Justice Richard Bernstein

It’s 1:30 a.m., a time when most people are asleep.

Your neighborhood is in darkness, except for a few street lamps. Someone—he doesn’t identify himself and the voice isn’t familiar—is pounding on your front door, demanding that you open up. Your heart begins racing. Your stomach is tied in knots. The adrenaline is pumping through you. You fear that it’s an intruder or worse. You not only fear for your life, but the lives of your loved ones.

The aggressive pounding continues, becoming more jarring with every passing second. Desperate to protect yourself and your loved ones from whatever threat awaits on the other side of that door, you scramble to lay hold of something—anything—that you might use in self-defense. It might be a flashlight, a baseball bat, or that licensed and registered gun you thought you’d never need. You brace for the confrontation, a shaky grip on your weapon, and approach the door cautiously. The pounding continues.

You open the door to find a shadowy figure aiming a gun in your direction. Immediately, you back up and retreat further into your apartment. At the same time, the intruder opens fire, sending a hail of bullets in your direction. Three of the bullets make contact. You die without ever raising your weapon or firing your gun in self-defense. In your final moments, you get a good look at your assailant: it’s the police.

This is what passes for “knock-and-talk” policing in the American police state.

“Knock-and-shoot” policing might be more accurate, however.

Whatever you call it, this aggressive, excessive police tactic has become a thinly veiled, warrantless exercise by which citizens are coerced and intimidated into “talking” with heavily armed police who “knock” on their doors in the middle of the night.

Poor Andrew Scott didn’t even get a chance to say no to such a heavy-handed request before he was gunned down by police.