Neil Young calls out Tidal

@frogman The idea that the unvaccinated should lose or be downgraded for medical services is not only the result of this fear, it is also inhumane.

Very inhumane.  There is a solution of course, and that is to make taxpayer funds available for sufficient medical resources, nurses, doctors, support staff, facilities and everything else I've forgotten so that everyone can be treated on a fair and equal basis.

In the absence of this, what is your solution?  Something to do with eliminating this fear thing that is causing the problem?

@noske

@yuviarora Vaccine mandates are a crime against humanity, and are in direct violation of the Helsinki Declarations and the Nuremberg Code. 

Did you make that up?  Because its not true.

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.

n Kano State, Nigeria, vaccination hesitancy is not only driven by conspiracy theories or mistrust in science. As health advocates struggle to fight disinformation about the COVID-19 vaccines, it is im-portant to remember that in some countries distrust stems not only from ignorance, but also from lived experience.

This extract from the Code confirms that the current Covid vaccine program is not in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

It goes to exactly what I already know and the basis upon what I said. So my original statement stands.

Don’t want to have any extended back and forth, but all the vaccines being administered around the world are still under EUA, the experiment does not end till 2026. The vaccines that have FDA approval are still not in production, and are not even due for a safety profile submission till 2025.

The Governments are using these legal gymnastics to skirt around liability for manufacturers and to rush out forced mandates.

Not that any of that matters, these are all semantics....any coercion, pressure for the public to take medication of any kind is a violation of natural human rights, the legal mumbo jumbo makes no difference to any of us that will not take it under any circumstances.

@noske The next time you go in for your booster, ask to see the insert label for the vaccines that they are injecting into you......... they all have blank pieces of paper stuffed inside, they do not have to provide a list of side effects until the experiments have ended.