Make Sure Your Voice is Heard / Take Action Now
Use this Link to Oppose CDC Medical Tyranny
http://tinyurl.com/InformedConsentProtection
.
Statement of Natural Solutions Foundation in
Opposition to Proposed CDC Regulation
Submitted to the CDC 11 September 2016
Comment Tracking Number: 1k0-8ruq-kk09
.CDC Quarantine and Forced Treatment (Vaccination) Proposed Regulation
“Control of Communicable Diseases
Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 157 (Monday, August 15, 2016)”
http://www.regulations.gov/comment?D=CDC-2016-0068-0001.
.
Assert Your Right to Informed Consent
Obtain Advance Vaccine Directive Cards Here:
http://tinyurl.com/AVDcard
.
Numbers Count! Share This Messge As Widely As Possible
http://drrimatruthreports.com/?p=30239
.
In an audacious violation of national and international law, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), a part of the Health and Human Services (HHS) Department of the United States Government, proposes the adoption of a regulation giving it power to quarantine and forced treatment (vaccination) for certain unspecified “quarantinable diseases.”
.
The proposed regulation brings medical tyranny to a new level of danger, by specifically overriding any and all informed consent rights, despite the well-established legal right to Informed Consent. This Regulation is being proposed under under the provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act.
.
The official Summary states:
.
“Through this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is amending its domestic (interstate) and foreign quarantine regulations to best protect the public health of the United States.
.
“These amendments are being proposed to aid public health responses to outbreaks of communicable diseases such as the largest recorded outbreak of Ebola virus disease (Ebola) in history, the recent outbreak of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in South Korea, and repeated outbreaks and responses to measles in the United States, as well as the ongoing threat of other new or re-emerging communicable diseases. The provisions contained herein provide additional clarity to various safeguards to prevent the importation and spread of communicable diseases affecting human health into the United States and interstate.”
.
What diseases are included? We must ask what diseases CDC has in mind. Measles (a non-quarantinable and trivial disease) is mentioned 186 times; Ebola is mentioned 330 times; Influenza (another non-quarantinable disease) is mentioned 26 times. Zika is not mentioned at all.
.
In context, generally mild, self-limiting diseases like measles are irresponsibly and irrationally equated to deadly diseases such as Ebola. The Regulation permits the CDC to include any communicable disease.
.
A close reading of the proposed regulation shows the word “consent” is mentioned 12 times, always in the context of denying the individual right to consent. Sections 70.18 and 71.40 are similar:
.
“§70.18 – Agreements. CDC may enter into an agreement with an individual, upon such terms as the CDC considers to be reasonably necessary, indicating that the individual consents to any of the public health measures authorized under this part, including quarantine, isolation, conditional release, medical examination, hospitalization, vaccination, and treatment; provided that the individual’s consent shall not be considered as a prerequisite to the exercise of any authority under this part.”
.
There is no language in the proposed Regulation safeguarding the universal right to Informed Consent, protected by international and US national law, as required under binding international treaties . The proposed Regulation therefore fails to acknowledge and provide for this basic human right as required by law.
.
The operative language of the UN Bioethics Declaration parallels the historic language of the Nuremberg Code, created by the United States Government at the end of World War II to codify the international law of Informed Consent. Under the provisions of the Geneva Conventions, that international law applies to the US Government and its agents.
.
The Nuremburg Code clearly states:
.
“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, over-reaching, 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.”
.
The UNESCO Universal Bioethics Declaration:
.
“Article 6 – Consent – 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice. 2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent.
.
“Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law. Article 28 – Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any claim to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity…”
.
The Supreme Court of the United States has clearly held that the individual right to consent to medical interventions is a right protected under the Constitution of the United States, most recently in 2014, in the case of Missouri vs McNeely, wherein the Court stated:
.
Even a “…diminished expectation of privacy does not diminish the… privacy interest in preventing a government agent from piercing the… skin. And though a blood test conducted in a medical setting by trained personnel is less intrusive than other bodily invasions, this Court has never retreated from its recognition that any compelled intrusion into the human body implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests…”
.
It is therefore clear that CDC is without any lawful authority to promulgate a regulation which explicitly states that “the individual’s consent shall not be considered as a prerequisite to the exercise of any authority…”
.
Such a claim to authority violates international law and United States constitutional law. It is both ultra vires (exceeding its lawful authority) and, if implemented, would include acts “under color of law” that constitute a crime against humanity for which there is no statute of limitations and against which the individual CDC or other government agents would have no lawful defense, but who would be personally responsible the violation of rights and subsequent harms to individuals.
.
The CDC must withdraw the proposed regulation in its entirety and not adopt or seek to adopt any regulation that violates international and national law. The failure of the CDC to provide for the due process expression of Informed Consent further violates constitutionally protected privacy interests. The proposed regulation opens the door to a unprecedented level of intrusive medical tyranny which is incompatible with a free and democratic society.
.
Individuals, as the Supreme Court declared in McNeely, must assert their right to Informed Consent or it may be deemed waived. A proper Advance Medical Directive, such as the Advance Vaccine Directive (AVD), which expresses the individual’s refusal to give informed consent to vaccination, must be respected by all medical and other personnel without regard to any unlawful contrary regulations. That the medical and other personnel were “just following orders” is no excuse for violations of Informed Consent and crimes against humanity.
.
Natural Solutions Foundation
By: Rima E Laibow MD, Medical Director
Ralph Fucetola JD, Legal Director
.
.
AVD Cards, expressing refusal to be vaccinated, may be obtained here:
http://tinyurl.com/AVDcard
.
Join in this Statement of Oppostion to the CDC by using this link: http://tinyurl.com/InformedConsentProtection
