Originally Posted by fadec

Fine. Let me humor you further with 4 points of the Helsinki code. Coercion in human trials performed under EUA fail all of these. Point 23 specifically mentions dependent relationships like the employer/employee relationship in this case. Though obviously intended for a different purpose, I think an employer forcing an employee to get vaxed fails the same ethical test.
​​​​​

20. The subjects must be volunteers and informed
participants in the research project.

21. The right of research subjects to safeguard their
integrity must always be respected. Every precaution should be taken to respect the privacy of the subject, the
confidentiality of the patient’s information and to minimize
the impact of the study on the subject’s physical and mental integrity and on the personality of the subject.

22. In any research on human beings, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail. The subject should be informed of the right to abstain from participation in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. After ensuring that the subject has understood the information, the physician should then obtain the subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be obtained in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

23. When obtaining informed consent for the research
project the physician should be particularly cautious if the subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In that case the informed consent should be obtained by a well-informed physician who is not engaged in the investigation and who is completely independent of this relationship.

Originally Posted by OOfff

Malone did not invent the mRNA vaccine technology.

Originally Posted by Thedude86

So that makes your opinion more valid than someone who’s done more than 30 years of research on the subject?

I will agree it isn’t 100% clear who invented it, but someone earlier mentioned Katalin Kariko. Looks like she didn’t apply for gene therapy research until 1990. Dr. Robert Malone had initial patents for mRNA in 1988 and 1989.

Regardless, if one or the other invented it, or neither of them invented it, I would say both of them are probably equally and some of the most qualified in the world to comment on the subject.

Just because you don’t believe Dr. Malone’s opinion does not make him unqualified to speak. Although I will say, anybody or any corporation that’s done research and/or sold billions of a particular product to the entire world, probably has a vested interest to keep the negative information from the public.

Originally Posted by Thedude86

Just because you don’t believe Dr. Malone’s opinion does not make him unqualified to speak. Although I will say, anybody or any corporation that’s done research and/or sold billions of a particular product to the entire world, probably has a vested interest to keep the negative information from the public.