The Nuremberg Code

On human experiments, (1947). Doctors on trial, for crimes against humanity. Medical Case: US prosecutor details illegal experiments In case you want to support our community work use the following: patreon: Link to our organization’s website: Donate: SENDWAVE/ WorldRemit / Wise transfer/Money Gram Mobile money number: 256785698803 Country: Uganda Registered name: Wefwafwa Andrew State: Eastern Uganda Address: Nkokojjeru Zip code:0000 Wallet Service provider:MTNE To contact Wefwafwa directly, wefandrew@ or WhatsApp 256756320736 Medical professionals on trial, after war for war crimes and crimes against humanity Including experiments on prisoners in the camp system. Doctors and nurses, participated in the killing of physically and mentally impaired Germans German doctors argued “Doctors Trial.“ 1946 Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10. Nuremberg October 1946 – April 1949 Their experiments differed little from those conducted before the war by German and American scientists. No international law or informal statement differentiated between legal and illegal human experimentation. “Permissible Medical Experiments.” Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office (n.d.), vol. 2., pp. 181-182. One 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 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. Before the acceptance of an affirmative decision, subject should know 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. Two The experiment should yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods, and not random and unnecessary in nature. Three The experiment should be based on the results of animal experimentation, a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem, the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment. Four The experiment should avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. Five 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. Six The degree of risk should never exceed, that determined by the humanitarian importance, of the problem to be solved by the experiment. Seven Proper preparations should be made, and adequate facilities provided, to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury disability or death. Eight 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 Nine During the course of the experiment the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end Ten During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, that continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.