The patient, H.M. as he has been widely known within the neuropsychological literature for more than five decades was Henry Molaison whose identity was made public only after his death in 2008. Luke Dittrich is an award winning journalist whose recently published . . . Continue reading →
Beware the month of August – when Congress and many citizens are vacationing! Government bureaucrats favor August to issue announcements about radical medical research policy changes, for which taxpayer money is sought. They do so, to avoid public controversy about public funding of radical experimentation…
Carl Elliott, MD, who has the moral gumption to stand up and speak out against “the toads and bullies who preside over academic medical centers” — including his own institution’s deplorable, but profitable human experiments in psychiatry — is especially revolted by . . . Continue reading →
Peter Aleff, our guest contributor whose scathing, detailed insightful critique of unethical experiments, in particular, the contentious government sponsored SUPPORT experiment that put premature babies lives and well-being at increased risk without disclosing the true nature of the experiment to the parents. . . . Continue reading →
Scientists and entrepreneurs have tried for years to develop a safe and universal blood substitute that did not spoil after 42 days. However, all such efforts have encountered serious safety problems.
Continue reading →
1998: Doing Harm: Research on the Mentally Ill, a prize winning research expose by The Boston Globe In November, 1998, the first of a four-part series by Robert Whitaker and Dolores Kong shed light on the abusive research parameters of non-therapeutic experiments conducted . . . Continue reading →
The National Heart Blood and Lung Institute (NHBLI) has embarked on a far-ranging, dubious unethical experimental research paradigm that puts vulnerable, (often) critically ill patients at increased risk of harm; merely to document the resulting harm. Thousands of patients accross the United . . . Continue reading →
August 20, 1947: Judgment at Nuremberg: 16 out of 23 doctors were found guilty of crimes against humanity. The Nuremberg verdict also set forth the parameters of “Permissible Medical Experiments” known as the Nuremberg Code. The Nuremberg Code laid the foundation for biomedical . . . Continue reading →
American public health officials and the medical community pretended that the Nuremberg Code did not apply to American medical researchers. The assumption was that the physicians who had conducted heinous experiments had been Nazi doctors in Germany; and they rationalized that most . . . Continue reading →
Judgment at Nuremberg All sixteen Nazi doctors were found guilty; seven were sentenced to death and executed, nine were convicted and sentenced to prison, and seven were acquitted. Karl Gebhardt was found guilty of “crimes against humanity” and war crimes for his . . . Continue reading →
The revelations at Nuremberg were extremely discomforting to the American medical establishment: the sheer unprecedented scale of immorality of the Nazi doctors was staggering — and the potential of guilt by association. The fact that the American medical profession had also enthusiastically . . . Continue reading →
In 1946, the World Medical Association (WMA) was formed by representatives of 32 national medical associations. In 1947, one month after the conclusion of the Nuremberg Trial, the WMA held its first meeting, when it adopted a new physician’s oath, omitting injunctions . . . Continue reading →
