Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Vaccine Mandates Coming For Employment
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 4956013" data-attributes="member: 63706"><p>[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Letter-in-Response-to-DOJ-Slip-Opinion-Released-on-July-26-2021.pdf[/URL]</p><p></p><p><strong>Entrenched Principle to Not Coerce Acceptance of Unlicensed Medical Products</strong></p><p>To be licensed, the FDA must find that a medical product is “safe for use and … effective in use.”3 Until licensed, a medical product remains investigational, even after issuance of an EUA. As the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) explains with regard to a vaccine granted EUA: “The issuance of an EUA is different than an FDA approval (licensure) of a vaccine. A vaccine available under emergency use authorization is still considered investigational.”4 And as the FDA explains, “<strong>an investigational drug can also be called an experimental drug”</strong> <strong>because these two terms are synonymous</strong>.5 For example, the EUA fact sheet for an intravenous drug to treat H1N1 granted EUA by the FDA explains that it is “an experimental drug.”6 Similarly, <strong>after an EUA was granted</strong></p><p><strong>for the COVID-19 vaccine co-developed by the NIH and Moderna, it was described by the NIH as an “[e]xperimental coronavirus vaccine</strong>.”7</p><p>Long settled legal precedent establishes that <strong>it is not legal to coerce an individual to accept an unlicensed, and hence experimental, medical product</strong>. An individual must voluntarily agree, free from any undue influence, to accept same. This principle was first codified long-ago by American jurists.8 It was then incorporated into the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, and guidance from federal health agencies. See e.g., 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-0a (Even for patients with a life-threatening condition, an unlicensed medical product cannot be coerced, rather Congress required obtaining the patient’s “written informed consent.”) 42 U.S.C. § 9501 (Same for mental health patients);9 45 C.friend.R. § 46.116 (For an unlicensed medical product, the “Basic elements of informed consent” include that “participation is voluntary,” “<strong>refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled” and that consent be obtained without “coercion or undue influence.”);10 FDA Information Sheet: Informed Consent (“Coercion occurs when an overt threat of harm [such as expulsion from school or employment] is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to obtain compliance.”)11</strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 4956013, member: 63706"] [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.icandecide.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Letter-in-Response-to-DOJ-Slip-Opinion-Released-on-July-26-2021.pdf[/URL] [B]Entrenched Principle to Not Coerce Acceptance of Unlicensed Medical Products[/B] To be licensed, the FDA must find that a medical product is “safe for use and … effective in use.”3 Until licensed, a medical product remains investigational, even after issuance of an EUA. As the National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) explains with regard to a vaccine granted EUA: “The issuance of an EUA is different than an FDA approval (licensure) of a vaccine. A vaccine available under emergency use authorization is still considered investigational.”4 And as the FDA explains, “[B]an investigational drug can also be called an experimental drug”[/B] [B]because these two terms are synonymous[/B].5 For example, the EUA fact sheet for an intravenous drug to treat H1N1 granted EUA by the FDA explains that it is “an experimental drug.”6 Similarly, [B]after an EUA was granted for the COVID-19 vaccine co-developed by the NIH and Moderna, it was described by the NIH as an “[e]xperimental coronavirus vaccine[/B].”7 Long settled legal precedent establishes that [B]it is not legal to coerce an individual to accept an unlicensed, and hence experimental, medical product[/B]. An individual must voluntarily agree, free from any undue influence, to accept same. This principle was first codified long-ago by American jurists.8 It was then incorporated into the United States Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, and guidance from federal health agencies. See e.g., 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-0a (Even for patients with a life-threatening condition, an unlicensed medical product cannot be coerced, rather Congress required obtaining the patient’s “written informed consent.”) 42 U.S.C. § 9501 (Same for mental health patients);9 45 C.friend.R. § 46.116 (For an unlicensed medical product, the “Basic elements of informed consent” include that “participation is voluntary,” “[B]refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which the subject is otherwise entitled” and that consent be obtained without “coercion or undue influence.”);10 FDA Information Sheet: Informed Consent (“Coercion occurs when an overt threat of harm [such as expulsion from school or employment] is intentionally presented by one person to another in order to obtain compliance.”)11[/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Union Issues
Vaccine Mandates Coming For Employment
Top