Jump to content

PAISD Offers Incentive for Vaccinations shot


BMTSoulja1

Recommended Posts

On 8/28/2021 at 9:17 AM, BMTSoulja1 said:

🙄🙄🙄

The Nuremberg Code (1947)

Permissible Medical Experiments

The great weight of the evidence before us to effect that certain types of medical experiments on human beings, when kept within reasonably well-defined bounds, conform to the ethics of the medical profession generally. The protagonists of the practice of human experimentation justify their views on the basis that such experiments yield results for the good of society that are unprocurable by other methods or means of study. All agree, however, that certain basic principles must be observed in order to satisfy moral, ethical and legal concepts:

1. 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, overreaching, 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. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him 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.

The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.

Theexperimentshouldbesodesignedandbasedontheresultsofanimal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results justify the performance of the experiment.

The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.

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.

The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.

Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability or death.

Theexperimentshouldbeconductedonlybyscientificallyqualifiedpersons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.

Duringthecourseoftheexperimentthehumansubjectshouldbeatlibertyto bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.

10.During the course of the experiment the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SmashMouth said:

I totally believe in not mandating vaccines. But I don’t think this is the same thing. An incentive for taking the shot is far from pressuring or bullying. Jmo. 

Yes on the surface it’s not.

So you think the few unvaccinated are looked at differently and aren’t gonna be blamed when in reality every vaccinated person can still spread it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, 5GallonBucket said:

Yes on the surface it’s not.

So you think the few unvaccinated are looked at differently and aren’t gonna be blamed when in reality every vaccinated person can still spread it

That’s a pretty good point. But that’s life. Be tough. Don’t listen to what dumbazz people say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I think it's dumb to give somebody $100 bucks to get them to take a shot that's costing the US taxpayers who knows how much.  Take it or don't.  Mandates aren't right, either.  

To me it’s kinda like the gun buyback programs.  Nobody is turning in a gun for a little bit of money if they want the gun, and nobody is getting the shot for $100 that wasn’t already ready to get the shot.  It’s unrealistic to offer a cash incentive large enough to convince someone who doesn’t want to get the shot.  If you offered $1500, and someone could pay their house and car notes for a month, I could see someone changing their mind and getting the shot. But $100?  That’s not going to make anybody take a shot that they already felt was so risky that they wouldn’t get it for free.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

To me it’s kinda like the gun buyback programs.  Nobody is turning in a gun for a little bit of money if they want the gun, and nobody is getting the shot for $100 that wasn’t already ready to get the shot.  It’s unrealistic to offer a cash incentive large enough to convince someone who doesn’t want to get the shot.  If you offered $1500, and someone could pay their house and car notes for a month, I could see someone changing their mind and getting the shot. But $100?  That’s not going to make anybody take a shot that they already felt was so risky that they wouldn’t get it for free.  

That's why I said it was cool for ppl that were already planning on getting it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing is played out… I’ve got a friend that is on fb live almost daily ragging on people who won’t get the vaccine. He’s a liberal, so it’s expected. No biggie. 
 

EXCEPT up until about a year and half ago he was a sworn anti-vaxxer. He completed his affidavit to send to the school claiming a religious exemption from his kids’ requires vaccines. I mean… what changed? Did you ever get those kids their shots? Or is this the only vaccine you approve? It’s so blatantly hypocritical.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/31/2021 at 10:12 PM, bullets13 said:

To me it’s kinda like the gun buyback programs.  Nobody is turning in a gun for a little bit of money if they want the gun, and nobody is getting the shot for $100 that wasn’t already ready to get the shot.  It’s unrealistic to offer a cash incentive large enough to convince someone who doesn’t want to get the shot.  If you offered $1500, and someone could pay their house and car notes for a month, I could see someone changing their mind and getting the shot. But $100?  That’s not going to make anybody take a shot that they already felt was so risky that they wouldn’t get it for free.  

I may consider it for a low six figure BRIBE...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,906
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Aprininteen
    Newest Member
    Aprininteen
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...