Shockingly serious video attached with English subtitles
How is patenting humans legal without informed consent?
See UN document below.
Dra. Chinda Brandolino
mp4 Transcript
In 2013, a United States court ruled that DNA, the human genome, could not be patented because it is a product of nature. However if it is genetically altered it is patentable.
When you modify the genome with an adenovirus vaccine, that vaccinated person is already a transgenic, a transhuman person. And, according to what is legally established in international law, it will be the property of the owner of the patent.
The most dramatic thing of all is that, because is transhuman, that person will not be considered human according to the Human Rights we know.
I have not yet had time to tell to you but the situation is extremely serious, and I have the feeling that even our people, as happened to us recently, do not realize the seriousness we are facing. It is not only the disease that is going to produce, often fatal, but also the fact that the survivors will have a modified genome and this modification will be passed on to their descendants.
I don’t know if … and because their genome is modified, that modification is patented. And everything patented belongs to the patent holder. I don’t know if you understand what I am saying.
That has to make you leave here today, today, with all the strength to resort to all the means to alert the population because it is the last possibility we have. As Maria Jose said “Pass this on and fight!”
They have enough money to achieve their goal no matter how badly it is done to give the definitive approval.
We are lost today and I have seen the deaths, and I have seen the causes of death but that is not the most serious thing but what will happen to the survivors.
So, the only thing I ask and remind you is that we are soldiers of life and defenders of the human species. END
INFORMED CONSENT: United Nations
https://www.bitchute.com/video/WaFIfpzLBWPE/ [1 min]
UN document link and excerpts below.
United Nations General Assembly
Human Rights Council Forty-fifth session
14 September–2 October 2020
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights including the right to development.
EXCERPTS
Compulsory vaccination violates the right to informed consent, one of the most fundamental ethics in medicine and a human right recognized under international law, including the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 1966, the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights of 2005, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and its Optional Protocol of 2006 and under internationally recognized agreements such as the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences International Ethical Guidelines for Biomedical Research Involving Human Subjects of 2002, and the World Medical Association Declaration Of Helsinki of 1964, revised in 2013. The United Nations (UN) and WHO are legally obligated to uphold the right to informed consent yet have instead been complicit in violating it.
WHO also receives funding from vaccine manufacturers, including GSK, Sanofi, and Merck. The single largest source of funding for WHO presently is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which promotes vaccines while holding investments in vaccine manufacturers including GSK, Sanofi, and Merck.
For example, studies have found that having a flu shot annually could increase the risk of infection with novel influenza strains, as well as with non-influenza viruses, in part due to the lost opportunity to acquire the cross-protective, cell-mediated immunity conferred by infection.
A complementary hypothesis is the phenomenon of “original antigenic sin”, whereby the first experience of the immune system with an antigen determines future responses. Priming the immune system with antigen components of the influenza vaccine could potentially cause a mismatched antibody response to strains that the vaccine is not designed to protect against, thereby increasing the risk of infection as compared to an immune response in which naive T and B cells are instructed to fight off the infecting virus.
A related hypothesis is that of “antibody dependent enhancement” (ADE), whereby vaccine induced antibodies, instead of protecting the individual from subsequent infection, enhance the infection and thereby increase the risk of severe disease.
Population effects of vaccination must be considered in addition to their effects on individuals. Data suggest that the varicella (chicken pox) vaccine has not been cost-effective but has rather increased health care costs due to the inferiority of vaccine-conferred immunity. This is because mass vaccination appears to have shifted the risk burden away from children, in whom it is generally a benign illness, and onto adolescents and adults, who are at greater risk of complications. Due to the loss of immunologic boosting from repeated exposures, elderly people who had chicken pox as children are at greater risk of shingles. But rather than reconsider existing recommendations, policymakers respond to this problem by recommending a shingles vaccine for the elderly.
All vaccines carry risks. Compulsory vaccination constitutes a gross violation of the right to informed consent. Governments urgently need to orient health policies towards protecting rather than violating this human right. https://undocs.org/pdf?symbol=en/A/HRC/45/NGO/43