How much risk should should soldiers be exposed to in military experimentation? A biological justification for throwing people under the bus!   (Non-voluntary consent):  A stunning 2015 paper lays out the concept of "non-voluntary consent" to being experimented on. In this case, the context for the non-voluntarry consent is military service, and the premise is as follows:                                                                                               - Biowarfare is increasingly taking the place of traditional combat.                                                                                                                               - Soldiers have already agreed to the risk of being killed.                                                                                                                                                 - So...                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            - And yeah, it is good to get the soldier's "informed consent" - but it can be non-voluntary consent.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Just like that, uttered under one breath:  "Non-voluntary informed consent." The concept is so upside-down that it's impossible to say "non-voluntary informed consent" with a straight face without letting go of a little piece of your soul. And because there has been a big psychological push since 2001 for treating regular citizens as "soldiers" and pawns of the security state, it is not tremendously surprising what happened to "informed consent" in the past three years, where they told us:  "Yes you have the right to refuse the COVID injection but it means that you'll probably lose your job, can't enter many public spaces, and the corporate hypnotists on television, masking a journalists, will do their best to ensure that you will also be ostracized by as many loved ones as possible, so that it's really-really-really hard to resist the temptation of giving informed consent."  Shameless bastards.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Anyway, back to the 2015 paper about experimenting on soldiers:  Quote:  With the threat of biological war becoming a more and more distinct possibility, there is a growing need for vaccines and cures for diseases. As warfare moves from the battlefield to the laboratory, the military must adapt its tactics in order to preserve national security. At the moment, soldiers consent to the risk associated with combat, but with the changing nature of war, the need may arise for soldiers to put themselves at risk not only through combat, but also through scientific experimentation, in order to produce vaccines or cures and ultimately maintain national security. By allowing soldiers to trade risk in the laboratory, deeper research can be made into diseases and biological agents, and this would therefore lessen the threat of biological war or terrorism.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     This is not a war for soldiers--it is a war for scientists. The race is on to find a cure or a vaccine. Human subjects are required. But in this war, soldiers could play a role--as participants in experiments of very high risk to develop cures and vaccines. Should soldiers be used in this kind of research and what level of risk should soldiers be exposed to in order to protect national security?  In an insightful paper, Mehlman and Li argue that the traditional civilian ethical principles that govern the research use and application of genomic technology are insufficient to regulate military users. They argue that the values of military life are different to civilian life. Citing Anthony Hartle's Moral Issues in Military Decision Making, they agree with Hartle that "freedom, equality, individualism, and democracy" are the 'core American [civilian] values". But for the military they are "honor, duty, and country".                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     Mehlman and Li do believe that consent should still be sought from soldiers, indeed, it is part of US Department of Defense policy to require consent. However, they question whether consent can be voluntary [emphasis mine]. The wars that are happening today are sheer disgrace and an act of remote vampiring. Individual soldiers on the ground get sacrificed to the rotten scam, devised by rotten individuals with rotten goals. This is not a new disgrace, this is an incremental disgrace.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Tens of thousands of troops were used in testing conducted by the U.S. military between 1922 and 1975. As one Army scientist explained, the military wanted to learn how to induce symptoms such as "fear, panic, hysteria, and hallucinations" in enemy soldiers. Recruitment was done on a volunteer basis, but the details of the testing and associated risks were often withheld from those who signed up. Many of the veterans who served as test subjects have since died. But today, those who are still alive are part of a class action lawsuit against the Army. If they're successful, the Army will have to explain exactly what substances they were given and any known risks. The Army would also have to provide those veterans with health care for any illnesses that result, in whole or in part, from the testing.