Did a self-described microbiologist tell the Dawson Creek, British Columbia, City Council the facts about the Nuremberg Code, adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines and the degree to which the vaccines revise patients' genetic code? No, that's not true: the Nuremberg Code has never been adopted by any nation, does not mention masks, the microbiologist seriously misrepresents what is in the Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS) database and she falsely describes how mRNA vaccines work.
The claims were made in videotaped testimony to a September 2, 2021, city council meeting (archived here) that was re-posted September 17, 2021, on the Debbie Ward YouTube account under the title "Sept 2 2021 Molecular Biologist speaks at Dawson Creek City Council meeting". It opened:
Poses her concerns over the current situation. In the Age of Information...Ignorance is a Choice!
Click below to watch the video on YouTube:
Identified in the minutes of the meeting as Gina Goad, she introduces herself to the city council as a microbiologist and multiple social media posts identify her as "Dr. Gina Goad." The LinkedIn resume for a health practitioner named Gina Goad from the Peace River region of British Columbia does not list any doctoral degree or doctoral studies or board certification as a physician. She lists a 1985 Bachelors in Biology from Queen's College in Kingston Ontario, training in herbal and other alternatives and offers her services as: "Alternative Health Practitioner, Psychic, Clinical Herbalist, Biofeedback Therapist." A Queen's College spokesman emailed Lead Stories October 6, 2021 to say the college does not verify alumnae credentials unless directed to do so by the alumnus.
All hyperlinks on time codes take you directly to that point in a YouTube video of the testimony.
False statements about the "Nuremberg Code"
Goad opens with several specific and false claims about the Nuremberg Code. At the 00:34 mark, she says:
As a result of all the countries, major players in the world, signing this document they were very clear that humans would never be forced to wear a mask, never forced to endure vaccines that weren't safe or any treatment protocol that was not safe and certainly not a genetic experiment.
That is not an accurate description of the "Nuremberg Code".
- The three-page "Permissible Medical Experiments" is a statement of ethical principles for research on humans, drafted during the post-World War II trial of Nazi doctors who used captives in medical experiments. Colloquially called "The Nuremberg Code", it has not itself been formally adopted by any country, according to the Holocaust Museum and medical ethicist Evelynne Schuster, writing in the New England Journal of Medicine. Led by the United States, Russia and Great Britain, war trial prosecutors used the concepts in the document to frame their case, differentiating between legitimate risks taken in experiments with voluntary human subjects and the Nazi doctors' use of captives and often-barbaric "treatments." While it has been influential in development of medical and academic codes of ethics, the document itself has not been formally adopted anywhere.
- The code makes no mention of masks, nor of genetic experiments.
- The code does not demand all experiments be safe, only that the risks be less than the risks of the medical condition being addressed.
False statements about alteration of human DNA by COVID vaccines
Goad then makes multiple false statements about genetic alteration by COVID-19 vaccines. She repeats the debunked claim that mRNA shots are a genetic experiment at 2:12, saying Canadian public health workers are "unequivocally promoting a genetic experiment." She declares at 2:25 that mRNA "can possibly insert itself and permanently insert itself into the DNA of the human."
- The two mRNA shots were tested on tens of thousands of volunteers during the clinical trials by which Pfizer (43,000 participants) and Moderna (30,000 participants) mRNA vaccines were granted Emergency Use Approval.
- Though technically described as "experimental" both had been through extensive lab and clinical experiments before they were cleared for use on hundreds of millions of Americans. Pfizer sought and in August of 2021 received regular "approved" status, which makes "experiment" an arguably false term for it.
- The Food & Drug Administration (FDA) which decides what is and is not approved gene therapy, defines it as "a technique that modifies a person's genes to treat or cure disease." The mRNA technology used in two COVID-19 vaccines does not interact with the human genome, instead, they deliver messenger RNA that prompts the body to make the spike protein that is characteristic of SARS-CoV-2, triggering an immune reaction so that the body is ready when it encounters live SARS-CoV2.
- The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is unequivocal about genetic alteration by mRNA vaccines: "mRNA never enters the nucleus of the cell, which is where our DNA (genetic material) is kept.The cell breaks down and gets rid of the mRNA soon after it is finished using the instructions."
False statements about vaccine-caused deaths
At 2:54, Goad misrepresents the purpose and contents of the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database, saying it shows "as of last month, 13,000 people in the United States died directly from this jab."
VAERS does not show specific numbers of deaths and cannot be used to assign cause of death.
Anyone with internet access can add a report to the VAERS list of reports. The public access link to it expressly warns against unwarranted conclusions based on VAERS material because the list only provides a tally of unverified notes about any health event people experience after they are vaccinated. The list itself cannot be used to prove or quantify, since all it shows is a chronological correlation, not the causal link that would be more difficult to establish. It's the equivalent of a police precinct's running "blotter" of reports that may serve as a starting point for police work, not an end point.
Though Goad is a self-described health expert and microbiologist, she would have to have ignored or failed to understand the VAERS website warnings including:
When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established ... VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event ... VAERS reports can be submitted voluntarily by anyone, including healthcare providers, patients, or family members. Reports vary in quality and completeness. They often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors.
And, also:
No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report. VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.
To gain access to the VAERS data, the website requires users to affirm having read the VAERS website's warning about what VAERS is and is not.
(Source: VAERS screenshot taken Wed Oct 6 17:09:00 2021 UTC)
