Medical Ethics is Sliding Down a Slippery Slope

Medical ethics, specifically ethics surrounding the transplant profession, has been the focus of DAFOH’s mission since its inception. Our mission states that we will “respect the dignity of human beings and promote the highest ethical standards in medicine.”

From the Nuremburg Code and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to the Declaration of Istanbul, free and informed consent without pecuniary compensation is essential for ethically performed medical procedures, especially organ donation and transplantation operations.

Sadly, in China there exists a massive nationwide transplant industry based on the procurement of organs from living people, prisoners of conscience who have been incarcerated solely due to their spiritual beliefs or ethnic origins. A total absence of ethical organ donation, procurement, and allocation is the norm.

Yet it is not just the Chinese transplant profession that is complicit in murder for profit. Due to short wait times, citizens from around the world travel to China to obtain organs without ensuring that the organs being received are ethically obtained. Medical professionals and academic institutions in Western countries train, collaborate with, and fund transplant research with Chinese colleagues involved in the forced live organ harvesting of innocent people.

According to a recent article in The Gateway Pundit, “U.S.-based scientists, both Chinese nationals and Americans, are directly or indirectly subsidizing China’s economy and military and possibly contributing to human rights abuses.” The article states, “On October 11, 2021, a scientific article was published by Megan Sykes of Columbia University in New York and Yong-Guang Yang, who listed his affiliations as Columbia University and the Laboratory of Organ Regeneration and Transplantation of The First Hospital of Jilin University.” The study was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) directed by Dr. Anthony Fauci. Additionally, between 2006 and 2018, Yang received over $6.6 million in NIH funding with most of that from NIAID.

The First Hospital of Jilin University was formerly known as The Affiliated Hospital of the First Military Medical University of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in Changchun, China. This hospital has long been denounced for its practice of forced organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience.

An article in The BL expanded on the above adding, “While Yong-Guang Yang received public funds from U.S. agencies, he also held dozens of positions as a senior manager of various entities. He won multiple awards that in Chinese society only come with being connected to the top ranks of the CCP.”

The Unity News Network reported on the “massive financial links” between the scientific community in the United Kingdom and the Chinese Communist Party claiming that, “The Imperial College London’s website states ‘Imperial is the UK’s number one university collaborator with Chinese research institutions’ and that ‘More than 600 research papers [are] published with Chinese institutions every year’.” Other universities with links to the Chinese regime include: University College London, University of Nottingham, and London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

The UNN article goes on to detail how “The links between China and the UK also exist at the heart of government. In 2018, the UK Secretary of State for Health Matt Hancock travelled to Beijing to ‘promote cooperation on healthcare innovation’… [and] this trip coincided with a meeting of the World Economic Forum in Tianjin that Britain co-chaired.”

Anders Corr of The Epoch Times summarized a recent study of China’s global influence operations by France’s Ministry of Armed Forces. He noted that, “the authors boldly construct a taxonomy of CCP influence operations, including propaganda, lawfare, espionage, and organizational influence tactics. They cover some of the most controversial topics in the field of Chinese politics, including Beijing’s foreign election interference, the capture of foreign elites through trade relations, the CCP’s persecution of the Falun Gong, and the CCP’s attempt to control narratives about global organ trafficking, even as the Party engages in forced organ harvesting from China’s prisoners of conscience.”

The CCP’s influence extends to medical universities and teaching hospitals in the United States and around the world. During the September World Summit on Combating and Preventing Forced Organ Harvesting, speakers discussed both medical and press reluctance to broach the topic of China’s forced organ harvesting for fear of reprisal by the CCP and loss of its funding.

Transplant professionals around the world have started down an unethical slippery slope as they deny patients life-saving transplant operations due to personal medical choices regarding their own bodily integrity.

The transplant center at the University of Colorado’s Anschutz Medical Campus has refused to perform surgery on patients who have opted not to have any of the vaccines being used for COVID-19. One patient was actually removed from its transplant list for choosing not to be injected.

Days before surgery was scheduled, with the donor ready, the Cleveland Clinic delayed a patient’s kidney transplant surgery due to its policy that requires both the donor and recipient to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19. The Cleveland Clinic also denied a liver transplant to a patient because both donor and recipient were unvaccinated.

The University of Washington Medical Center is removing unvaccinated patients from its transplant lists. According to Red Voice Media, several patients have been denied or have been threatened with denial of treatment over COVID vaccine refusal.

The Beaumont Hospital in Dublin, Ireland is also requiring organ donors and recipients to be fully vaccinated against COVID or be removed from the transplant list.

In essence, such requirements, which are in violation of both the Nuremburg Code and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, deny patients medical treatment that would save their lives. Ethically, how is this not equivalent to pre-meditated murder?

Apparently, bioethicists are now blurring the line between informed consent and murder. In an article in the National Review, Wesley Smith said, “When organ transplant medicine began, the “dead donor rule” was instituted to assure a wary public that people’s vital organs would only be procured after the person was dead… Many bioethicists are now pushing to allow doctors to kill via organ harvest, sometimes called “organ donation euthanasia” (ODE). At first, this proposed killing license was supposed to be limited to patients on the verge of death or the permanently unconscious. Now, a prominent bioethics journal has published a piece urging that healthy people be allowed to die by removal of vital organs,” should they give consent.

Mr. Smith pointed out that, “these proposals are not fringe ideas. Bioethics, which published this article, is a wholly mainstream publication. The idea of killing for organs is considered respectable in the field. And it gives these advocates no pause that their plans would also transform organ-transplant doctors, known for focusing exclusively on saving lives, into outright killers.” If ethicists and medical professionals around the world are heading down this path, how long will it be until the CCP’s model of organ procurement for transplantation becomes the global norm?

The mission of physicians is to care for their patients without prejudice. The medical profession should not participate in discriminatory practices but instead call for morally upright and ethical behavior. It is time to place ethics and the sanctity of human dignity and life above profit, professional and/or personal gain, reputation or political ideology.