By Robert Malone at Brownstone dot org.

Tomorrow will make four long years since that bitterly cold day in Washington, D.C., when the medical freedom movement shocked the officious and unctuous Biden administration with the first major DC political rally since the infamous post-election events of January 06, 2021. And yet, what I find most stunning was not that we pulled it off with essentially no lawlessness — despite rumors of attendance by a variety of disruptive forces and the concerted efforts of various chaos agents — but that the core issues remain unresolved four years later.

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the West Coast Health Alliance continue to advocate for mandated Covid mRNA vaccines for children as young as 6 months old. In Hawaii, Governor Dr. Josh Green and his cronies have just introduced a bill in the legislature to repeal the current Hawaiian Childhood Vaccinations Exemption process, making compliance with state-imposed vaccine mandates for children a statewide policy without any opt-out clause.

Shortly after the DC "Defeat the Mandates" rally, the Washington Post labeled me a liar (in print, repeatedly) for claiming that the mRNA products were not working as intended, in that they did not prevent infection or disease caused by SARS-CoV-2. And yet that has now become a universally acknowledged truth. I guess that intentional, repeated defamation did not withstand the test of time.

Suffice to say, I am not holding my breath for an apology. So much for the reliability of the "experts'" wisdom and insight. One might imagine a bit of introspection would be in order, perhaps a modicum of shame, and a pinch of humility. But that does not deter the same highly credentialed medical "experts" from insisting on mandating the most aggressive vaccine schedule in the entire world for our children. In jab they trust, and so we must.

But what do the medical Guilds have to say about mandates and informed consent?

In its Code of Medical Ethics, the American Medical Association states:

"Informed consent in medical treatment is fundamental in both ethics and law. Patients have the right to receive information and ask questions about recommended treatments so that they can make well-considered decisions about care. Successful communication in the patient-physician relationship fosters trust and supports shared decision making."

American Medical Association. Code of Medical Ethics: Informed Consent. 2025.

Fundamental in both ethics and law. But apparently there is an unwritten and unspoken vaccines mandate exemption.

In its Public Health Code of Ethics, the American Public Health Association asserts:

"the effective and ethical practice of public health depends upon social and cultural conditions of respect for personal autonomy, self-determination, privacy, and the absence of domination in its many interpersonal and institutional forms."

American Public Health Association. Public Health Code of Ethics. 2019.

"Absence of domination in its many interpersonal and institutional forms" is an interesting and relevant turn of phrase. If state-imposed vaccine mandates are not a form of institutional domination, I do not know what is.

Bioethics is the study and application of moral principles in medicine and the life sciences, built around four central pillars: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice. Among these, informed consent stands as the cornerstone of ethical practice because it operationalizes respect for autonomy — the individual's right to self-determination. Informed consent requires that patients receive complete and transparent information about the purpose, benefits, risks, and alternatives of any proposed intervention, including the option to refuse treatment.

True consent must be voluntary and free from coercion, deception, or informational manipulation. Without full disclosure and comprehension, consent becomes mere compliance, negating the principle of autonomy and transforming medicine into a f...