Dear Bioethics Commission,


I would like to thank this commission for their
efforts to recommend ethical protections for human subjects.


Ethical protections for human subjects are essential
considering the past history of non-consensual research by United States
Military and intelligence agencies in collaboration with educational
institutions such as Harvard, John Hopkins, MIT, Princeton, and Stanford;
pharmaceutical companies such as Eli Lily; medical schools and hospitals; the
American Psychological Association; the National Institutes of Health, the
Veterans Administration Center, U.S. Public Health Service  and


Examples of past non-consensual experimentation
include the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, The Manhattan Project, The
Willowbrook Experiment, and Radiation Experiments. 


Mind control experiments such as Project CHATTER,
Project BLUEBIRD, Project ARTICHOKE, Project MKULTRA, Project MKSEARCH, Project
MKNAOMI and others were often interwoven with radiation experiments and
research on chemical and biological weapons.  Psychiatrists,
psychologists, neurosurgeons and other contractors conducting the work were
embedded in a broad network of doctors and some of the research was published
in medical journals.


As previously reported to this commission in 2011 and
continuing to be reported in increasing numbers to this day United States
citizens and others are reporting non-consensual experimentation including
remote experimentation and torture.  In 2011 it was reported to this
commission that there were approximately 3000 known victims.  Four years
later those numbers have grown to 4000  to 5000 victims, an increase of at
least 33%.  I have brought with me over 60 of their statements.


Non-consensual victims of experimentation have
experienced covert COINTELPRO type tactics including those used in Project
materials were used for harassment, discrediting, or disabling purposes. 


Due to past history, previous testimony and statements
provided to this commission, and continuing reports of non-consensual research
ethical protections for human subjects in the form of regulatory changes are


As I understand Subpart A of the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services’ (HHS) regulations, Protection of Human Subjects
(codified at 45 C.F.R Part 46), also known as the Common Rule loopholes allow
for experimentation when there is no physical intervention or interaction with
the subject by an investigator as occurs in remote experimentation and
previously reported to this commission by victims; or when the identify of the
subject is unknown to the investigator (for example Subject 9,543).


Also there is no oversight for some non-federal
entities such as private corporations and contractors and foreign entities; as
well as some federal departments and agencies.  Oversight is needed for
all entities conducting research on American citizens and U.S. persons as well
as research conducted on foreign soil.


Additionally research activities are permitted for
some demonstration and service programs for public benefit; department or
agency heads can waive consent in certain cases; institutions can register
their own institutional review board (IRB); and IRBs can waive consent in
certain instances.  There are other loopholes not described
here.   Additional protections are also needed for children,
prisoners and those of impaired consent.


In light of the testimony given in 2011 and existing
loopholes in federal regulations I was shocked and dismayed that the only
notable recommendation the Bioethics Commission made regarding the consent
process is to add people of impaired consent.  Ethical protections for
human subjects necessitate regulatory changes. 


After experiencing painful vibrations in my forehead
with associated blood in my mucous, vibrations of my organs and more I sought
help in the form of testing.


Test results included materials specifically used in
the manufacture of neural dust as researched and developed by the University of
California, Berkley. Neural Dust is an ultrasonic low power implantable form of
brain-machine interface which as originally designed includes a subdural
transceiver, an external transceiver and cmos chips implanted into the cortex.


The University of California has collaborative
agreements with Temple University, which in turn has collaborative agreements
with Dartmouth University and Dartmouth Hitchcock Hospital where I had surgery
on my nose and face.


Additionally, an ELF/EMF scan found 20 sites on my
body that emit emf emissions beyond normal for the human body and consistent
with implants.  Also, the scan showed my body receiving governmental
frequencies that were not observed during ambient conditions; my body was
acting as a receiver.


This is only one example of the continued
collaboration between United States government agencies and others who receive
funding from those agencies.


I do not consent nor  have I  knowingly
consented to any form of research, experimentation or implantation.


Not everyone can afford to pay for testing nor should
we have to.   We need the medical community to evaluate our medical
complaints in a scientific manner and not subjectively rule out complaints as
mental illness.  We also need an
investigation into our complaints of non-consensual research and covert
psychological operations.


In addition to regulatory changes, criminal penalties
must be legislated for research involving human subjects when bodily integrity
and autonomy are violated as for other criminals who are routinely punished
with convictions for assault, fraud and homicide.  Unethical treatment of
human beings can only be prosecuted when laws and regulations are in place.


Even if a researcher, physician, institution, other is
engaged in socially beneficial research that might lead to cures or treatments
for devastating diseases it is imperative that each person’s autonomy,
self-determination, human dignity and constitutional rights prevail over
scientific advancement and social benefit.


Over fifty years ago American citizens reported being
victims of non-consensual human experimentation and reports continue to this
day.  Over fifty years later we still don’t have the necessary reforms to
protect U.S. citizen
and others from non-consensual research.  As a society we must ensure that
research subjects possess human rights that are inviolate.


This commission includes members of institutions that
have participated in unethical research in the past.  This commission does
not include a single victim of non-consensual research.  They have the
insight that only a victim could impart.


Thank you for your efforts to recommend ethical
protections for human subjects.  Much work still remains to be done.




Karla Smith