Strangers in the Room: Vaccine Mandates

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
April 3, 2022 | 9 Comments


  1. “Our doctors need to be asked – Exactly why do you not believe me? Tell me – I’m not going away until you tell me.”

    Well couldn’t go away being as I was locked behind two doors, ostensibly a voluntary patient, but was very forcefully told if I didn’t stop carrying on as above I would definitely be sectioned for 6 months. That is a very effective way to shut a person up. Suspect it’s been done to a lot of people for a long time as well.

  2. The God factor is already at play with the vaccines.

    How many times have you read, ‘I got Covid but if it wasn’t for the vaccine I would have been a lot worse’.

    This may or may not be true but, of course, there is no way of knowing.

    We see the same with antidepressants, we hear, ‘If it wasn’t for my medication, I’d be dead now’.

    Again, there is no way of knowing.

    One could confront these very same people with cold, hard evidence that neither claim was true. Alas, they will believe their own experience and ignore whatever evidence you put their way.

    Drug companies, I believe, have tapped into this way of thinking.

    Faith requires a threat and a promise of something better – a promotional tagline probably used by pharma execs internally at board meetings.

    It would be interesting to know if those who have taken the jabs are heavily into religion and if those who have refused the jabs are atheists.

    On the flip side, many find comfort in religion when they are depressed. Many will also be able to see through the bullshit that is thrown their way via the media and government. They will pray for guidance and believe they are right to ask for guidance..

    Me, well I’m an agno-atheist – I don’t ask for guidance – I just question.

    This comment isn’t meant to chastise anyone who has religious beliefs, its intention is to draw parallels between how people will refute anything that goes against their beliefs, particularly with vaccine and antidepressant ‘protection’.

    God is taught to us. We are born without knowledge of God. It’s okay to question, although it never used to be. People who doubted were labelled and even killed.

    Pharmaceutical product safety and efficacy are taught to us, it’s wrong to question it, although when the smoke lifts it may just be okay to have doubts.

    It sucks to wear a tin-foil hat, eh?

    • “How many times have you read, ‘I got Covid but if it wasn’t for the vaccine I would have been a lot worse’.”

      As Dr. Kheriarty says: “Unfalsifiable counterfactuals: the last refuge of someone clinging to an idea even after getting mugged by reality.”

  3. Loads of gobbledegook in the pipeline which will be welcomed especially by ignorant clinicians who use threats instead of explanations for their ‘treatments’
    Towards personalised predictive psychiatry in clinical practice: an ethical perspective
    Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 March 2022

    Natalie Lane
    Open the ORCID record for Natalie Lane[Opens in a new window]
    Matthew Broome
    Personalised prediction models promise to enhance the speed, accuracy and objectivity of clinical decision-making in psychiatry in the near future. This editorial elucidates key ethical issues at stake in the real-world implementation of prediction models and sets out practical recommendations to begin to address these.

    A Snippett from –
    The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 220 , Special Issue 4: Themed Issue: Precision Medicine and Personalised Healthcare in Psychiatry , April 2022 , pp. 172 – 174
    DOI: in a new window]

    Uncertainty regarding patient diagnosis, prognosis and optimal management are ever-present challenges in clinical practice. In psychiatry in particular, clinical decision-making has been critiqued as overly subjective. Personalised prediction models represent a novel approach, whereby statistical and machine learning models detect patterns in big data repositories of sociodemographic, clinical, behavioural, cognitive and biological (e.g. neuroimaging and genetic) information to generate probabilistic, individualised risk estimates of a particular outcome occurring. In clinical psychiatric practice, this could facilitate targeting of the type and duration of interventions offered and thus improve patient outcomes. I

  4. Considering the damage and making a judgement may mean a doctor getting into trouble. A more detached and coarse attitude may reveal that the doctor also feels as if there is something extraneous in his/her office (like a tape recorder) and a little voice in his/her mind that sounds like “Anything you say can be used against you in court”. At the same time, changing attitude will send a consistent message to patients: “Enough. Do not go any further in seeking this kind of confidence with me”.

    Quite simply, no doctor would want to receive a Surprise Visit:

  5. John Read

    Excellent article, relying on the pioneering work of @joannamoncrieff
    @markhoro @JdaviesPhD et al. Time for epidemic of overprescribing of largely ineffective and frequently damaging psych drugs to end, and psychiatry to be independent of drug industry.

    Breaking Off My Chemical Romance

    We deserve a fuller picture of both the benefits and dangers of antidepressants.

    ‘And then, one day about four months after my taper, I woke up shaking, with a sense of impending doom like nothing I’d ever experienced. The best I’ve heard it described is by Andrew Solomon in his book Noonday Demon: It’s like the adrenaline rush of terror you feel when you trip while walking and realize what’s happened just before you hit the ground. It was like that. Every second. Twenty-four hours a day. For months. I got close to making plans to end my life.’

    ‘Burn begins the opinion piece sharing her experience after co-signing a letter to The Times in 2018; the letter noted that antidepressant withdrawal was mild and short-lived – mostly resolved within two weeks. In her own experience, patients had not reported adverse experiences after antidepressant discontinuation – something she attributes to a practice of advising patients to taper off slowly.’

    ‘I can count on one hand the number who have gone on to have long term problems withdrawing from antidepressants or problems coming off antidepressants.’

    this is part of the dream …

  6. I’ve often wondered why we need professional ethics philosophers. Shouldn’t we all be ethics philosophers?

    If someone claims to be an engineer, I expect that person to know more than I do about engineering. I am not aware of a shred of evidence that demonstrates that professional ethics philosophers are any more ethical than the rest of us.

    The whole idea an professional ethics philosopher has always struck me as kinda like being minister without portfolio. Their specialty is not evidence — it’s deductive logic: If-Then. In my experience, all of the meat — ALL OF IT — is in that if clause.

    Now, I know what they would say to this: we base our conclusions on the scientific consensus. The problem is, that consensus is manufactured and controlled by individuals and organizations that have a vested interested in selling us all as many drugs as possible, and damn the consequences to actual human beings.

  7. The tragedy of Matt Hancock

    What two years of Covid taught us


    He appears to cry on television when the first Pfizer jabs are stuck into the arms of two pensioners: Margaret Keenan and William Shakespeare.

    William Shakespeare dies naturally within a few months of taking the vaccine.

    Every so often there are moments of Lucidity when we know we are in a dream …

  8. I think its exactly the opposite. Those who took the vaccine had a vacancy where God lives for those of us who believe in God. So it was easy for Big Pharma to gain the part of humans where God used to dwell.

Leave a Reply