The vaccine nudge playbook adds door-to-door jabbers!

The UK childhood vaccination programme has been so damaged by the Covid vaccine fall-out that clinicians will be sent door-to-door to browbeat unwilling parents.

Deep state rag the Sunday Times had this front-page headline on 8 June:

We learned that:

“Health visitors will step in as Sunday Times analysis shows a drop in protection for measles and whooping cough in five-year-olds”.

What the government is going to pilot here is incredibly interesting. They are going to use a nudge technique by way of using a figure of authority to apply pressure on parents, but with the new twist of doing so in home.

The paper writes:

“In an effort to tackle Britain’s vaccine crisis, Wes Streeting, the health secretary, is planning to give new powers to 6,000 health visitors so they can vaccinate children during their visits to family homes.”

You see, there are not that many people who would initiate a request for a vaccine for themselves or their child.

The behavioural psychologists know it is all about engineering a face-to-face opportunity to get that needle into that arm.

As vaccine uptake thins out, the Sunday Times writes:

“Local National Health Service regions have been ordered to draw up plans to improve vaccine uptake in their area by this winter. This includes making it easier for people to book flu vaccines and find walk-in pharmacies offering jabs.”

For childhood vaccines, there are millions of letters, texts and emails sent to parents, walk-in pharmacies offering jabs and, now, most nefarious of all, health visitors will intimidate people in their own home.

We saw much of this nudge psychology apparatus in Covid, where people were texted with nudge phrases such as it is ‘your turn’ to get a Covid vaccine.

And you have come to the ‘top’ of the queue for a Covid vaccine! Did you know you were in a ‘queue’?

It is worth going into detail about how all this works because it is the de facto sales push that is key to driving up vaccine uptake, not the pros or cons of any vaccine.

The de facto sales push usually takes place in what behavioural psychologists would call a mental blind spot.

The two most common features of these blind spots involve the use of a figure of authority to create trust or the use of peer pressure to make someone feel they are in a minority.

If you will not go to the figure of authority in the medical building, the authorities have ways around that: They will send the figure of authority to you and your house.

Let’s go through this in detail from cradle to grave:

1) Pre-birth. Remember, it the nudge techniques we want to note.

Midwives place huge pressure on expectant mothers. A mother to be has no choice but to place all her trust in a midwife because her child’s life will be in its hands. That is why the authorities turned midwives into de facto vaccine sales people.

A first-time mother will be terrified of making a mistake in her pregnancy so she will want to ‘do things by the book’ as advised by the midwife.

In the UK, pregnant women are coerced by midwives to try to get them to take the Covid, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza jabs.

One of the things about coercing three vaccines is that it creates an opportunity for unnecessary deal-making with the midwife. The mother-to-be may feel that she has been reasonable and gone half-way to meeting the midwife’s coercion if she takes the flu vaccine in pregnancy.

Someone such as Dr Judy Mikovits objects to any vaccines in pregnancy because a woman’s immune system is undergoing complex changes to protect her and the developing foetus. These changes can enhance certain immune responses while suppressing others to prevent the body from rejecting the foetus as a foreign object.

Can you see why someone such as Dr Judy Mikovits argues that vaccinating in pregnancy is such an incoherent idea?

2) 0-4. Once the child is alive and in infancy, health visitors to the home are simply hand maidens of the vaccine industry.

Yes, the health visitors check weight, height and other milestones when the pop by, but one of the things they are most engaged in is talking up the merits of vaccines.

Until now, all that health visitors have done is applied verbal pressure to mothers to go and get vaccines.

The Sunday Times says out loud that the UK government wants health visitors to administer vaccines in the home because so many parents are ignoring the official advice.

What the Sunday Times will not say out loud is the sort of devious verbal tactics that health visitors might use behind closed doors. Consider the following nudge techniques:

a) The health visitor might use words to the effect: ‘We’ll start with weight and height checks and then finish with getting up to date on vaccine.’

The health visitors are likely to be given nudge psychology scripts that make vaccination look like a fait accompli.

There is unlikely to be a detailed discussion about pros and cons, informed consent and the non-existent manufacturer liability.

b) The health visitor might say: ‘While I am here, can I just get them up to date on their vaccines?’

c) And if that does not work, perhaps something like this: ‘Can you please put in writing why you don't want your child vaccinated?’

That is how the health visitor might ratchet up the intimidating pressure if they are not getting the parent to give in. There might be no formal requirement for a parent to put their objections in writing, but something like that may intimidate a first-time mother.

And if the parents were to put their objections in writing? The parents would likely be told their fears are unfounded. The cycle of coercion would simply start all over again.

d) The health visitor might even say something like: ‘We had a lady recently who would not vaccinate her children and they ended up bringing in social services.’ Again, this is unlikely, but it is the sort of verbal nudge technique, using a tacit threat, that may go on behind the front door.

3) 4-11. Once they get to primary school, parents will be asked for permission about nasal flu vaccines.

Huge pressure is put on parents of children in primary school to give consent for the flu mist vaccine on the basis that it will purportedly protect older relatives and sick children.

It is not unusual to hear stories of school immunisation nurses quite unabashedly trying to socially shame school children in front of peers for not receiving vaccines such as the flu mist. Nurses may use phrases such as: ‘Helping to keep others in the community safe.’

Notice the use of peer pressure. Letters to parents will have the tone: 'Everyone else is doing it, so why aren’t you?'

This is also a social conditioning designed to make people think that pre-winter people take a flu vaccine.

For anyone over the age of 50, flu vaccines at school were unheard of.

4) 12-18. This is the most nefarious blind spot because in the UK, the law works in a way many parents are unaware of.

Secondary school is where the nasal flu vaccines morph into some far stronger concoctions. These are some of the vaccines used in UK secondary schools Covid (which seems discontinued nowadays), flu, human papillomavirus (HPV), three-in-one school booster (tetanus, diphtheria and polio) and meningitis ACWY.

Forms seeking consent to these vaccinations will be sent to parents insisting that parents contract with the health authorities by filling in the forms.

If the forms are not filled in, a parent can expect to receive phone calls from nurses telling the parent they can ‘fill the online forms for you’.

There are anecdotal stories circulating that if parents point out to these nurses that this would be fraudulent, the nurses do it anyway.

Here’s the thing. Parental consent forms are often sent out, but these can be (and often are) over-ridden on the day by the use of Gillick competence.

Victoria Gillick was a British schoolgirl who became infamous for the eponymous 1985 UK House of Lords ruling that considered whether contraception could be prescribed to under-16s without parental consent or knowledge.

The ruling established the term ‘Gillick competence’ to describe whether a young person below the age of 16 is able to consent to his or her own medical treatment, without the need for parental permission or knowledge.

Gillick competence means a nurse can speak to a child and disregard a parent’s refusal to consent.

If a parent has not consented, but the child is persuaded to receive the vaccine by a figure of authority, there is no legal comeback on that clinician or their employer.

This Gillick competence concept catches many parents unawares and some are surprised to have found their child received a HPV vaccine without parental consent.

Vaccinating children in school makes it look like ‘everyone is doing it’ and is used to bolster the argument presented to children that it is protecting the community.

Vaccinating at school stealthily removes the subject out of the immediate oversight of parents and adds a devious component of peer pressure.

Vaccines in secondary schools are the only situation in which most children would ever undergo a Gillick competence assessment.

In reality, though, the Gillick competence assessment carried out by the vaccinator is just a formality.

The ‘assessment’ is supposed to show that the child can demonstrate sufficient maturity and intelligence to appraise the proposed treatment, including the risks and any alternatives will almost certainly be a sham.

In reality, though, there is unlikely to be a serious, lengthy discussion with the child, usually aged 12-16 years old, about the risks and benefits of the vaccine on offer.

The reality is that the Gillick competence assessment involves sleights of hand on the part of immunisers, whose sole aim is to jab as many children as possible.

For example, 12-year-old pupils can be given the HPV vaccine despite their parents signing to say ‘no consent’.

The consent form is in fact meaningless.

Parents of state secondary school children may well write ‘no consent’ to vaccines, but this can be over-ridden by the nurse using the legal trickery of Gillick competence.

In practice, the immunisation nurse can take the pupil aside and ask this question: ‘Would you like to protect yourself from cancer?'

Looking at a figure of authority and hearing words they know are associated with fear and alarm, the pupil will in most cases answer: ‘Yes.’

An immunisation nurse can simply use one leading question as the Gillick competence threshold.

A simple yes to a misleading question is enough legal excuse as the nurse will need.

She can jab the child and the consent form was not worth the paper it was written on.

If a figure of authority such as an immunisation nurse has a child with two or three others, the child will be self-conscious about objecting.

The child would not have the first clue how to challenge authority.

It is not out of the question for the nurse to say: 'This is to protect you from cancer' and inject the HPV vaccine there and then.

All the talk about the child demonstrating sufficient maturity and intelligence to appraise the proposed treatment seems to be mainly formal blether for official documents so that if people look this up online it appears there is some big formality to a Gillick competence assessment.

The reality on the ground seems to be in many cases a long way off that.

What can parents do to avoid their secondary school age child receiving vaccines?

They can leave a thick paper trail by writing to the community immunisation team, putting them on written notice of liability.

They can send a copy of the written notice of liability to the GP.

They can also send a copy of written notice of liability to the school staff.

The parents, though, should not rely on paper trails.

If parents know what day the secondary school is vaccinating, they can always consider keeping the child at home that day.

5) 18-70. Jabs tend to be offered for flu and in pregnancy. And, of course, everyone was offered the Covid jab.

Even outside of Covid with all its pop-up clinics and attempts to get into the face of the public, the use of nudge techniques is commonplace for other vaccines.

For example, someone might be called into their GP surgery for a review of their asthma medication with a practice nurse and, hey presto, be offered a flu vaccine.

It can sometimes feel that things like medication reviews are in fact just a pretext for trying to get a patient into the GP practice building by stealth and, once there, to ambush the patient with a surprise vaccine offer to get the GP practice’s vaccine rates up, not least because GPs are financially rewarded for vaccinating patients.

6) 70 - death. As an older person slips back into childhood vulnerability, who comes knocking at the care home door, where, just like school, there may be no relative to protect them? Mr Jab Man.

As with the HPV vaccines injected into parents who did not consent to their secondary school age child receiving them, it is very common for relatives of people in care homes to find out that their non compos mentis parents were given flu jabs, RSV jabs and Covid jabs without any foreknowledge or consent of outside relatives.

Before even the cradle, and all the way up to death, people are stalked - in their blind spot - by the jab pushers.

Perhaps the best thing to do with health visitors who want to jab kids is to ask them for all of THEIR paperwork relating to vaccine manufacturer liability.

If that health visitor cannot provide vaccine manufacturer liability then the conversation about vaccines is over before it even began.

No liability? No vaccines!

*** If you enjoy my work here, can I ask you to consider becoming a PAID subscriber, it’s only £5 a month, you can cancel if you don’t enjoy it but I know you will. I want to thank the kind people who already do this, without your help this becomes impossible. Thank you in anticipation of your support***