so, if someone is being forced to take it or be on terminal lockdown, lose a job, lose your kids, or starve to death, and then a "needle phobia" moves into this sedation scenario which you consent to, is it still informed consent when you were forced to take it against your will in the first place?
I think the whole exercise has employed intimidation, shame, fear, threat and coercion while under extreme duress. If there is no accounting and punishment for those behind this genocide, there better be in the afterlife, if there is one. That's what I'm holding onto.
so, if someone is being forced to take it or be on terminal lockdown, lose a job, lose your kids, or starve to death, and then a "needle phobia" moves into this sedation scenario which you consent to, is it still informed consent when you were forced to take it against your will in the first place?
I think the whole exercise has employed intimidation, shame, fear, threat and coercion while under extreme duress. If there is no accounting and punishment for those behind this genocide, there better be in the afterlife, if there is one. That's what I'm holding onto.
It’s informed consent once you sign a document saying you are consenting to be injected.
You can make claims about whether people are being coerced to sign it, but this document has nothing to do with that.
You would still have to agree to get the shot while under sedation. That's no different from a shot while you are awake.
Whether that consent could be considered coerced, I don't know.