Formal Complaint- Notice of Legal Action Taken Against WA for attempted MURDER enough is enough when it’s enough!
My Email sent to The Boots Store Manager and the Optician’s Complaint Center:
Oral and intravenous use of fluorescein can cause adverse reactions, including nausea, vomiting, hives, acute hypotension, anaphylaxis and related anaphylactoid reaction, causing cardiac arrest and sudden death due to anaphylactic shock.[1
Anaphylactic shock and subsequent cardiac arrest and sudden death are very rare, but because they occur within minutes, a health care provider who uses fluorescein should be prepared to perform emergency resuscitation.
Intravenous use has the most reported adverse reactions, including sudden death, but this may reflect greater use rather than greater risk. Both oral and topical uses have been reported to cause anaphylaxis, including one case of anaphylaxis with cardiac arrest (resuscitated) following topical use in an eye drop. Reported rates of adverse reactions vary from 1% to 6%. The higher rates may reflect study populations that include a higher percentage of persons with prior adverse reactions. The risk of an adverse reaction is 25 times higher if the person has had a prior adverse reaction. The risk can be reduced with prior (prophylactic) use of antihistamines and prompt emergency management of any ensuing anaphylaxis. A simple prick test may help to identify persons at greatest risk of adverse reaction.
Dear Kris, (store manager)
The above is the ingredient’s “safety” information about the “medication”, which I’ll refer to as what it is, poison, which the Doctor/Optician who, for the purpose of this communication I will refer to as non- Doctor, offered to apply to my 16 years old son.
Poison: Anything that could be harmful to the body when ingested. Doctor: Someone who aids cure, help and heal human life, a non-Doctor: does precisely the opposite. Like the man under your supervision who tried to MURDER my son.
Non-Doctor Murderous Optician at Boots The Oracle in Reading Berkshire
On 13th December 2021, at the Boots Opticians in the Oracle in Reading, Berkshire, Waqaar Aslam tried to kill my 16-year-old son. I will be pressings charges for attempted murder with the Common Law Court.
A copy of all correspondence will be forwarded to Common Law Court.
I’m happy I voice recorded the entire incident. It will be easy for anyone who listens to the recording to see that the man mentioned above tried to convince my son to accept poison to be applied to his eyes. Then he became aggressive, rude and nervous when I objected while I read the product’s information sheet. I continued by searching the components/ingredients on the internet on my phone. At the same time, the non-Doctor watched my progress in understanding what was going; he was doing nothing but trying to permanently poison my young teenager. The man aggressively ended our child NHS Opticians visit by saying that he was going to call security if we didn’t leave immediately. My son was shocked to watch the non-doctor’s reaction when all I was doing was reading the information about the poisonous product he tried to use on my son.
The non-doctor spoke of side effects such as anaphylactic shock! But he did not talk about cardiac arrest and sudden death.
Unless this non-Doctor can swear under oath that there were absolutely zero possibilities of my son dying from the poison he offered him, he will be admitting to having attempted to murder my son.
Why would I give my son something that might kill him? Unless it was under deception, misinformation and dishonesty on the part of the non-doctor offering the poison?
He did not say it was a poison that included the side effect of death.
He observed how my son was eager due to him playing sports.
He offered this “dye” after examining my child’s eyes and making the observation that his eyes (in this case, the back of his eyes) were “very healthy”.
The Non-doctor told my sixteen-year-old about the application of this “dye“. It was a compulsory step if he wanted access to contact lenses.
A dye which would obviously blind my son! What business has a dye inside a child’s eyes?! These murderous non-professionals in the current “sick care system” have numbed us so stupid that some parents might think it a great idea. Right? I hope not.
He told my son that the dye was a requirement to evaluate if his eyes were suitable for contact lenses. Then he continued by saying that it might provoke rare side effects and insisted he must take if he wanted to qualify to wear contact lenses, preying on the fact that my sixteen years old youngster very much wanted to qualify to wear contact lenses. I consider this filthy and evil.
I knew these were lies, as I’ve worn contact lenses before, and no “dye” was ever required.
Upon him mentioning side effects, I asked to see the list of side effects.
I had already asked to have a close look at the product. I had the “strip” in hand. Now the non- Doctor passed me the “poison’s” information sheet.
A doctor cures, help and heals human life; a non-doctor does the opposite.
I witnessed how
The Non-Doctor tried to murder my 16 years old son when he tried to apply poison to his eyes, which would have blinded him first, then killed him, enduring a horrendous death including anaphylactic shock, the cardiac arrest followed by sudden death.
There is absolutely no evidence or reason to believe that killing my son wasn’t the purpose when this non-doctor offered my son his WHO poison. Unless he can swear under oath that my son could have never, under any circumstances and at all suffered any of the side effects that are listed in the product’s ingredient list of side effects.
Thus non-doctor had no way to predict whether or not my son would be severely damaged or killed. This non-doctor knew this and Went ahead to gamble with my son’s life consciously and on purpose. The fact that he became AGGRESSIVE and kicked us out of the NHS Child eye care appointment irrefutably demonstrated that the non-doctor was trying to hide his actions before I found out what he was up to.
This is all voice recorded for anyone to judge for themselves whether or not this man tried to kill my son with impunity. (Email me to get the recording)
His plan to kill my son became evident when I asked for the list of side effects, and I began to investigate the non-doctor became suddenly aggressive and angry and literary kicked me and my 16 years old out of the NHS optician practice at Boots, The Oracle, Reading.
He did this when I was well engrossed, quietly reading the information sheet about the poison he offered to apply to my son’s eyes.
Common-Law Court of Justice
I’m charging this non-doctor with attempted murder. And he will have to answer in Court why did he offer this poisoning to my son and why did he become angry when I began to investigate the compound.
Please advise this non-doctor that he will soon receive a Common Law Court notification. He broke the law when he intended to harm my child.
DO NOT HARM
Sylvia Love Johnson
PS: Please note that I’m going to make this concern followed legal action public by posting all details and all subsequent updates on my blog.
Their Disgusting Reply to my Email:
From Catherine Wooldrige
Dear Ms Love Johnson
Please allow me to introduce myself. I am a Clinical Governance Optometrist for Boots Opticians and I work with our Professional Services Team in the resolution of customer concerns of a clinical nature. I am sorry that you have had reason to complaint about your son Gabriel’s recent visit to the Reading store.
In order to proceed with your formal complaint, I would like to confirm that Gabriel is aware that you have raised a formal complaint and that he is happy for you to act on his behalf in this matter. I am aware that Gabriel has given implied consent for you being involved in his care by the fact that you both attended in person for his appointment on 13th December 2021. However as your formal complaint has been received via email on 31st December 2021, I feel that it would be right to seek confirmation that Gabriel is happy with this course of action. A young person ( age 16 and 17) is regarded as having the capacity to consent to any treatments and as such the right to be involved in all aspects of their interactions with healthcare professionals.
I am happy to arrange a suitable time for a phone call with yourself and Gabriel to confirm that he is happy to proceed with you acting on his behalf for this complaint.
With kind regards
My Infuriated Answer to that piece of vomit worthy nonesense
Has Gabriel given consent for his mother to be involved in his care?!!! What kind of questions is this? Should the Boots Employee who tried to kill him be in charge of his care instead?!!!!
Yes! My son is aware of this complaint. How dare you ask that question? We don’t need your “permission” to take this non-doctor to Court for attempted murder.
Gabriel is my son. I have always acted on his behalf since the day I gave birth to him.
This is going to Court. I’m suing for attempted murder, and you are starting off by insulting and trivialising this serious matter with your stupid questions and even more stupid assumptions.
You can go ahead with “pretending” that you are dealing with my complaint. Go ahead and do whatever you wish.
I will see the boots employee in question is a common law court of justice. Of that, you can be sure, and there are no doubts.
Note that trying to alienate a Mother from his son (what a nasty dirty trick so you can poison our children with impunity, disgusting!) is not going to get Boots, and Big Pharma for that matter, out of this huge CRIMINAL mess by which all of you, and probably especially you will lose your jobs.
Mark my words. This non-doctor will not get away with this. Boots will not get away with this. Big Pharma will not get away with this.
The time of criminally poisoning us with your SICK-CARE human-killing products is up!
I will see you in Court.
Re: Your link
Also, NOTE that my children and I, We Stand Under Common Law Jurisdiction. We do not abide by any legislation or policies or laws other than Common Law. We do not consent to any dictate indicated on the link you provided. We DO NOT CONSENT. Forcing us to go by any other than Common Law is a criminal offence, and it will be added to the charges in Court. Whatever you are referring to in email, assuming that we have an obligation to go by whichever law/legislation is detailed in the link you send, your assumption is WRONG. We do not consent to that. It does not apply to us. We are FREE SOVEREIGN Beings. We are not bound by any Law but common law. We can do as we please as long as we do not breach Common Law.
So you can save your links to pieces of disgusting legislation for someone else.
Sylvia Love Johnson