Heathrow incident 8/9/25 claimed to be mass psychogenic illness

[bobbler]

Another question should be whether if anyone ended up being given an inaccurate label or medical notes based on this, then is that all being removed and corrected appropriately? I'd hope that if it was eg tear gas that they at least updated and gave them the correct medical treatment if/when that info came through?

It seems a prime opportunity to make a point about how truth coming to light doesn't seem to be waited for nor updated in general despite its impact on someone's rest of their life. Too much of the population seem either unaware of or just so used to 'it/they won't change' that we are in the habit of not flagging this should be the etiquette and yet is neither the norm nor has a protocol to make it easy to be the norm.

 

[Hutan]

In my country, we have a radio programme called Mediawatch that does just that - monitors how journalism is done and provides commentary on it. If anyone can think of a similar programme in the UK, perhaps this latest incident could be flagged to them? Along with the poisoning campaign inflicted on Iran citizens, mostly schoolgirls, that Wessely suggested was a psychogenic phenomenon.

 

[rvallee]

In my country, we have a radio programme called Mediawatch that does just that - monitors how journalism is done and provides commentary on it. If anyone can think of a similar programme in the UK, perhaps this latest incident could be flagged to them? Along with the poisoning campaign inflicted on Iran citizens, mostly schoolgirls, that Wessely suggested was a psychogenic phenomenon.

Well, chances are they'd be just as gullible about it and end up gushing about how it, I don't know, reinforces the mind-body-spiritual-flying-spaghetti-monster connection or whatever. There's something about mind-magic stuff that just dissolves all the skepticism from almost everyone who knows better.

Just looking at a few examples of so-called skeptics in the UK, they all pretty much ate the onion (meaning gullibly falling for obviously made-up nonsense).

 

[Sean]

I would say this is unfair on the 19th century, that it rather belongs in the Middle Ages.

It would be unfair on pre-history humans, who needed a very robust grasp of reality to even just survive, let alone prosper.

Well, chances are they'd be just as gullible about it and end up gushing about how it, I don't know, reinforces the mind-body-spiritual-flying-spaghetti-monster connection or whatever. There's something about mind-magic stuff that just dissolves all the skepticism from almost everyone who knows better.

Just looking at a few examples of so-called skeptics in the UK, they all pretty much ate the onion (meaning gullibly falling for obviously made-up nonsense).

We here in Australia had a Prime Minister a few years back (Tony Abbott) who literally ate a raw onion at some event like it was an apple, unprompted and apparently unconcerned or even aware of it, for reasons nobody has ever been able to fathom.

Still one of the weirdest things I have ever seen in politics.