Pharmacist Tue Johansen, registration number 2052089, has been given a warning for allegedly telling a patient that “the people in power are trying to control us through the Covid vaccine”.
In a remote hearing on February 10-12 and 17, a fitness-to-practise (FtP) committee heard that he also allegedly told the patient that “around 30% of DNA has been altered through vaccinations”.
Read more: Pharmacist suspended for claiming MMR jab causes autism
The regulator accepted that this was an “isolated incident involving one patient” and that Johansen had “immediately admitted his conduct was inappropriate when it was brought to his attention”, the hearing documents said.
But it stressed that his comments “had not been based on reliable evidential sources and as such he had provided incorrect information in circumstances which had not been solicited” by the patient.
Government “control”
Johansen was working as a locum and responsible pharmacist at Baden House Pharmacy in Cornwall in January 2024 when a patient – Patient A – came into the pharmacy requesting a repeat prescription for an oral fungal infection which “had not cleared up”, the document said.
He told her that he could not give her a repeat prescription but advised her to “speak to her GP” or visit a health food store which “may be able to provide a product to help with her condition”, it added.
Patient A told the committee, however, that she thought Johansen had “initiated a conversation enquiring whether she had had a Covid vaccination”, although she “couldn’t be certain due to passage of time”.
Read more: Suspended pharmacist made £50k selling medicines on eBay
While she “could not now recall the exact words he had used”, she said he had told her that “the government used this method to control us”, the document said.
She stressed that he “was never aggressive in manner” but was sure Johansen had “used the word ‘30% of DNA’ as he told her that DNA was altered by these vaccinations”, it continued.
Patient A explained that she “felt uncomfortable” when he said this and that, in his “professional capacity” as a pharmacist, he was “expressing personal views which could lead to people being placed at risk”, it added.
“Covid scepticism”
The committee then heard from Johansen, who said that “there was a moment when he understood Patient A to say that she was not confident in her vaccine, but he conceded this may have been something he misunderstood at the time”.
He accepted that she “had not asked for his views and that he had expressed scepticism about the Covid vaccine to her”, the document said.
Johansen explained that he “had read an article referring to a study that had found that DNA could transfer to liver cells” and that this “related to the Pfizer Covid vaccine”, but stressed that “he had not stated 30% of DNA altered through vaccinations”, it added.
Read more: Antidepressants to ‘vulnerable patients’ - pharmacist warned
He accepted, however, that he had “shown concern about the Covid vaccine” and that Patient A “may have thought he was saying vaccines assert control”, the document said, but noted that “he did not say the vaccine was used as a method of control”.
Johansen told the committee that “I do not have a good answer why I told her, something in me was concerned”, adding that “I should never have done it, I know that now….. I am so in the wrong”.
“I was way out of line and admit that...I accept I did not present vaccination as safe and effective” and “I’m sorry”, he said, adding that he accepted that “the concerns he had expressed later turned out to be incorrect”.
“Undermined” a health initiative
The regulator accepted that Johansen had “taken immediate steps” to address the situation to “ensure there would be no repetition” and that he had “expressed genuine insight and remorse”.
It acknowledged that he had been “open and candid when giving evidence and had apologised to Patient A” and that “there had been no actual harm to any patient”.
And it added that there was “a low risk of repetition” and Johansen had “fully cooperated with the regulator throughout proceedings”.
Read more: Superintendent warned for stealing £3,000 from pharmacy till
But the GPhC stressed he had “been in a position of authority and had made the comments to Patient A in a clinical setting”.
It also noted that his comments “had undermined an important public health initiative and could have potentially had wider ramifications”.
The committee decided, however, that it was “satisfied” with Johansen’s “genuine insight and remorse”, arguing that he understood that “any medical information given to patients must be from reliable sources that are evidence-based”.
Read more: Pharmacist warned for refusing patient morning after pill
It concluded that a warning was “the appropriate and proportionate outcome in this case” and was satisfied that a more serious sanction “was not necessary and would have a punitive effect”.
The warning will be published in the register and made available for 12 months, it said.
Read the determination in full here.
