Former
Pfizer Science Officer Reveals Great COVID-19 Scam
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked December 05, 2022
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
· By November 2020 there were
no excess deaths from COVID-19 even though cases increased
· Data showed that many
deaths — primarily people aged 45 to 65, with equal distribution between the
sexes — was mainly due to heart disease, stroke and cancer, which suggests they
were excess deaths caused by lack of routine medical care due to the pandemic
restrictions
· The PCR test is not a valid
diagnostic tool and should not be done on the scale we’re now doing it. The
high rate of false positives is only fodder for needless fearmongering
· Virtually no one who is
asymptomatic has the live virus, but when you run the test at a cycle threshold
over 30, meaning you amplify the viral RNA more than 30 times, you end up with
a positive test even if the virus is inactive and noninfectious
· According to Michael
Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug
company Pfizer, very few people need the COVID-19 vaccine as the mortality rate
from the infection is so low and the illness is clearly not causing excess
deaths
I've written
several articles about scientists and medical doctors who question the official
narrative about the COVID-19 pandemic and the global measures put into place
because of it, from useless testing, mask wearing and social distancing, to
lockdowns, tracking and tracing and the baseless fearmongering driving it all.
In the video
above, British journalist Anna Brees interviews Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former
vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer and
founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, now owned by Novartis.
In this 2020
film, he discusses several concerns, including his belief that widespread PCR
testing was creating the false idea that the pandemic was resurging, as the
total mortality rate is completely normal. He also discusses his concerns about
COVID-19 vaccine mandates.
PCR Testing Is Causing a
False 'Casedemic'
As I explained
in "Asymptomatic 'Casedemic' Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear," by
using PCR testing, which cannot diagnose active infection, a false narrative
has been created.
At the time,
rising "cases," meaning positive tests, were being used as the
justification to impose more severe restrictions, including lockdowns and
mandatory mask wearing, when in fact positive tests have nothing to do with the
actual spread of illness.
According to
Yeadon, at the time of the interview, the U.K. had tested an estimated 30
million people, or close to half the population. "A large number of those
tests have been recent," Yeadon says, noting that the definition of a
"coronavirus death" in the U.K. was anyone who died, from any cause,
within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test.
You cannot have
a lethal pandemic stalking the land and not have excess deaths. ~ Michael
Yeadon, Ph.D.
So, what we're
seeing now is a natural death rate — about 1,700 people die each day in the
U.K. in any given year, Yeadon says — but many of these deaths are now falsely
attributed to COVID-19. "I'm calling out the statistics, and even the
claim that there is an ongoing pandemic, as false," he says.
He challenges
anyone who doesn't believe him to seek out any database on total mortality. If
you do that, you will find that the daily death count is "absolutely
bang-on normal," Yeadon says.
For some
months, the death count is actually slightly lower than the average norm over
the past five years. And, he adds, "You cannot have a lethal pandemic
stalking the land and not have excess deaths."
Lack of Routine Medical
Care Caused Uptick in Deaths
The slight
uptick in deaths that are now being reported simply aren't directly due to
COVID-19, he insists. Data show these deaths — primarily people aged 45 to 65,
with equal distribution between the sexes — were mainly from heart disease,
stroke and cancer, which suggests they were excess deaths caused by
inaccessibility of routine medical care as people are either afraid or
discouraged from going to the hospital.
These deaths
may be characterized as being COVID-related, but that's only because they were
falsely lumped into that category due to false positives being recorded within
28 days of death.
Again, people
are being tested very regularly, and the rate of false positives is extremely
high. All hospital patients to this day are also tested upon admission, so when
they die — regardless of the cause — they're likely to have a false positive on
their record, which then lumps them into the death tally for COVID-19.
"The longer you stay in hospital, the more likely you are to die, obviously," Yeadon says. "You would be released if you were well and improving. So … long-stay patients are both more likely to die statistically, and much more likely to be tested so often that they'll have a false positive test.
That is what I think is happening … It's a convenience for someone playing some macabre game, because I don't think it's an error anymore … I've spoken to people in [public health] and they're embarrassed that they're not even being allowed to characterize and publish the information you would need to know to work out how useful the test is. That's not being done."
Can You Get Reinfected?
Yeadon also
says he's "sick and tired" of people claiming that immunity against
SARS-CoV-2 may wane after a short time, leaving you vulnerable to reinfection.
If you've been ill with COVID-19 and recover, you will have antibodies against
the virus, and you will be immune, he says.
He understands
that journalists may get this wrong, or may be given incorrect information, but
if a scientist says this, "they are lying to you," he says. Yeadon
categorically denies the premise that you can recover from COVID-19 and later
get reinfected and experience severe illness again.
According to
Yeadon, there are only two ways by which COVID-19 would not provide lasting
immunity. The first would be if it destroys your immune system. The HIV virus,
for example, which causes AIDS, disarms your immune system, causing permanent
impairment. Hence you do not become immune to the HIV virus. Coronaviruses do
not do that.
The second way
is if the virus mutates, which is common among influenza viruses — and which we
now know in 2022 did indeed happen. (For transparency, there were already
reports in 2020 of SARS-CoV-2 mutating,1 and some people did
get reinfected with a slightly mutated version of the virus that made them sick
again.)
Not only that,
after the COVID antiviral came out, many people began experiencing rebound
COVID cases.2 One
reason for a reinfection is because when a virus mutates, your immune system
may not fully recognize it and will have to mount a defense again, thereby
creating another set of antibodies. Rebound infections can occur in previously
infected persons as well as after receiving Paxlovid, either from insufficient
drug exposure or from having no immunity to the mutations.3
Hidden Agenda in Plain
Sight
As noted by
Yeadon, people are now changing the laws of immunology, which simply shouldn't
happen. This should not be a political issue, but somehow it is being treated
as one. He claims to have no ideas at all as to why these false narratives are
being created, and why scientific truth that contradicts the mainstream
narrative is being censored.
Others,
however, have become more outspoken about this issue, pointing out how the
pandemic is being used as a convenient excuse and justification for
redistribution of wealth and the technocratic takeover of the whole world under
the banner of a Great Reset to a "more equitable" social order and
greener commerce.
It's being used
to usher in social changes that simply could never be introduced without some
sort of calamity, be it war or a biological threat, because they involve a
radical limitation of personal freedoms and the elimination of privacy. Those
in charge of pandemic response measures also refuse to take into account the
price of these measures.
When making
public health decisions, you need to calculate the cost in terms of lives saved
and the price in dollars and cents of saving those people, against the cost of
not implementing the measure in question. This is not being done. The question
is why is such an illogical stance being taken?
Yeadon on Vaccination
Toward the end
of the interview, Yeadon addresses the issue of COVID-19 vaccination. Many are
nervous about it becoming mandatory, and rightfully so. Vaccine passports are already
being rolled out, and all the indicators point to vaccination becoming a
requirement for travel, perhaps even within national borders.
Having spent
his career in the pharmaceutical industry, Yeadon fully supports vaccination,
believing they prevent large numbers of deaths. However, when it comes to
SARS-CoV-2, he believes the vaccine will only benefit the elderly. For those
over 80, a vaccine might give them a few more months of life.
"Nobody
else needs this [vaccine]," he says. "You don't vaccinate a
population because 1 in 1 million might have a bad outcome [from the
infection]." He also strongly believes the vaccine must be voluntary:
"It's an appalling … public platform to suggest that the only way we get our lives back is to mass vaccinate the population. Something very smelly is going on. It's simply not appropriate. I don't even think it would work."
In an open
letter to the British health minister, Yeadon wrote:4
"I have read the consultation document. I've rarely been as shocked and upset. All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been in development for more than a few months. If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent.
This is because there are precisely zero human volunteers for whom there could possibly be more than a few months past-dose safety information. My concern does not arise because I have negative views about vaccines (I don't).
Instead, it's the very principle that politicians seem ready to waive that new medical interventions at this, incomplete state of development, should not be made available to subjects on anything other than an explicitly experimental basis. That's my concern.
And the reason for that concern is that it is not known what the safety profile will be, six months or a year or longer after dosing. You have literally no data on this and neither does anyone else.
It isn't that I'm saying that unacceptable adverse effects will emerge after longer intervals after dosing. No: it is that you have no idea what will happen yet, despite this, you'll be creating the impression that you do …
I don't trust you. You've not been straightforward and have behaved appallingly throughout this crisis. You're still doing it now, misleading about infection risk from young children. Why should I believe you in relation to experimental vaccines?"
What Can You Do?
In his
interview with Brees, Yeadon suggests medical professionals, especially those
who are members of a professional society, who disagree with further pandemic
measures — based on the medical facts — write an open letter to the government,
urging them to speak to and heed the recommendations from independent experts.
Arm yourself
with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how
and why this pandemic simply isn't a pandemic anymore. First and foremost,
there are no excess deaths. The same number of people have died this year that,
on average, have died in previous years. This simply wouldn't be the case if we
had a lethal pandemic.
Second, the PCR
test is not a valid diagnostic tool and should not be done on the scale we're
now doing it. The high rate of false positives is only fodder for needless
fearmongering. "People should demand to know what [the false positive]
rate is," Yeadon says.
Additionally,
"testing people who are well — it's just a madcap thing," he says.
Virtually no one who is asymptomatic has the live virus, but when you run the
test at a cycle threshold over 30, meaning you amplify the viral RNA more than
30 times, you end up with a positive test even if the virus is inactive and
noninfectious.
"Let's get back to the facts," Yeadon says. "There are no excess deaths. But that's not what you hear from the BBC now, is it? I'm never going to trust the BBC again, by the way. I've watched BBC for 41 years. [They're] never coming back into my ears, because they've lied in my face all year … There's a fraud going on …
You're walking into voluntary house arrest when there are no excess deaths. Why are you doing that? Seriously? … I'm fearful, because it doesn't make any sense and there are no benign outcomes."
Get Organized
It's easy to
get so confused that you can no longer think straight these days. As explained
by Dr. Peter Breggin, featured in "Psychiatrist Blows the Whistle on
Pandemic Fearmongering," when you add uncertainty to fear you end up
with anxiety, a state in which you can no longer think logically.
If this applies
to you, I urge you to turn off mainstream media news and turn to independent
experts, such as Yeadon. Do the research. Read through the science. Reorient
yourself to the facts and turn off the propaganda. Next, join a group so that
you can have support.
A number of
groups have formed around the world that are now rising up against mask
mandates, mandatory vaccinations and lockdowns. A
few examples of such groups include:
·
Us for Them, a group campaigning for
reopening schools and protecting children's rights in the U.K.
·
The COVID Recovery Group (CRG), founded by 50
conservative British MPs to fight lockdown restrictions5
Additional
sources of information and groups fighting for truth and transparency that are
worth checking out include:
·
The Great Barrington Declaration,6 which calls for an
end to lockdowns. As of November 30, 2022, it had been signed by 47,278 medical
practitioners, 15,989 medical and public health scientists, and 870,827
concerned citizens7
·
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s The Defender, a newsletter that
publishes "banned" news
·
The German COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry
Committee (ACU2020.org), which is launching an
international class-action lawsuit against a long list of authorities over the
global pandemic response
·
In the U.S., doctors have formed a group called
America's Frontline Doctors, which is fighting for medical freedom rights
Sources and References
·
1 The Straits Times August 17, 2020
·
2 CDC Health Advisory May 24, 2022
·
3 UC San Diego
Health July 31, 2022
·
4 Principia-scientific.com November 10,
2020
·
6 Great Barrington Declaration
·
7 Great Barrington Declaration Signatures
