A voice calling in the media wilderness
An important warning from Pfizer's former Chief Scientific Officer for Allergy and Respiratory Diseases
Dear Church Leaders (and everyone else)
This post features a transcript of this recent video from Dr Mike Yeadon, Pfizer’s former Chief Scientific Officer for Allergy and Respiratory Diseases. Along with some other comments and links.
The video was recorded in the context of the recent Consultation Document re Policy underpinning the Public Health Bill (Northern Ireland) as discussed in this post:
As you can see from the video — or even just the above snapshot — there is nothing slick or flash about Dr Yeadon’s presentation. But he is the real deal: an exceptionally intelligent scientist who evaluates the available evidence carefully, and who is cautious in reaching conclusions. And someone who says what he believes to be true, regardless of the cost, and irrespective of what other people might think. I have encountered a lot of scientists in my time, but few with anything like Yeadon’s insight, integrity and courage. And who else on the planet is better qualified to comment on pharmaceutical products for respiratory disease?
Moreover, unlike the scientists on SAGE and government committees such as the JCVI (Joint Committee for Vaccination and Immunisation), Yeadon has no conflicts of interest. He is relatively wealthy, and he says he has deliberately not earned any money over the past four years. Moreover, speaking out has cost him a great deal, including financially. He used to be a consultant for around 30 biotech companies.
I first encountered Yeadon when he was speaking out in 2020, e.g. in the article What SAGE Has Got Wrong — a piece which has aged well. But one of the most striking indicators to me at that time was the extent to which he was being censored even then. A strong contender for the country’s most-qualified person to comment about covid was not even being allowed to speak on any mainstream media outlet. That fact alone was enough to tell me that there was something seriously wrong.
An exceptionally well-qualified scientist
Hello. My name is Dr Mike Yeadon. And in the next 15 minutes or so I would like to address those of you who have been vaccine-injured or bereaved, and also those of you who are involved in the political process in Northern Ireland, as well as [anybody] anywhere else in the world who might hear me.
At the end of this process, I hope you will believe what I am going to tell you, which, shockingly, is that the materials masquerading as vaccines were designed intentionally to harm the people who received them.
I’m probably the most-qualified former pharmaceutical company research executive in the world speaking out on this matter. And since I spent my entire career in the business of working with teams designing molecules to be new potential medicines, I think I am qualified to comment on it. And that is my shocking judgement that has been only reinforced over the last almost four years since I first said it. I also have some suggestions for what we can do together to fight against the global crime which is ongoing.
So just a little bit about me so you can decide whether or not to believe me…
I’m a career-long research scientist. I’ve worked all of my life in the pharmaceutical industry and in biotech. My first degree included a training in toxicology… an understanding of how materials can injure human beings at a molecular level, and what the relationship is between the structure of them and the toxicity.
In my second degree, a PhD, I did research in respiratory pharmacology — control of breathing and control of respiratory reflexes. And then after that I joined the pharmaceutical industry in 1988. And I worked until very recently on new medicines for allergic and respiratory diseases.
In my corporate career, I was for a long time responsible at Pfizer — then the biggest research-based drug company in the world — for everything to do with allergic and respiratory diseases in the research field… that was my responsibility.
And in the last ten years after leaving [Pfizer] in 2011, I was an independent and I became the founder and CEO of a biotech company which was eventually acquired by Novartis which was then the biggest drug company in the world.
Yeadon was Pfizer’s former Chief Scientific Officer for Allergy and Respiratory Diseases. The story of Ziarco, the biotech company that Yeadon founded, led and sold, is told in this 2017 article in Forbes magazine written by a former Pfizer board member.
According to this link:
Novartis AG (SWX:NOVN) completed the acquisition of Ziarco Group Limited from New Enterprise Associates, Lundbeckfond Invest A/S, BVF Partners LP, Amgen Ventures, Sofinnova Ventures, Inc. and Pfizer Venture Investments for $420 million on January 20, 2017
Back to the main video:
So I have had a good career. I was well-regarded in the industry for my scientific acumen and judgement. Until of course I started speaking out against the nonsense — the “covid pandemic” and especially the so-called vaccines. I have become persona non grata with my former colleagues after that. So I am well-qualified to comment on the toxicological principles, properties of molecules, and the kind of effects you might see from certain structures.
What actually happened in 2020?
There was no pandemic or public health emergency
So just very briefly, before I talk about the so-called vaccines… What happened in 2020?
It’s taken me a long time to get there, and… I’ve not made everybody happy with the decision I’ve reached, but there was not a pandemic or a public health emergency.
This is consistent with data from the UK Office for National Statistics which anyone can easily look up and check:
In February 2020, when we were told that covid was circulating, there were fewer deaths registered than in any of the previous five years. And 2020 was a Leap Year!
And in March 2020, even with the chaos that ensued following the announcement of lockdown on 23rd, there were still fewer deaths than in the same period in 2018.
Links to the data can be found in this post:
The table below features a more detailed summary:
According to official UK government data, until Britain was ordered into panic mode on 23rd March deaths were at normal levels for the time of year
Back to Yeadon:
I don’t think there was anything at all apart from lies, propaganda, fear-based information, fake diagnostic tests called PCR. And then, as it were, misattribution of real illnesses that people did have, which were called “covid” when there was no such thing.
In relation to the PCR test, this post, featuring Kary Mullis, winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry “for his invention of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method” is well worth reading:
But what happened, shockingly, was that after the World Health Organisation’s [Director-General] called a pandemic — which was not true; there’s never been a pandemic, there won’t be pandemics, they’re immunologically impossible…
This analysis by Denis Rancourt shows that all-cause mortality data did not increase at all in the run up to the WHO declaration of a pandemic:
Re the bigger picture, here is an extract (emphasis added):
Interestingly, none of the post-second-world-war Centers-for-Disease-Control-and-Prevention-promoted (CDC‑promoted) viral respiratory disease pandemics (1957-58, “H2N2”; 1968, “H3N2”; 2009, “H1N1 again”) can be detected in the all‑cause mortality of any country. Unlike all the other causes of death that are known to affect mortality, these so‑called pandemics did not cause any detectable increase in mortality, anywhere.
The large 1918 mortality event, which was recruited to be a textbook viral respiratory disease pandemic (“H1N1”), occurred prior to the inventions of antibiotics and the electron microscope, under horrific post-war public-sanitation and economic-stress conditions. The 1918 deaths have been proven by histopathology of preserved lung tissue to have been caused by bacterial pneumonia. This is shown in several independent and non-contested published studies.
Rancourt’s analysis on the covid era is also consistent with the verdict of John Dee, a pseudonymous retired statistician and former NHS Head of Department (Clinical Audit):
Back to the Yeadon video…
There were excess deaths from imposed medical procedures and the withholding of medicines which would have saved lives
…after [the WHO Director-General] called them, many countries in the world changed radically their medical management practices for people in hospitals, also in care homes and in the community. And, very briefly, in hospitals many people were sedated… had a plastic tube put down their airway… and, unconscious, [were] put on mechanical ventilators. I can assure you that is not ever an appropriate treatment for someone with an influenza-like illness, whatever you might think covid was.
That would not be something you would do. And… if applied to frail and elderly people, they will die in large numbers, which they did.
Here is a table featuring the official ONS data for registered weekly deaths in the six weeks before and the six weeks after the introduction of the “covid measures”:
To reiterate, the inconvenient truth is that the death rate increased only after the first lockdown began and the “covid response” began. When people panicked. When people were terrified by their governments. When people were told, “Don’t come into hospital if you can help it.”
So that was the first crime. It’s not a mistake. There are no mistakes here. Mistakes were not made.
I am reminded of Yeadon’s reading of the thought-provoking poem featured in this post:
They were told to do this by figures at supranational level. We don’t know exactly who. But we know this because these mad procedures changed in many countries all at the same time. So that was hospitals.
In care homes — assisted living, old age people’s homes and so on — many people were given drugs like midazolam, which is an injectable form of a drug like valium, i.e. a sedative. But they were also given injections of pain-relieving drugs like morphine, even if they weren’t in pain.
My PhD was in the field of understanding what opiate drugs like morphine do to the respiratory reflex. And I can assure you that it suppresses it and suppresses it and depresses it. So if you give an elderly person on their own an injection of midazolam, they will become sedated and sleepy. And if you give them an injection of morphine their breathing will slow.
I can tell you it’s absolutely forbidden to give a person those two drugs together — those two drug classes together — unless they are under intense ongoing medical monitoring. And the reason is [that] they are very likely to fall asleep and stop breathing. That of course is what happened. So that’s hospitals and care homes. Your relatives were killed by the medical procedures that were imposed.
Now it’s quite possible early on that not everybody involved knew what was happening, but I’m afraid after a few days you’d have to be a blockhead not to realise that it was what you were doing to your charges — your patients — that was resulting in their deaths. So I have completely lost any trust in the medical profession because virtually no-one has spoken up, four and half years later.
This happened to lots of people. If you listen to the recordings — heart-breaking recordings given to the Scottish covid inquiry… I think that’s probably the only place where there has been an official taking of evidence from people — and what I just described is exactly what happened to lots of people’s relatives, and no doubt happened to some people in Northern Ireland as well. It certainly happened in England.
Some details of the Scottish covid inquiry plus links can be found in this post:
And also the September update here.
While the UK covid inquiry has received extensive coverage, the Scottish covid inquiry has had barely any time at all. Maybe The Trusted News Initiative has something to do with it.
And the author of a Substack featuring clips from the Scottish covid inquiry has had his Twitter/X account suspended for months, which seems odd for a platform owned by someone who is supposedly in favour of free speech (more details in the above September update link).
There were worse things as well. People in the community were deprived of medical care that would have saved their lives. And there’s plenty of evidence to say that not being given antibiotics when they had incipient bronchial pneumonia also killed thousands, possibly tens of thousands of people.
And there, ladies and gentlemen, was your “pandemic”. All of those deaths were attributed to covid. And you were told, “This is this terrible pandemic. You need to lock down, wear masks, do what you’re told.” Nothing was happening at all apart from medical murder and propaganda from the television and the newspaper, politicians and many well-known public figures who were doing what they were told.
So of course one conclusion I’m going to come to later is: Stop listening to liars. The people who have lied to you… you shouldn’t listen to them ever again. Stop listening to them today.
The worst thing
But for me I think the worst thing — because it comes out of my industry and because it’s so deliberate… it required such a lot of forethought — are the so-called vaccines.
Now we were told there was this new infectious disease. So far, so good, ladies and gentlemen. But then they said, “Don’t worry, we’ll rustle up a vaccine.” And they did so, in about 10 months… something like that.
I can tell you, after spending a career in this industry, you can no more make a baby in one month with nine women than you can make a complicated biological product in 10 months. It cannot be done. It was not done. They did something else. They created materials which were essentially injected poisons. They were not vaccines. There was never anything to vaccinate against. And when you’ve listened to what I’ve just told you, you know that must be true, because you can’t do something in 10 months that normally takes 6-12 years.
Medicines are not put together randomly. They are built. And they are built by people who are discussing with colleagues [to] work out what kind of materials, what kind of structures, what kind of formulations, what kind of doses you would need to add in order to hit a particular molecular target, to have a chance of a particular therapeutic goal being reached without unacceptable side-effects. That is called rational design. And that is my whole career… from my undergraduate days to today.
So when I look at the design of a medicine, whatever kind it is, and look at the design on paper — its composition, structures and so on — it is as if I am looking over the shoulder of the designer — someone like me. Someone with my qualifications designed these things. So when I look at [medical products], I am looking over the shoulder of the designer. And I can discern something of what their objectives were, what [they were] trying to do.
And I came quickly to the conclusion that they wanted to bring about toxicity that would injure, kill and reduce fertility. There aren’t any other alternatives. And remember, there was no public health emergency.
I’ll just give you three examples. I’m not going to be too scientific, but three things, so you can check them…
A foreign protein
The objective of these so-called gene-based vaccines was to inject you with an genetic sequence for something called spike protein.
Now it doesn’t really matter what spike protein is… if it’s real… where it came from. The point is that it’s a genetic sequence for a protein that doesn’t belong in your body. It’s non-self. It’s foreign. Your immune system is a wonderful work of God and nature. It distinguishes self, i.e. things that are meant to be inside you and are fine, from anything else — foreign, non-self.
If you inject a person with a genetic sequence that instructs your body to become a factory for some protein that doesn’t belong in you, your immune system will detect that, and it will attack every cell that’s done that instruction, and kill it.
Now these materials, when injected in your arm didn’t stay in your arm. They travelled around your heart, your lungs, your kidneys, your brain, your ovaries. And in every place it landed, if it was taken up and expressed, your body registered that as a foreign invasion. And it attacked and killed every cell doing it. There is no other possible consequence from doing that.
So that is step 1. And no-one can argue that’s not what they did. That is the design of them.
An inherently toxic protein
They also picked a particular protein. I’m not really sure where spike protein came from… if it’s really real. But proteins like the one they claim was encoded in these gene-based materials are known to be toxic. There are… lots of published experiments showing that proteins like that one cause blood coagulation, damaged nerves, damaged heart tissue.
So they injected you with something that would make your body make protein that doesn’t belong there, knowing axiomatically, automatically, unavoidably, your immune system would attack that. It would be like rejecting an organ transplant. Your body would say, “That’s foreign, it’s got to go.” And use your immune system to kill it.
And then they also injected you with something that is inherently toxic, so that if it got out into your body — or wherever it was made — it would harm you. And I’ve got a third one which cannot be argued with.
A delivery system
These mRNA products from Pfizer and Moderna were encapsulated in something called lipid nanoparticles… a complicated, technical blob of fat…
And… that material… allowed your injection to glide all round your body across all biological barriers and get everywhere in your body. Which of course is not what you would want, is it? For something [covid] that they told you was inhaled into your nose and lungs. But no, it went all round your body, into your brain, your blood vessels.
But in particular, I need to tell you, there were publications that are now more than ten years old… peer-reviewed journal articles… showing that lipid nanoparticles were recognised over a decade ago of having a particular property, which you’re not going to like to hear… which shocked me when I learned it.
They tend to deposit their payload into the ovaries. That is exactly what happened with those injected materials. There was at least one study performed with the Pfizer [injections] with the Japanese regulatory authorities. And lo and behold, the material accumulated in the ovaries of the test animals. That is what has happened, ladies and gentlemen, to every woman and girl injected with these materials.
This is a snapshot from p21 of a report titled A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA Formulation Containing ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats:
And this is a snapshot from p45 of an Australian Government document titled Nonclinical Evaluation Report for the BNT162b2 [mRNA] COVID-19 vaccine (COMIRNATY™) (often called the Pfizer vaccine, although it was actually developed by the German company BioNTech):
Remember what I said about designing molecules to do things deliberately with objectives in mind? They picked nanoparticles knowing that they accumulate their payload in ovaries. It’s not an accident. Mistakes were not made
So I tell you, as a professional who spent his whole, honest, scientific career — in an industry I did not realise was corrupt — trying to make experimental medicines for respiratory allergy and diseases… that my experience tells me that there are multiple independent, unnecessary and obvious mechanisms of toxicity built into these so-called vaccines.
And then, by sheer luck, all four companies — Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca, Pfizer — all chose basically the same formula for their so-called vaccines. That would never happen if it was real [vaccine development]. For a start, I would call my opposite numbers and say, “We should do different things because if something goes wrong, if we’re wrong on an assumption, all of the so-called vaccines will fail for the same reason. We should do different things.” It’s called diversification.
But no, they all did the same things because they were just lying. They were making intentionally dangerous material, passing them off as vaccines, jabbing you and your children.
And that’s what they did. Of course I didn’t get injected. Neither did my children. And most of my relatives. Some of them didn’t believe me. I’m afraid they’ve been injected too.
The bigger picture
So, big picture… what happened?
I think, from the research I’ve done, and of course I’m an expert in research and development not in politics… I believe that very wealth people, the kind of people who run foundations with names, have planned (as have their antecedents for a couple of generations) to take over the world, to remove the freedoms of ordinary people like us that they regard as “useless eaters”. They don’t want us around anymore.
And their intention is to strip us of our freedoms by persuading us that there are very frightening events occurring in the world, and we need them to lead us to safety. There are documents you can find from a group called the Club of Rome who, in the late 1960s, were commissioned by some of these people who run these named global foundations that have hundreds of billions of pounds of worth…
I recommend listening to this podcast from 2:28:50 — and particularly from 2:31:10 where Robin Monotti — who comes from Rome — talks about the Club of Rome (transcript of short extract below):
There’s people that I grew up with who would have had and heard some of these conversations… of the Club of Rome. Not directly, but indirectly… second- or third-hand… being discussed at home.
Like: “There’s too many people on the planet… too many poor people. I don’t like looking at them on the street. There’s too many people in Rome when I go to the Vatican museums. I don’t like to see all these people who look ugly because they’re lower class. And they don’t look after themselves. I’m rich and I live in a castle…”
And this was a group of basically globalist people. So, at the heart of a lot of this was… basically a kind of contempt of [a] very privileged oligarchic industrial group — a banking group as well — on normal people, poor people, who don’t dress in the same expensive clothes, don’t have the same kind of look as they do. And this is what led to The Limits to Growth… which was a scientific justification for the reduction of population.
A freely available online Internet Archive copy of The Limits to Growth can be found here:
They were asked to come up with scenarios that would produce challenges to countries that couldn’t be solved by countries on their own, so they would have to look outwards and upwards to supranational solutions. And guess what the two things they came up with [are]: pandemics of infectious disease, which I know, as an immunologist, are not possible and have not happened. And the other thing that they said to look out for — or plan for — were climate change crises.
I’ve done enough research now, ladies and gentlemen. I’ve spoken to people who have spent as long in climate and atmospheric research as I have in pharmaceutical R&D. And they have explained to me — and I understand very well — that all of this nonsense about carbon dioxide, global boiling, Net Zero, it’s all a complete scam…
See e.g. this post:
And this one, comparing and contrasting the “climate crisis” and the “covid crisis”:
…from the same people who brought you the covid scam and the dangerous injections. It’s the same people. They want one world government. They want to deprive you of your liberty. And then I’m afraid I think they will kill us using these injections, because they’re going to do it again.
All over the world, factories to make mRNA-based materials are being thrown up. Billions of doses are being made. And, if we let them, they will stick them in our arms. And people will sicken and die.
See e.g. The bigger picture section of this post:
Where to go from here?
So those of you who have been injured or bereaved, in my mind no blame whatsoever attaches to you. How could you know that people you trusted and thought you could trust were lying to you?
Well, you didn’t know. But if you let them inject you again, you have no sympathy from me. Because they have lied to you. You’ve been injured [and some people] killed. And I’ve explained to you that they are liars and they have attacked us. So, if you go along with it, you cannot be saved. All we need to do is… enough of us to continue to speak out about this and say, “We’re not having it any more. Get lost.” So don’t listen to liars any more. People who have lied to you forfeit their trust forever, in my view.
And… anyone who is in the political process, for example in Northern Ireland looking at this so-called “public health” bill, which if you pass it, will allow these supranational criminals to take you from your house, to inject you, by force if necessary… they are aiding and abetting a global crime… [And] if you pass that legislation, I don’t think it would be unreasonable to interpret that as an act of war. It’s as serious as that.
So, politicians, you may well be under pressure from shadowy figures. But if you go along with it, and hope for an easier time of it, you will… unlock the doors of hell This is your time to do what I am doing, which is to speak out no matter the consequences. I say to you, if you’re frightened about what happens if you speak out, you should be absolutely terrified about what is going to happen if you don’t.
So… that’s all I’ve got to say. I do think these criminals are going to do it again. They’re continuing to threaten us with pandemics like “bird flu”, “monkeypox” and so on. It’s all nonsense. Stop listening to liars right now.
Put things right between you and the people you love, and between you and God, if you haven’t already. And for goodness sake, be one of the people who speaks out, no matter what the consequences. Because if you don’t, we’ll lose our freedom and then our lives.
Thank you.
I am reminded of these words, often attributed to Mark Twain, and quoted by Yeadon in his What SAGE Has Got Wrong article in 2020:
It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled
I know well enough, not least from experience that some see, some see when shown, and that some cannot or will not see.
But if Yeadon is right — and his expertise and track record are better than that of most — there is an enormous amount at stake.
I am reminded of Yeadon’s wager:
A. If I’m right and you ignore me, the downsides could be (I’m sure of it) as I’ve outlined…
B. If those standing back, hoping I’m wrong, are right, we all get a good laugh at my expense.
Which wager should you take, A or B?
As to Yeadon making an appearance on any mainstream media outlet? Or even the supposedly pro-free speech platform that is Twitter/X? I won’t be holding my breath.
Related:
This article — one of my first posts — featuring an earlier statement from Yeadon and some additional discussion:
Also:
And:
Dear Church Leaders most-read articles
Some posts, including a version of this one, can also be found on Unexpected Turns
The Big Reveal: Christianity carefully considered