Former Pfizer Exec Believes Leaky Vaccine Was Intentional

Former Pfizer exec believes pandemic was a coordinated attack on humanity

Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser for the drug
company Pfizer and founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, now owned by
Novartis, has become one of the most prominent critics of COVID mandates and COVID19 shots. In this riveting interview with British radio presenter Maajid Nawaz, he shares
why he believes that the narratives around COVID-19 are false and were put into place
deliberately to exert control over society.

Yeadon says you’ve been lied to about the magnitude of the threat represented by this
entity called SARS-CoV-2 and the disease COVID-19.
The 2009 H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic was a “dress rehearsal” for the COVID-19 pandemic.
The use of the spike protein in the shot was a diabolical mistake, as 90% of the immune
response mounted after natural COVID-19 exposure is not to the spike protein.

Spike protein is also toxic and mutates rapidly, which essentially destroys virtually any protection that the shot provides shortly after it’s given.

The fact that virtually every country worldwide followed suit in imposing ineffective lockdowns and other COVID-19 mandates suggests a coordinated, supranational effort was underway.

Yeadon is uniquely positioned to speak on this topic, as he has degrees in biochemistry
and toxicology, and studied respiratory pharmacology. You have likely seen Yeadon
being interviewed many times previously, but I strongly encourage you to watch this one
as he explains items I have never heard him previously discuss. He is one of the
sharpest guys out there in this area and you will be glad you took the time to listen.
In the film, he says: “So, I understand … inside of cells and how cells and tissues talk to
each other, and how dangerous chemicals can affect and injure humans and others.”
Not only does Yeadon explain why COVID-19 shots aren’t effective, but he details why
using spike protein in the vaccine was one of the most diabolical mistakes made.

“First,” Yeadon says, “you’ve been lied to about the magnitude of the threat represented
by this entity called SARS-CoV-2 and the disease COVID-19. Been lied to about that, in
every way, shape and form … the bottom line is, we’ve been lied to and it’s deliberate, and
they knew it, and no action was needed whatsoever, other than if you’re sick, stay
home.” Further, the wheel may have been set into motion in 2009, during the swine flu

The 2009 Swine Flu Was the Final Dress Rehearsal for COVID

During the 2009 H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic, secret agreements were made between
Germany, Great Britain, Italy and France with the pharmaceutical industry before the
H1N1 pandemic began, which stated that they would purchase H1N1 flu vaccinations —
but only if a pandemic level 6 was declared by the World Health Organization.

Six weeks before the pandemic was declared, no one at WHO was worried about the
virus, but the media were nonetheless exaggerating the dangers. Then, in the month
leading up to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, WHO changed the official definition of
pandemic, removing the severity and high mortality criteria and leaving the definition of
a pandemic as “a worldwide epidemic of a disease.”

This switch in definition allowed WHO to declare swine flu a pandemic after only 144
people had died from the infection worldwide. In 2010, Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg, then head
of health at the Council of Europe, accused pharmaceutical companies of influencing
WHO’s pandemic declaration, calling swine flu a “false pandemic” that was driven by Big
Pharma, which cashed in on the health scare.

According to Wodarg, the swine flu pandemic was “one of the greatest medicine
scandals of the century,” — and it shares many similarities with the COVID-19
pandemic. Yeadon explained:

“He [Wodarg] was public health officer and a politician during the swine flu
pandemic in 2009. And some very similar things that happened in COVID were
happening in 2009. There’s a very interesting experience here and I think 2009
was the final dress rehearsal for COVID.

They misused PCR, they overdiagnosed cases, they twisted the arms of
governments all around the world to pay for billions of dollars’ worth of
vaccines, and not very good antivirals.

And then they all ran off. And Wodarg was the one that managed to point out in
the second season that it was a false positive pseudo epidemic. It was all bad
PCR testing. And as soon as they fix the PCR, it all went away. All went away.”
PCR Tests Labeled Healthy People Sick.

For the first time in history, during the COVID-19 pandemic the polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) tests were used to dictate whether someone was healthy or sick. If the
test was positive, then you’d be labeled as sick and counted as a case, even if you had
no symptoms.

The PCR tests used for COVID-19 use a powerful amplification process that makes them
so sensitive they can even detect the remains of a dead virus, long after infection.
Wodarg said COVID-19 “was a ‘test’ pandemic. It was not a virus pandemic,” because
PCR tests may give a positive result when it detects coronaviruses that have been

around for 20 years. PCR tests weren’t meant to be used for clinical diagnoses,
according to their inventor, the late Kary Mullis, Ph.D. Yeadon explained:
“And the reason is … that the PCR test has a theoretical lower limit, that is,
what’s the smallest amount it might detect and give a positive result, the
smallest amount is one, one virus, one piece of a virus.

… And then basically, every time you run a cycle of this polymerase chain
reaction, like cranking a handle, it gets hot and cold, hot and cold, and it goes
through basically a doubling, every cycle is a doubling …

So basically, if there’s an infinitesimally tiny amount of a piece of a virus, or the
sequence you allege is a virus, in the sample, and then you run it 40 cycles, you
could get a positive result even though there’s only one piece of one virus — not
enough to make you ill, not enough to make you infectious.”

The same strategy was used in COVID as deaths characterized as being COVID related,
but only because they had been falsely lumped into that category due to a positive test
being recorded within 28 days of death. “If you die from something entirely unrelated
but you’ve tested positive by a PCR test, and you die within that 28 days that’s counted
as a COVID death,” Nawaz noted.

90% of COVID Immune Response Is Not to Spike Protein.

Yeadon stresses that there are “design errors” in COVID-19 shots. “The main problem
with them is there’s no dose where you can get obvious signs of benefit without
attendant harms, that are much greater at a population level than any possible benefit.”
Further, the use of the spike protein was a mistake, as it’s been known for more than 10
years that it causes adverse effects in humans:

“There are no gene based vaccines on the market for very good reasons. And
that’s one of the problems. But let’s see, you could like pull it pull it apart, you
can pull the spike off, you could pull the ball in the middle of this virus, which bit
would you give to people? … what you would do is ask, what’s the toxicity of the
bit I’m going to give to a person?

So if I told you that the spike protein, like a floating landmine in … the sea with
the spikes sticking out, I told you that we’ve known for more than a decade that
the spike bits from related viruses had unwanted biology that could cause blood
to coagulate and activate platelets and make blood clots. That’s true.

And if you knew those things, you’d think well, probably a bad idea then to give
them the spike to train on … So the fact that they chose spike protein, gene for
spike protein, make your body become a manufacturing center briefly to make
that virus spike protein — that’s the first mistake.”

Further, according to Yeadon, the human body mounts its best immune responses after
natural COVID-19 infection, not exposure to the spike protein in the shots. He states,
“90% of the immune response to COVID are two bits of the virus that are not spike
protein. So I think I am right that that was not the best bit to give, because it’s not the
thing your body likes to respond to.”

Spike Protein Mutates Rapidly, Destroying Shots’ Protection

By choosing the spike protein on which to base COVID-19 shots, scientists picked a
protein that was known to be toxic to humans and that was not the part of the virus that
prompted the best immune response. On top of that, spike protein mutates rapidly,
which essentially destroys virtually any protection that the shot provides shortly after it’s
given. The end result is a seemingly never-ending series of annual shots and boosters.

COVID-19 shots have been found to have dismally low effectiveness rates of 12% in
children, according to research conducted by the New York State Department of
Health. Among adults, within four to five months post-booster, protection against
emergency department and urgent care visits due to COVID-19 decreased to 66%, then
fell to just 31% after five months or more post-booster. Yeadon explained:

“What you should do is pick the bits of the virus that’s genetically most stable.
Now, I don’t know that we knew it at the beginning, but it’s certainly true now
that the thing that undergoes variation most quickly is the spike protein … now
you’ve picked something that’s going to rapidly go out of focus to rapidly evolve
to a different variant, new vaccine won’t work anymore.”

Further, because the spike protein is similar to “lots of bits in humans,” it can prompt
your body to make an immune response to human proteins — “that’s called an
autoimmune response,” Yeadon says. Yet, scientists chose the spike protein anyway —
even though it violated all of the “rules” when it comes to creating a safe and effective
product. Yeadon believes this wasn’t a mistake at all; it was intentional:

“So just to say, again, you deselect things that are toxic in their own right, you
pick things that are genetically stable, and you pick things that are most
different from humans, all three of those, in the words of patents, they teach
away, they will teach you away from picking spike protein.

But guess what? Moderna picks spike protein and so does Pfizer, and
AstraZeneca, and Johnson & Johnson. So I put it to you, colleagues, any
scientists out there or just logical people. How the hell would they pick?
No team I was ever part of would ever have picked bloody spike protein for this
vaccine. And you know, what, if we did, and we have competing groups, we
would not, all four of us, make the same mistake. Not possible. It’s collusion
and malfeasance. The did it on purpose, knowing it would hurt you.”

For the Next Pandemic Understand Vaccines Are Not the Answer

Billionaire Vaccine Investor Bill Gates has made it plain the next pandemic is inevitable, by stating publicly that COVID-19 was “pandemic one” and “pandemic two” is coming. “We’ll have to prepare for the next one. That will get attention this time,” he said — while smiling.

The implication is that “next time” another experimental mRNA shot will be available much quicker with which to inject the population. But Yeadon wants the public to learn from COVID-19 and understand that the shots aren’t the answer:

“It’s really important that you listen to me here, that if there’s another respiratory
virus, you must know this time that whatever however they design, the damn
vaccine is the wrong answer. It’s the wrong answer for loads of reasons. One is,
you will generate an immune response in your blood that cannot possibly affect
infection, it doesn’t matter what it is, it won’t affect infection.

Secondly, if you if you design it using spike protein from some other virus, then
if it has that same property of causing toxicity, it will cause toxicity because
when you inject these gene based vaccines, it’s like launching a go kart that has
an accelerator, no steering wheel and no brakes … there’s nothing in the design
of these vaccines that limits where they go.

Some of it will go into your brain, the back of your eyes, your ovaries or testes,
your blood vessels or your heart … you can’t develop rapid vaccines, and then
give them to billions of people, because you will never have enough safety data
to allow you to know whether that was a good bet or not. And without that data,
it’s reckless. Don’t do it.”

What else can be learned from the COVID-19 fiasco, Yeadon says, is that the
nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) — things like masks, lockdowns, border
closures and mass testing of the population — were also useless in curbing the spread
of the disease, and world leaders knew this in 2019, when a paper by WHO scientists
showed that most NPIs were ineffective in stopping the spread of respiratory viruses.
“Of course, many of them have really serious side effects on the economy, psychology,
social relationships and so on,” he noted.

Evidence of Supranational Coordination

“Public health officials knew perfectly well those things didn’t work,” Yeadon said, but
the fact that virtually every country worldwide followed suit nonetheless suggests a
coordinated effort was underway. “I think it’s the strongest evidence of supranational
coordination, something happening above the level of country,” Yeadon said, and he
wants to get the word out:

“They were doing it because there was pressure to do it … They did not oppose
what was happening. That’s the most disappointing and frightening thing that
why, why none of the scientists from Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, Spain,
Portugal, Britain, why none of them, said, ‘You know, this is absurd.
I’m not doing this. And if you’re going to do it, I’m resigning, and then I shall go
to the media.’ Either that didn’t happen or they tried to try this and BBC … said,
‘Well, we’re not interviewing you.’ That’s possible.

There was a supranational agreement or pressure to do it.

I don’t know whether that pressure was instantiated in spring of 2020, or whether they had
already agreed to do it a few months ago, but either way, nobody spoke up. And as far as I know, nobody resigned even though what was being imposed on all
of those countries was … ineffective and would damage their economies. That’s
the kindest thing you can possibly say.

Sources and References
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 7:24
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 33:30
BitChute, TrustWHO
Wayback Machine, WHO Pandemic Preparedness September 2, 2009 (PDF)
Daily Mail January 17, 2010
The Times of Israel May 14, 2020
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:08
The Fat Emperor, Podcast, December 11, 2020
Rumble, Planet Lockdown, Wolfgang Wodarg, Full Interview, October 18, 2021, 14:02
Rumble, Planet Lockdown, Wolfgang Wodarg, Full Interview, October 18, 2021, 9:40
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 55:29
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 44:05
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:05
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:09
medRxiv February 28, 2022
The New York Times February 11, 2022
Rumble, The Plan May 4, 2022, 0:37
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:17
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:22
Odysee, Radical w/Maajid Nawaz June 12, 2022, 1:33

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments