Patriots Perspective News
Patriots Perspective News


How To Know Which COVID-19 Vaccine To Get?

Or are you considering getting a COVID-19 Delta Variant Booster Shots?

Before you consider either, I wanted to bring you this eye-opening interview with Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former Pfizer scientist who believes in medicines and pharmaceuticals of all types as long as they work. Throughout this post, you’ll find Dr. Michael Yeadon’s interview with call-outs and with the complete unedited automated transcript below the video.
Dr. Michael yeadon says, “Your Government is Lying As They Masquerade a New Covid-19 Delta Variant Virus.” “The Nazi doctors, by the way, were hung for their crimes against humanity. And I’m sorry to say those NHS doctors who are administering these agents to people who are not at risk from the virus, and they’re not telling them that they’re experimental, are also breaching the Nuremberg code.” 

What do actions can you take to stop the vaccine tyranny?

Dr. Michael Yeadon says “You don’t need to do anything violent. You just need to say, “I’m withdrawing my consent. This is a stupid experiment. We’ve had enough now”—end of the story. Go back to normal life. That’s all you need to do at the moment. It’s so astonishingly simple normality is literally arm’s length, but it won’t be soon. Suppose the vaccine passports system is voted in by our corrupt people in the West. That will be the end of liberal democracy. And I don’t think there’s any way out of that. We’ll be standing at the gates of hell.”

Humanity & Liberty For All Depends On Your Decisions

Throughout this post, you’ll find:
  1. Dr. Yeadon’s complete UNPAID interview along with call-outs of his warning to humanity
  2. Expertise and proof of how your immune systems work
  3. Science behind vaccines & Covid-19
  4. The Full Unedited Automated Transcript of His Words of Wisdom are below the video
As many vaccinated people are now being pushed to get a booster shot, Dr. Yeadon provided this free educational video on what will happen if humans continue to comply. Whether you’re vaccinated or not, or maybe you’re just considering a first vaccine or a booster, it’s important to know what real scientists think before you help usher in the COVID-19 (Certificate Of Vaccine Identification – A=”1″ Automated “9”=I Intelligence) In case you missed seeing the proof of Microsoft Patent for Bodily passports which is located on Google and what it means for you – click here.  Read the book of Revelation and understand the Mark of the Beast Bill Microsoft style will be in your hand, forehead, and everywhere in between. 

Is The Delta Variant Different Than Covid-19?

Former Pfizer Scientist and one of the biggest targets silenced by BIG TECH and media censorship, Michael Yeadon says, “So when your government scientists tell you that a variant that’s 0.3% different from SARS could masquerade as a new virus and be a threat to your health, you should know, and I’m telling you THEY ARE LYING. If they’re lying, and they are, why is the pharmaceutical industry making top-up vaccines? They are making them; you should be as terrified at this point as I am because there’s absolutely no possible justification for their manufacturer, but they’re being made.”  And the world’s medicines, regulators have said, because they are quite similar to the original vaccines, the ones that are being given, they won’t be asking them to do any clinical safety studies. So let me just say again, the variants are not different enough to represent a threat to use. You do not need to top up vaccines. They are being made, and the regulators that more or less waved them through. I’m terrified of that. There’s no possible benign interpretation of this.  I believe that they’re going to be used to damage your health and possibly kill you seriously. I can see them. Sensible interpretation, other than a serious attempt at mass depopulation, will provide the tools to do it and plausible deniability because they’ll create another story about some biological threats. You’ll line up and get your top-up vaccines, and a few months or a year or so later, you will die of some peculiar explicable syndrome, and they won’t be able to associate it with the top-up vaccine.” 

Watch Former Pfizer Scientist Michael Yeadon Entire Interview

While I know many of you are short on time, I highly recommend that you spend your tell-lie-vision-watching time watching this very informative interview. If you want to go to the part I listed above please start the video around 35 minutes. Unlike Dr. Fraud-Fauci, Dr. Yeadon gives facts, solutions, and reasons the governments are ushering in COVID-19 which means Certificate of Vaccine Identification – AI (the one is an A and the letter I is represented by the number 9).

Full Unedited Transcript from Dr. Mike Yeadon, Former Pfizer Scientist Tell-All Interview Warning Humanity of Why Covid-19 Is Not a Threat & How You’ve Been Lied To

Yes. Hi, my name is uh, Dr. Mike Yeadon. Um, I’m a qualified life science researcher. Really? I have a first degree. Uh, in biochemistry and toxicology and have a research-based Ph.D. in respiratory pharmacology. And then I’ve worked for 32 years, mostly in big pharmaceutical companies and 10 years in the biotechnology sector. So my last job in big pharma, I was the vice president and chief scientist of allergy and respiratory research. I left Pfizer in 20 years. Uh, and then after that, I found it drew yeah, sold a biotech company called Zarko to Novartis. That was 2017. Um, before that, and afterward, an independent advisor to over 30 startup biotechnology companies. So, uh, you would expect from that, that I am pro, uh, new medicines of all kinds are goals. Always. Address unmet medical needs and to do so with acceptable safety, given the medical context, um, and I’m in favor of all modes of new medical treatments, whether they’re biologicals or vaccines, small molecules, cream, sprays, appointments, whatever, but I’m fervently against, um, unsafe medicines or medicines used in an inappropriate context. And so, some of the things I’m going to say are not favorable to the current crop. Gene-based vaccines, and it’s for that reason that they’re inappropriately used. And I don’t think they have a sufficient safety profile to be used as a sort of wide spectrum, uh, public health prophylactic, as a result of that background in, uh, pharmaceutical industry and biotechnology. I am pro new medical entities that treat unmet needs and do so safely. And that’s true, whether the entity is a vaccine or a biological, like an animal. Or if it’s what I would call a small molecule, therapeutic, you know, a pill or a tablet, but I’m unsafe anti medicines regardless of what format they are. And so my criticism is sometimes falling on to unsafe small molecule substances and sometimes on unsafe vaccines. So I’m generally pro-new medicines as long as they are safe and effective and used appropriately. And I’m, I’m anti the opposite of that. A few things have allowed me, I think, to spot what’s going on in the world at the moment. I do have. I would say two, two big advances. One, I’ve loved biology since I was little. And this year marks the 40th year I’ve been studying. Look, continuing to learn and to apply biology broadly, whether it’s pharmacology, biochemistry, and molecular biology, uh, toxicology. And so, I’ve got a very broad grounding in all things to do with life science in terms of health and disease. Um, but one of my former supervisors said that I had a remarkable facility that stood out above the sort of ordinary things you’d have to do to be a vice president or a CEO. And he said that, um, I could spot patterns in sparse data earlier than my peers did. So when there was not enough data for most people. Judge what was going on. I would often be able to see it. I could see a pattern forming when there wasn’t quite enough information. And really, I guess I was running a lot of simulations in my head and trying to work out. What could these small bits of information mean rather than waiting for more data? It’s my word. I think I know what’s happening here, and that would sometimes be applied to, say, target selection in industry or how we should prosecute a program or what the competition was doing. But on this occasion, It allowed me quite quickly to determine what we were, what we were being told about this virus, and what we needed to do to stay safe was not true. Um, for example, early on in the UK, um, there were enormous changes made in the attribution of causes of death. So we’d never had anything as absurd as the rule that is now used. So if you should do, within 28 days of having a positive result in, uh, you know, an inappropriate test using molecular biology, then you would be declared to have died of COVID-19; that’s just wrong. It’s not just a matter of disagreeing professionally. It’s just complete nonsense. And we can certainly talk about the unreliability unpredictable nature. PCR testing. Uh, but also, uh, things like lockdown. I mean, just the whole phrase of it, the fact that it was completely unprecedented, uh, and that we were to minimize contact one with another, and that was going to save us. I knew quite early on that that was rubbish. And the reason is simply that only person who is ill and have similar. Are really strong infectious risks through other people. And those people are not people walking around in the community because if you’re full of viruses and symptomatic, you are also ill, and ill people tend to stay at home or in bed. And or if they’re very serious, they end up in a hospital or die. And so the idea that if you can’t normal contacts at work, and you know, just civic society and you’re normal. That would slow epidemic spreading. I, I was fairly sure fairly on that. That was bunk. Um, and unfortunately, it took several months before that was clear, by which time the idea that lockdown, uh, is what you need to do had been pretty much cemented in most, most of the world. So basically, everything your government has told you about this virus, everything you need to do to stay safe, is a lie: every, every part of it. And I’ll be challenged on that. And there are no. No, none of the key themes that you hear talked about from asymptomatic transmission to top-up vaccines; not one of those things is supported by the science. Every piece is cleverly chosen adjacency to something that probably is true, but it is itself a lie and has led people to where I believe we are right now. And, um, I don’t normally use phrases like this, but I think we are standing at the very gates of hell. Yeah. When I first heard the word lockdown, I hope, like most people, this is a phrase you use in relation to controlling unruly prisoners. Um, it’s a control measure. Um, and I think pretty much all that has happened since is to do with control, um, this myth of asymptomatic transmission, which is simply not true as I mentioned. To transmit a virus, to be a good, efficient source of infection, you have to have a lot of viruses. And if you have many viruses in you, viruses attacking you in, you are fighting back. That process produces symptoms, inevitably. It’s not to not just occasionally; it must always happen. And so all the people who are very good sources of infection are ill. So the whole idea of asymptomatic transmission, I would think it’s like 1% or 0.1 points if it occurs at all. As good as a strong infectious case. So by the time we got to about the third main theme of this pandemic and how to control it, I knew I was being lied to all the time by government scientists, their advisors, and ministers people on the TV. And I’m afraid that impression has, has simply firmed up as time has gone on. Um, and so this is all about, it’s all about control. Um, I have my thoughts on what that control is going to be used for. And, uh, I certainly want to communicate that to you, your listeners, and viewers. I remember one of the things I started doing early on because I understood it quite well was to criticize the PCR or polymerase chain reaction test publicly because I, I knew enough about it, uh, Northern molecular biology expert, but I’ve hired people who are. And, you know, I understand how PCR works, this idea of, uh, developing primers, uh, baked as it were for the thing you’re trying to detect. And then to amplify it repeatedly, potentially up to a trillionfold, people will be pretty familiar. I think with the idea of DNA testing that will be used for forensic purposes. Uh, and I point out to them that the PCR test uses most of the same technology. And imagine if you were preparing for a trial. And you were able with your attorney to show the judge the conditions under which PCR testing was being done relatively inexperienced lab—doing hundreds of thousands of pipetting actions a day in the same laboratory. And you said, look, your honor, um, you know, my client’s sample is one of those on the bench there, you know, the might be cross-contamination in that. I suspect it’s inevitable but, but you’ll get the results shortly. I mean, the judge would just throw the entire evidence set out of court, and rightly so, but it’s the same technology. It is being used to work out whether your sample or that. A family member or someone in your community is not positive for this virus. It’s completely fraudulent. The way it’s being done, you simply cannot run a technique like that at an industrial scale and expect the results to be meaningful. And they’re not; I don’t think they’ve ever been meaningful. And one of the frauds, our government and the people they hired to run the testing of. Is, they refused to entertain the idea that there is 17 something called a false positive rate. I assure you if you run any diagnostic test repeatedly, sometimes there’ll be a positive result when there’s nothing in the sample. That’s called a false positive; false negatives also occur, but let’s focus on false positives. We don’t know whether that’s going to occur half a percent of the time. 4% of the time. This is enormously mature. So telling you whether there’s lots of infection in your community or pretty much not at all, but you will find nowhere in the world. Has anyone measured and released often this what’s called operational false positive rate. You should disregard announcements about case rates in your community because of the complete fraud, and you cannot run a medical diagnostic test without those checks being run in situ every time. And so I argued repeatedly. And what I was finding, I was going heading was sent to ship, uh, inside. Um, I mean quite unpleasant staff on things like Twitter, PE people would be assigned to come and write up insulting and bad and hateful things about you. There was no way people were willing to engage scientifically, and I’ll tell you what that did very quickly. It caused less confidence and less angry people to stop coming. And I think that was the point of it. So as time went on, I found when I talked to fellow scientists, often retired scientists or academics, people I grew up with who are now, now hold chairs and immunology. Uh, they would agree with me privately that, you know, PCR testing as it was being done was completely nonsense and fraudulence that the attribution of deaths in the way we’ve done it, it’s completely stupid. Lockdown was irrational and probably killing lots of people. But the difference was they were not willing to say anything in public because they said it’s been, we’ve been, it’s been intimated that the authorities in the university don’t want us to challenge the government narrative or that of its advisors. So we’re not, and that’s what happened. We ended up with people looking the other way, and the more they look the other way. The fewer, uh, people that were like me. And so eventually I became noteworthy for that bloke that keeps saying things that scientist that keeps challenging. And then it was quite easy for them to write smear stories about me, call me an anti-vaxxer, uh, you know, suggests I lost my mind or gone off the rails because, you know, if you’re a viewer, you don’t have to listen to me if I’m any of those things, but I assure you I’m none of those things. And the reason I’m commenting is that. It’s not just my life. More importantly, that of my children and grandchildren is being stolen from us by a systematic process of fear and control. Uh, that’s going to culminate in, I think some, some very horrible times, and I’m, I’m desperate to wake you up. So when your government lies to you once or twice, we’re probably quite used to politicians, occasionally telling white lies, and we kind of let them. Still, when they lie to you about something technical, something that you can check, and they do repeatedly say over months, and they do it over many, many elements of the whole, of the same event. Please. You’ve got to believe me and not telling the truth. And if they’re not telling the truth, that means there’s something else. And I’m here today to tell you that there’s something very, very bad happening. Uh, and if you don’t pay attention, you will soon lose any chance to do anything about it. And don’t say you weren’t warned because I’ve been warning people as long as I can. And as hard as I can that you can still right now take your Society back. You can take it back tomorrow. You don’t need masks. They didn’t work. Forget lockdowns. They never slowed transmission, which took place mostly in institutions like hospitals and care homes. You don’t need to be vaccinated by, uh, inadequately tested and somewhat dangerous gene-based spike protein, inducing proteins, uh, and you don’t need to do what you’re told by corrupt scientists to. We are advising our government. If you don’t do that in the next few weeks, it will be over. I believe if we get to the point of a so-called vaccine passport, I think you will have lost the chance to take it back. And you will regret it. Government policy from the beginning before even the virus arrived in our country, uh, has turned decades of understanding of how. Uh, protect people from infectious diseases on its head. So we’ve never used lockdown before. Uh, and the good reason for that is it’s not effective. I’ve just explained that you need to be symptomatic to be infectious. So what we do is we quarantine the sick. We’ve always done that. We’ve quarantined the sick because that’s how you avoid infection. Yeah, the wider population. So the idea of quarantine in the, well, the so-called lockdown is a new invention, and it has no foundations whatsoever, either in science or in the history of, uh, controlling epidemics. Uh, also, mass testing of people without symptoms has, has no underpinning science at all. Um, and, uh, it’s, it’s just a way of frightening people. And this idea, for example, that you can be ill. Even though you have no symptoms and you can be a respiratory virus threat to someone else, even though you have no symptoms, that’s also invented in 20, 20 there’s simply no history of it. And it defies common sense as well. So most people probably are aware when I tell them you’ve got an incredibly good facility for noticing, as you walk towards somebody, whether they represent a health threat. Uh, you can tell just from the way their posture, how they’re moving, uh, you know, uh, have they got symptoms? Eyes, nose, and so on. And if they do, you instinctively move around them. And if you think about it, that goes right back to prehistory, where one of the things that could kill you in the wintertime would be catching a respiratory virus, perhaps being disabled for a few days. That might be enough to kill you; even if you are fit and well, that might be enough to kill you. And so, it’s a strong, evolutionary advantage for us to be highly aware of whether or not someone represented a threat to us. And the fact that we’re very good at that should tell you that there are real, reliable guides as to whether someone is a threat to you. So if, if they’re not symptomatic and not going to infect you with flu, they might stab you or hit you on the head. But they’re not going to give you a chest infection that could kill you. And yet time and time again, you know, lockdown, asymptomatic transmission. Hi, multiplication, molecular bar with you tools, uh, just over and over again, wearing masks. Um, all of these things have either never been used before, or we already knew that they didn’t work. And so I’m just, just piecing them together. You can go and check these things in five minutes if you haven’t done already, but when the government lies to you for a few weeks, and then it extends to a few months, and then for over a year, you know, come on, this is a respiratory virus. They say that it’s slightly worse in the elderly, and already Elvin is flu. It’s less severe to those who are younger and fit than is influenza. That’s clear from the published literature of COVID-19. So why is it you’re still hiding from a threat to your health as, say, the working-age population is less of a threat to you than influenza, and you’re still being told to run away and hide? Uh, after, I don’t know, 15 months or 14 months, something like that, you must understand that this is completely inappropriate, um, and something else is happening. And, but the point is I am a scientist. Uh, I’m not any good at what I’m doing right now. I have no training whatsoever about how to talk to people who are not scientists, but I would say. Uh, I’m a professional scientist. I’ve done very well. I’ve been, you know, really enjoyed my career, and it’s unwell. Um, you know, no one is paying me to do this. I am receiving absolutely nothing except criticism, you know, social isolation from my peers. Do you know? So what I would tell you, the reason I think you can trust what I’m saying is sincere. Is that I’m getting, uh, I’m paying to do this, right. I have lost work. I have had people I’ve known for decades who no longer want to speak to me. Um, so I am very sincere in what I’m doing. I’m warning you that governments worldwide and certainly yours locally are lying to you in various ways that are easy for you to establish. If you choose not to do that, there’s nothing someone like me can do about it. Okay. You’ve been subject to propaganda and lies by people who are very well-trained in how they do that. And I’m a complete amateur. So I’m simply telling you that if you want to check any of the things I have seen. You will find it to be true. And I would point out that if you find one of the things your government has said, which is not true, I ask you this. Why would you believe anything else they’ve told you? Don’t you think that retired ex visor guy might have something after all? You know, if I can show you and I’m going to show you a few things that you can go and check, and if, if I’m right and I am, then I, I beg of you to no longer assume what you’re being told is. That’s the best I can do for you. I can’t overwhelm. I can’t sweep away a year of highly accurately done propaganda by people who are lying to you. But like, all I can do is point out that they’re lying to you, and we will go through a number of examples. And it’s, it’s really in the end, it’s up to you if you would like to stand behind the desk called comfortable lies. There’s absolutely nothing I can do to stop you. But if you would like to go to the desk, Uncomfortable truths, which is the one I’m sitting behind, then welcome. I’d like to help you. One of the reasons I went into the commercial sector early on was I wanted to do applied research. I wanted to find it to be part of teams that would find, hopefully, find new cures very much. I’ve always liked applied research. Um, how things work. Why they sometimes don’t what we could do about that. That’s, that’s the love of my life. Um, but I had some peers who wanted to do blue-sky research, and back in the eighties, I guess they could do that. They could maybe get a position at a university and apply. For grants and then they could pursue things they thought were interesting. Um, and if they make good progress, that would often attract more funding. So they were driving the pharmaceutical research industry. Uh, now as much as it ever was, uh, still wants to pursue applied research. So some of the methods have changed, but the objective was pretty much as it was when I joined it in the year. But my academic friends report things are very different for them in universities. The major funding bodies are still governments, but they tend to decide directional themes often agreed upon internationally. And, if your research falls into one of those themes, you might get funded. And if it doesn’t, you, you, you were starved out because the only other funding source is large private institutions. So in Britain, for example, the Biggest one is the medical research council, which is public money. And the next one is the welcome trust; a substantial endowment used to drive research that’s of interest, to it’s to it, to its management. And so, you know, basically over time and more recently, academic researchers pretty much have to toe the line. So if some thematic regions are being pursued, Uh, private funding or, or endowments and, um, scholarships. And so on, that comes from private foundations. Those are the areas you have to work in, and it becomes quite difficult. Independent research is not only not supported, but it’s also often not tolerated. Uh, and that makes, I think it has made them, um, very easily persuaded. Should we say over the last year to do what they are told and most important? Um, and I’ve spotted this many times. They won’t contest the COVID narrative. So over the last three months, I’ve spoken to eight professors at UK universities whose discipline includes immunology. And I’ve discussed with them what I’m going to tell you about virus variants. And they’ve all agreed with my interpretation. None of them will say it. And it’s because I won’t get a grant from the welcome trust, or the medical research council suggested I won’t get grants if I speak about this stuff. So I want you to know that the academics in your country are easily pushed around, frankly, by politicians, uh, and people with lots of money. Then, in summary, the main change I’ve noticed over the last probably 40 years is that university research has been. Away from being, uh, directed mostly by the head of departments and individual researchers. Uh, and to be now much more directed from the center, from governments, and from those that provide most of the, uh, the grant funding and. Uh, it’s to be regressive. I think there’s some advanced disease. It means that the resources of a country do get focused on certain areas. And who’s to say that they’re not the right ones, but I think the key thing to note is that the academics are no longer independent. So if you expect a university professor to be knowledgeable, yeah, they probably are. But if you expect them to be honest and independent, then you’re naive because they’ve got to pay attention to whether. Uh, who’s buttering the bread. Who’s providing their funding, and they’re not able to be independent anymore. Um, probably the only people you’re going to find to true independence are, uh, former biotechnology CEOs. People like me. So I’m not a member of any club. Nobody pays me. Uh, and maybe some retired academics. Most of them still won’t speak out because they still have connections. They’re all departments. They might be having a Meritus position. So there are very few truly independent people, and the rest are, um, you know, subject to the influences you would expect if money comes from a very small number of sources. And it’s quiet, it’s quite different from a few years, from a few decades ago. So one of the seriously and upsettingly misleading kinds of things that you often hear is the implication, uh, perhaps even the statement. What gives you immunity to something, some infectious diseases, whether you’ve got antibodies to that thing. And, and I think they have done that because most people think that antibodies are what confers immunity. Indeed, antibiotics are quite important, uh, against certain infections, certainly bacterial infections. If you don’t have antibodies, uh, it can not be easy. Uh, that’s not the only part of your immunity and, importantly, immunity to viruses. Uh, it doesn’t rely on antibiotics at all. And I’ll just explain why that is. The virus is a tiny thing, really tiny, and their businesses get as quickly as they can inside your cells. So they bind to a receptor on the surface and inject themselves into your cell. Their inside antibodies are big molecules, and they’re generally outside your cells. So think about that for a moment. And viruses are in separate compartments. The virus is inside the cell; the antibodies are out inside the cell. So I’m not saying antibodies have no role, but they’re not very important. And there’ve been, this has been proven, some people in whom a natural experiment has occurred. They have a defect, and they don’t make antibodies, but they’re able to fight off. COVID-19 the virus, SARS, cov two quite well. And the way they do that is they have what’s called T-cell immunity, cellular immunity. And there are, uh, sales that are trained as it were to detect virus-infected cells and kill those cells. And that’s how you defend yourself against a virus. So all of these, um, mentions of antibody levels, it’s just bunk. It is not a good measure of whether or not you’re immune. Uh, it does give the idea that it does give evidence that you’ve been infected. But there, their persistence is not important to whether you’ve got immunity. Um, and so I feel I’ve noticed, uh, the emphasis on antibiotics I think is, is, is a psychological operation. To convince you a public member, uh, that you do know it, that it’s antibodies, that confer immunity. And so when they fall away, well, you must be losing immunity. I’m sorry. It’s not true. Uh, there are multiple arms of your immune system and what’s almost never talked about is T-cell or cellular immunity. It’s not a new thing either. We’ve known this for decades, so it’s not like our; maybe there’s something about T-cells it’s being implied. Um, T-cells recently come on the scene and, and maybe there were questions about how important it is. Absolute rot. We’ve known about T-cells for decades. They were clearly in my undergraduate textbooks. And we’ve known about their importance in defending you against respiratory viruses since probably the 1970s, certainly the 1980s. So don’t believe anything where people suggest to you that their role is uncertain. It’s just boom. Well, we’ve known for a very long time that they are central. Um, and you know, I would like to explain why the virus variants stories are just yet another lie, and it’s involved. T-cells, your immune system has multiple components because you are susceptible to infectious threats of various kinds, parasites, fungi, bacteria viruses. Those would be the main categories. Well, they invade and threaten you in entirely different ways. It would not be surprising then to learn that you’ve got, you know, four or five different arms of the immune system, innate immunity, mucosal, antibody T-cells, and compliment. There are all of these other beautiful systems that are integrated. One with them. Because you, it needs to defend you against all sorts of different threats in the environment. And what I’m telling you is that the emphasis on antibodies in respect of respiratory viral infections is wrong. And you could, you can establish that quite quickly by doing some searching. Uh, and therefore once you’ve found that for yourself, then you’ll probably realize, well, why do they keep telling us about antibodies when they’re probably not very important? Yeah. Uh, why aren’t they talking about T-cells that are well-established to be that which maintains, uh, you know, the defense of your tissues when this virus was first being talked about before it kind of landed in each of our countries. I think we were given; we were given exaggerated suggestions of exaggerated risks; you know, early on, people were talking about maybe 3% of people who were infected would die, which is truly awful. Um, something like influenza. Uh, it’s normally thought to be about 0.1%, one in a thousand, but even that doesn’t give you an idea of their, of your relative risks. And let me just tell you, um, you know, this anyway, the older you get, the lower, the chance that you’ll make your next birthday. So if you’re 60, as I am, uh, statistically, I’ve got about a 99% chance of making my next birthday, but by the time I reach my mid-eighties, you know, it’s okay. Maybe I only got about a 50% chance of making my next birthday. And inevitably, you reach a point where you, you know, you don’t turn the cards over. If you think of the risk of dying for having been infected by influenza, uh, frankly, the older you get and the ill you already are, uh, the greater, the risk that that will be what carries you off, you know, something has to, and this virus that causes COVID 19 is pretty much like. It’s just; it’s a slightly bigger risk for you. If you’re above 70 and already ill, it is a bigger risk to you than the flu. Not a great deal more, but it’s worth it slightly worse, but the Corolla is also true. If you’re younger than 70 and don’t have prior illnesses, it’s less of a risk to your health than influenza. So it’s just absurd that you should be happy or willing to let your economy and civil society be smarter. For something that represents a lower risk than influenza for almost everyone who is working, but that’s true. Given this virus represents, at worst, a slightly bigger risk to the old and ill than just influenza and less risk, a more negligible risk to almost everyone else who’s younger and fit. Uh, it was never necessary for us to have done anything. We didn’t need to do anything: lockdowns, masks, mass tests. Vaccines even, um, multiple, uh, therapeutic drugs are at least as effective as vaccines are, uh, that they’re already available and cheap. So inhaled corticosteroids that are used in asthma, uh, reduced symptomatology by about 90% studied this published this week. Um, an off-patent drug called ivermectin. Uh, it’s one of the most widely used drugs in the world. Uh, it can also reduce symptoms at any stage of the disease, including lethality, by about 90%. So you don’t need vaccines, and you don’t need any of the measures that have been introduced at all. So it’s not just a shade of opinion here. I would say objectively that none of those things were required, yet governments and their scientific advisors have lied to us for a year. And I think they’ve just produced, you know, mayhem potentially sort of fatal damage: economies and civil societies. So of the things that your governments and advisors have misled you about. And he was the catalyst for me making these recordings is the issue of virus variants and the following issue, the related issue of, uh, top-up vaccines or variant vaccines. So let me just quickly explain this is critical to your very survival. It’s quite normal for RNA viruses like SARS cov two; when it replicates to make typographical errors, that’s what it does, typos. Um, it’s got very good error detection, error correction systems. So it doesn’t make too many typos, but it does make some, which are called variants. Um, but you must know if you find the most different variant from the sequence identified. Uh, that variance and most distance is only 0.3% different from the original sequence. So I’ll say it another way. If you find the most different variance, it’s 99.7% identical to the original one, and I can assure you, and I’m going to explain why I’m sure that that amount of difference is not. Not possibly able to represent itself to you like a different virus. That’s what people are leading you to think that maybe variants will escape your immunity either caused by a vaccine or by natural infection. And it’s an absolute lie. So why do I know that? Or 17 years ago, 18 years ago, there was a virus called, sARS. Uh, she was very similar to SARS cov-2; it’s 80% similar to SARS cov two. And there were some experiments done last year where they found people who’ve been infected by SAR 17 years earlier and asked them to donate blood. And they did, and there were tests done on those cells in that blood. And they wanted to know where the circulating immune cells could still recognize SARS 17 years later. And they were; they’re all still there. Memory T-cells are circulating their body. That’s great. That’s what I would have expected. They also did a really important experiment. They showed those same people’s T-cells the new virus, SARS cov two, and unsurprisingly to me; they recognize that new virus, and that’s because the new virus is 80% similar to the old one, 20% different. So just to say again, a 20% difference was not enough. To a kid, these people’s immune system, that it was a new virus, easily recognize it as a sibling, a brother, a cousin of something that conquered already.

Your Government is Lying As They Masquerade a New Covid-19 Delta Variant Virus

So when your government scientists tell you that a variant that’s 0.3% different from SARS could masquerade as a new virus and be a threat to your health, you should know, and I’m telling you they are lying. If they’re lying, and they are. Why is the pharmaceutical industry making top-up vaccines? They are making them; you should be as terrified at this point as I am because there’s absolutely no possible justification for their manufacturer, but they’re being made. And the world’s medicines, regulators have said, because they are quite similar to the original vaccines, the ones that are being given me. Uh, we won’t be asking them to do any clinical safety studies. So let me just say again, the variants are not different enough to represent a threat to use. You do not need to top up vaccines. They are being made, and the regulators that more or less waved them through. I’m terrified of that. There’s no possible benign interpretation of this.  I believe that they’re going to be used to damage your health and possibly kill you seriously. I can see them. Sensible interpretation, other than a serious attempt at mastery population, will provide the tools to do it and plausible deniability because they’ll create another story about some biological threats. You’ll line up and get your top-up vaccines, and a few months or a year or so later, you will die of some peculiar explicable syndrome, and they won’t be able to associate it with the top-up vaccine. That’s my belief that they’re lying to you about variants so they can make, uh, damaging, uh, top-up vaccines that you don’t need at all. And I think there’ll be used for malign purposes. And if you don’t wake up, that’s what’s going to happen. I think during that. I have heard many people worry about, uh, the origins of this SARS, cov two. Um, I don’t have a firm opinion about it because the evidence, you know, it looks both ways and so on, but you must know that, uh, it’s not true that we don’t know a lot about it. We know an enormous about it, a tremendous amount about it. Um, it’s very similar to a virus that people have been infected with. Uh, and survived before. He’s a lot less lethal than SARS. It spreads more quickly, but it’s a lot less lethal. And we know that the people it injures and kills are only elderly and or ill, usually both. Um, and so we’re talking about less than 0.1%. It’s been moving through our communities now for well over a year. You know, it’s not some mysterious thing that’s going to just leap out from behind the carpet. It’s a street—respiratory virus. Most people have completely ample immunity to repel it. Uh, and I’ll tell you a few things about it once you’ve been infected. You weren’t immune. There’s no uncertainty about it. It’s been studied hundreds of times. Now. Lots of literature has been published. So once you’ve been infected often, you’ll have no symptoms. Uh, you’re now immune, probably for decades. That would be my default expectation for decades. It’s simply not true that the variants that it throws off as it replicates are sufficiently different from each other to represent any threat at all. It’s not even unlikely. Impossible based on the thousands and thousands of variants that have been formed; they’re all very, very similar to the original. I joke about them and call them Samians because they’re so similar. You might as well see them as the same. And so you’ve been infected. You mostly survive unless you’re very close to death. Or then immune probably for decades, possibly for life. It’s not true that, uh, the VAT variants represent any kind of threat, not true that you need a top-up vaccine. Most of you don’t need a vaccine at all. Most of you would be well advised to stay away from experimental, uh, vaccines. Unfortunately, that does come with a blood clot risk. Why would you take a risk with your health for something that’s not a threat? So I’m particularly troubled at the moment by, uh, the repeated mention in the media and by all sorts of people of so-called vaccine passports. Now, um, the only reason we’ve ever had, uh, passports for sure, for immunizations prove you’ve been immunized against certain diseases. Uh, are those when the diseases—extremely lethal something like yellow fever. And when you might otherwise bring back to a community that has no immunity whatsoever, a dangerous pathogen. So if you want to go to certain parts of the world where yellow fever is present, you need to be vaccinated. One to protect you from a disease that might kill you. And two to make sure you don’t bring it home to people. Uh, in a community where there’s no yellow fever. And so, of course, there’s, there’s no immunity to it. You might have a little card that says you were immunized once for life for yellow fever that doesn’t tell you; you need a passport against a common and garden respiratory virus. Let me explain why, if you’re an elderly and vulnerable person, you’ve chosen to be vaccinated; you are now protected against that virus. It doesn’t matter what anyone around you is doing; whether they’ve got the virus or not got the virus, you’ve got your armor on. You don’t need to see anyone else’s vaccine status. You don’t need to know anything about them. If you’re a younger and fit person, and you’ve looked at the literature and decided, rightly, you don’t need to take a vaccine. Cause you’ve got excellent immunity. If your own, you two don’t care what the immune status of anybody around you. So you don’t need to know vaccine passport status. So I’ve just explained someone who’s been vaccinated. Doesn’t need to see someone else’s vaccine passport and someone not vaccinated. He doesn’t need to see anyone else’s vaccine passport. They don’t provide you with any safety at all. They’re not required at all. What they provide, though, is complete control. Over your movements to whoever controls the database that your vaccination status is connected to. Let me just quickly explain it. I hope you grasp this because this is not optional. This is what’s going to take over your life in a way that, uh, George Orwell in 1984, didn’t even dream of imagining you’ve been vaccinated and you’ve been awarded a vaccine passport on an app. It’s going to be the world’s first. Database that contains your name, a unique digital ID in the same format as absolutely everybody else on the planet on the same database. And it’ll have like an editable health-related flag that will say thumb up that you’ve got, you’ve been vaccinated, or maybe a red flag. If you haven’t been now, the algorithm that rules that workout, what you can do with, or without your vaccine passport, that’s, what’s going to control. The rest of your lives until you die. So you might think, oh, that’s an exaggeration. They’re only going to need vaccine passports, perhaps to enter a sports ground or big public building like a museum. That’s that might be true initially. But imagine if they say, um, no, you need your valid vaccine passport to enter any large, um, you know, shopping complex. Uh, and then if we launch. That’s going to provide coercive, coercive pressure on people. Who’s chosen not to be vaccinated. They’ll have to get vaccinated. Now it’s an illegal thing for your government to coerce you to accept any medical treatment. And it’s against the Nuremberg code that was put in place after the Nazi doctors were convicted. Performing experiments on people, including lethal experiments that prevent you, coercing people to take experimental therapies because now they’re taking part in medical experiments against their will. But if this vaccine passport system is up and running and you’re told, say that you can’t tend to any shop at all without beeping your vaccine passport; no, you can’t tend to any retail establishment. You can’t control those rules. You have no idea. Who’s setting those rules. Don’t allow their system to come into force. It’s going to be used to coerce you. And let me just give you another example. You know, those variants on the top top-up vaccines I spoke about, I believe if you allow vaccine passports to come into force, you’ll be pinged one day, and it’ll advise you to go to the medical center to have your top-up vaccine. And if you choose not to your vaccine, passport validity will expire. Which means you won’t be able to enter a shop. You may not eventually be able to use your bank card, or somebody needs to set a rule that says as after given the date before any bank card can be used, a vaccine passport has to beat onto the card reader. So take it from me. You don’t need vaccine passports. They provide nothing whatsoever to you or anybody. You will give away to whoever controls that database, and the complete rules control everything you do for safety. Let me give you one last example. You own this vaccine passport, and it pings. And in addition to advising you, you need to come to the health center for your top-up vaccine, perhaps your second one in, in a year. Uh, it also advises you that you need to bring your small grandchild. Because your daughter hasn’t brought the little lad in yet, and they say, if you don’t get that grandchild down, your vaccine passport will expire. And that of your daughter now try resisting that simply think this system is being put in place using lies, and it’s been put in place using lies for some purpose. And I believe that purpose is complete totalitarian control. And I think the meaning of that is going to. Master population. I can’t think of it. There is a single benign interpretation for the simple creation of these top-up vaccines, let alone the lies surrounding them. And I’m terrified that the combination of vaccine passports and top-up vaccines will lead to mass depopulation, deliberate execution, and potentially billions of people. You can start. Once, once you’ve heard what I’m saying, even if you like the idea of vaccine passports, put the damn thing in place using written records or something, something that’ll, you know, allow you, you know, to, to, to show you’ve been vaccinated, but do not allow it to be on an interoperable global fixed format database, because that will be the end of human freedoms. And it’s, I just see no way of recovering from that once the system’s up. The frustration I feel is that we can’t get this information to very many people. And very few of the people who live here will do anything with it. That’s why I’m literally at the end of my rope. Um, I’ve tried and tried and tested, and I can see that, uh, the people running this have played an absolute blinder they’ve they must’ve thought about it for some time. Uh, and they basically, they’ve used a relatively small number of lies and chosen to be quite close to something plausible. Um, and then they’ve just, you know, pounded this script of half a dozen points relentlessly. And the only other thing they’ve needed is to frighten people to death and then censor everybody else. That’s all we’ve needed to do a really simple story, repeated censorship, and fear. Uh, and here we are. So it’s just remembered we’re subject to censorship. So, of course, I’d been busy as hell, and of course, you’d never have heard of me. This is the problem. Almost no one has heard of me or anyone speaking similarly, almost nobody, you know, I’m, it’s just amazing that, uh, but it’s, it just shows how, in fact, one of the reasons I’m very disappointed, um, is I’ve, I’ve had a sort of realization over recent weeks that it doesn’t matter what we do. If we do the things that those operating this, uh, global fraud expect, we will. They already know we’ll do these things. They’ve, they’ve mapped it out, and they’ve worked out. What are the things that are most likely to happen? It will be well; there’ll be some noisy individuals. Well, as long as we can control the share of voice they get, we don’t need to be worried about them. And I’m worried that I’ve done nothing different from what they have already modeled and war games, and that did not work, or they wouldn’t have moved off with this plan. So, unfortunately, the conclusion I’ve got. Uh, collectively, we need to do something unexpected. And if we do expect things, we will lose. Um, that’s a bit pessimistic, but forgive me, I’ve been a research scientist all my life, not a propagandist. It’s only recently I’ve realized that I’m in a trap that I’m doing. I’m playing my role as a, almost like an icon in their game. I’m a representative of a tiny number of people. Who’d be noisy, and they’re fine. The government knows who I am. I know people in the government, um, and I’ve been advised. They knew who I am. Uh, but they won’t do anything because I’m ineffective. They haven’t left me alone because I’ve, I’m off-target. They’ve left me my own because they know I can’t reach anybody. I, I briefly worked with, uh, the UK chief scientific advice. So Patrick balance when he was, uh, as I was, uh, researchers in the welcome research labs in about, um, the late 1980s, you know, um, I know who he is. He knows who I am, but they leave me alone because I’m ineffective. If I become effective, that would be different. But I think they’re not worried because they have complete control of the mass media, TV, radio, newspapers, internet, and the only people who will see me. Are real people already looking for information? So I doubt I’ll convert Bernie, many people because people who need to be converted are not looking there. They’re looking at the leading media, and that message is completely controlled and hermetically sealed. So if we carry on doing the same things, we’re just playing out our expected role in a simulation that whoever’s running this has already thought about. So I don’t want to worry you, but it’s probably true. I hope that, for example, um, I think the United States, uh, God bless it. So, uh, the federal system, you’ve, you’ve shown diversity. Some states have done different things from others. And so I think it’s quite helpful because of the people. Not just in the US but outside, it can see that it hasn’t made any difference. You know, if you’re a South Dakota or Florida or California, it’s all pretty much turned out to be the same. So the measures that have been put in place are unnecessary and have made no difference except to worse than the outcome. People who live in those states have destroyed the economy and civil society and probably cost people their lives by depriving them of ready access to normal health care. Our responses to this virus have been smashed. But in the European countries, in every country, whatever set of measures they chose, they were uniform north, south, east, and Western. So we never know. Any opportunity to see what would have been the counterfactual. So each country is pretty much hermetically sealed, and, you know, whoever is running, this has complete control of the message and the medium, something significant for you to know the vaccines that these gene-based vaccines are. They’re not approved by any medical authority, like the FDA Europe. Medical, uh, agency medicines, agency, are available only for emergency use authorization. So if there wasn’t an emergency, they simply couldn’t be administered at all, but you must know that they are emergency youth authorized only. Yeah. We don’t know very much about them. We don’t know anything at all about the potential for long-term side effects. So if it turns out, for example, um, that they induced cancer in one in 10 people, I don’t think that’s likely, but since we don’t know anything, anything’s possible, right. So it’s inappropriate to be giving these, uh, to more than the most vulnerable people. So when they first were emergency use authorized. And they were to be used only in the elderly and already L I could understand why they were doing that. But when in the UK, the government said, now we’ve got the list of everybody else all the way down to the age of 18 that we want all of them to be offered the vaccine. And it’s more than an author. Uh, and now they’re even running studies in children who don’t suffer from COVID-19, not a single child in the UK who was well has caught this virus and died. But there were 10 million children under the age of 10, who I’m confident they’re going to be wanting to vaccinate. Now, this is entirely wrong. You know, there’s simply no basis for doing this. It will result in injury and death of some people, every medicine has some side effects, and you would never use it on the scale unless the people receiving it were at risk of the illness. And they’re not. So, uh, you’ll notice if you ask some friends who’ve been vaccinated. Were they informed in writing that these are experimental medicines that have not yet been approved? If you weren’t, you were administered experimental agents without your consent. That is contrary to the Nuremberg code, a code put in place after world war II, recognizing the human foul experiments performed by Nazi doctors. The Nazi doctors, by the way, were hung for their crimes against humanity. And I’m sorry to say those NHS doctors who are administering these agents to people who are not at risk from the virus, and they’re not telling them that they’re experimental, are also breaching the Nuremberg code. And I believe they’re doing it knowingly. And I think there should be a Nuremberg. And I think those physicians should be tried on those charges and appropriate sentences handed down. So if you’re one of those physicians, I hope to be around to see you in the court. This is undoubtedly a time for people who know or suspect that our politicians and scientific advisors say what is being said to you is wrong. It’s time to stand up and say no. Withdraw your consent. There’s something awful happening. You know, it, those people, if you are listening to me that you’ve suspected for some time that, that this isn’t right. Don’t look away. Don’t look away. It’s time now to find other people like you, who are not quite sure but suspicious. Find somebody else and talk to. Because if you find someone else who thinks Khan, I’m glad you said that because I’ve felt, this is lies as well. Then the two of you can go and find a third person and just net; once you have woken up and realize you’re being lied to, it’s very, very frightening. You don’t have to do anything with that at first, except don’t forget that realization. Find someone else who also feels the same. Don’t be afraid to be a little bit wrong. The people around you don’t know any better do. If they’re experts, well, they’re probably not going to be, uh, then they would be able to tell you what I’m saying is true. And if they’re like you suspicious, but they’re not experts, then they’re not going to be able to tell you you’re wrong. So if you think something’s wrong, you’re right. Find someone else who feels the same; never look back and accept what the government’s telling you. Um, it’s your last chance to rescue your own Liberty and that of your children and grandchildren it’s going to. So if you’re suspicious, if you’re frightened, if you think something’s up, you’re right. This is our last chance. I think we’re in the UK of liberal democracy in the past few weeks, and it will then vanish forever. So, you know, take your courage in your hands. The worst that will happen is someone will laugh at you. It’s not a big deal. Is it to find someone else who’s also suspicious. And if you find that person go and find yet. You don’t need to do anything violent. You just need to say, do you know, stop? I’m withdrawing my consent. This is a stupid experiment. We’ve had enough now—end of the story. Go back to normal life. That’s all you need to do at the moment. It’s so astonishingly simple normality is literally arm’s length, but it won’t be soon. Suppose the vaccine passports system is voted in by our corrupt people in the Western. Yeah. Well, also stupid. That will be the end of liberal democracy. And I don’t think there’s any way out of that. We’ll be standing at the gates of hell. Yeah.  


Subscribe To Our Newsletter