Tuesday, June 18, 2024
HomeCOVID-19Mike Yeadon has been proved right – we have been lied to

Mike Yeadon has been proved right – we have been lied to


THERE was a time when the former Pfizer chief’s name was not out of the UK’s social media headlines. Mike Yeadon is, as you know, the first senior UK research scientist and specialist biochemist and immunologist to put his head over the parapet and express his deep concerns about lockdown and the PCR tests and then the Covid ‘vaccines’. 

His views were not just unwelcome in the government scientific establishment: they were ignored, derided and silenced. Yet, in this world of reliance on scientific expertise, there was never any question about his. From the autumn of 2020 when he wrote of the the PCR false positive pseudo-epidemic and with other European senior doctors and scentists wrote to the European Medicines Agency warning of the barely tested mRNA vaccines, and onwards, he must have felt he was hitting his head against a brick wall. By last December he had had enough and quit this country for Florida with his amazing, supportive and lovely wife Joanna.

Just over a year ago James Delingpole conducted a marathon interview with him that we published the transcript of, all linked to here. 

Twelve months on James tracked him down in Florida and repeated the exercise. About twenty minutes into the interview James asks Mike whether his position has hardened.  What comes out in his answers is how serious concerns that he’d identified as early as spring 2020 have been borne out.

Over the following days we’ll be publishing a series of edited extracts from the interview on what Dr Yeadon calls Covid lies:

MIKE YEADON: I became very suspicious quite early. This idea of lockdown, as soon as I heard it, I thought, ‘This is prison slang,’ you know and I thought, ‘I’ll go and find the literature that supports lockdown or shelter in place.’ 

There’s none. So, there isn’t any. It’s never been used anywhere ever before. Right? So I’d realised by the end of March that we were going down a nasty dark tunnel and then, when, sure enough, instead of being – was it three weeks to flatten the curve – or anyway when Mr Johnson extended the lockdown, that’s when my hair started coming out. Because I thought, ‘There’s no reason for them ever to release it.’ 

I think at first I came up with this idea – because I probably couldn’t believe that it could be planned – for two reasons. One, I didn’t think people would be that evil; and two, it’s too complicated, surely. But we’ll come back to both of those.

And, therefore, I thought, ‘Well, then these people are opportunists.’ You know, like if you’re a green person and you’d really rather we didn’t fly or drive our cars, you’d think ‘Oh my God, there’s reduced activity in travel, we’ll take advantage of that.’ And then there’ll be other people in the financial system who could perhaps use it to transfer huge sums of money through subsidies from the poor people who pay the taxes to the rich people who receive the subsidies ultimately, so they could be . . . and then the pharma industry, you know, they might have been tinkering with some vaccines, it’s like, ‘Oh my God, instead of a few hundred million doses, maybe we can jab everybody twice.’ You know, I could imagine that could be quite enticing. 

And for a few months I had satisfied myself. The phrase I used was ‘convergence opportunism’. That kind of sounds sensible, but it’s bullshit. And I kind of thought it wasn’t quite right. Why? Too much preparation? How is it that the whole world ends up with enough PCR tests to be able to kind of swab whatever the number of people who are being tested almost everywhere, from Costa Rica to Mexico to New York and so on. That literally requires – it probably has been tens of billions of these things – more units of any single medical product probably that’s ever been made before apart from aspirin or something, or the over-the-counter headache tablets. There was too much preparation (involved).

But on to the point of ‘people wouldn’t be that bad, would they?’ I kept coming across examples. Here’s one, for example, you may remember, I think it was in the 1980s where there was a contaminated blood scandal . . . And in fact, it happened to the son of my sister’s best friend who lived next door and her son had been given this contaminated blood product to treat his haemophilia. And I think he had got one of the nastier hepatitises and was at risk of dying, either of the hepatitis or of cancer, which can follow from it. 

And it turns out that the civil servants and the governments of the day knew perfectly well that the blood products either were either contaminated or were likely to be, because the blood products came at low cost, because they were collected from prisoners and intravenous drug users in the US who could just walk in and donate blood. And the governments, they’re basically just like, ‘Well, we don’t really care. We won’t be caught and it’ll be someone else’s problem.’ And there have been several such examples. 

If people would like to go and look back at the The Covid Lies [set out in a speech in May 2020] (to see) how much of it was truth – and the answer, unfortunately, is none of it. There are 12 and I keep adding to them. 

1. In order to get people to run for the hills and do what they’re told, they lied to us about how lethal this virus was, as compared with other respiratory viruses. So extraordinary lethality. It’s not true, is it? It’s a little bit worse than flu. 

2. They said because it’s new, there’d be no prior immunity. Well, that’s always unlikely, because viruses, even under mysterious circumstances, if they’re related to prior viruses, some people will have been exposed to relatives of those earlier viruses. And it’s true. I knew it would be true and it was true. So somewhere between a third and a half had some kind of immunity. It could be SARS-CoV-1. It could be from other . . . there are several coronaviruses, some of which cause human common colds. So I think there are, like, seven coronaviruses now known to infect human airways. But certainly, that was the idea that we’re battered by . . . you know? 

The no-virus people sometimes get on my case . . . But when I strike back and say, ‘I’ll accept there’s no viruses as long as you will provide me with an alternative means to explain transmission.’ The common experience is that people do catch colds from each other. So if you’re telling me it’s purely, what do they call it? Terrain. Like depression or bad nutrition. So how come then a fit, well and cheerful person can visit a friend with a cold and then get a cold? . . . So if you don’t call it viruses and you say it’s not this little sphere that’s an exosome, that’s fine, you know? But I think there’s a transmissible agent and I think that’s people’s common experience. 

Furthermore, at an immunological level, you can detect antibodies to, and T-cells, that respond to bits of things that we call viruses. So even if they’re not it, there’s what I call this molecular fingerprint (that) is left after an infection. 

So it’s the common experience of being infected with respiratory illnesses. 

But, so, yes, that was two and I have deviated. But other people, what were they saying? ‘No one’s safe till everyone’s safe.’ I mean, that’s . . . come on. 

3. We knew at the time and it’s been hardened ever since, that pretty much the only people who are at serious risk of getting really ill and dying are the people who are close to the end of their life by virtue of age and usually additional chronic life-shortening illnesses. So that you can see already we shouldn’t be locking down, because it’s not much worse than flu, if anything. And lots of people have immunity. The only people that matter, really, are the old people. 

4. Then, very quickly, we were told you could carry and transmit this thing, this virus, without any symptoms yourself. That’s just not true. I’m not saying it never occurs, but it’s extremely rare, it’s epidemiologically irrelevant. So I would say that was the central psychological deceit. Actually, I’ll just pause and say that again. The idea that you could carry and transmit, give others this infective agent without having any symptoms yourself, is the central psychological deceit. So you’ve been told to be frightened: ‘It’s really horrible thing. And you’ll all have to wear masks and separate,’ like, any person walking down the street might breathe on you and give it to you and you could kill Granny and so on. And people still believe that now, two years later, even though the data (says otherwise) and their experience is they don’t know anyone who isn’t relatively old and already ill that’s died. 

But nevertheless, so that was the central . . . it’s brilliant, brilliant psychology.


We will continue with Dr Yeadon’s proven and borne out Covid lies tomorrow.

You can listen to the whole conversation on James Delingpole’s podcast here, including Mike’s account of how he legally entered the USA across the Mexican border at the end of last December. 

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Kathy Gyngell
Kathy Gyngell
Kathy is Editor of The Conservative Woman. She is @kathygyngelltcw on GETTR and is back on Twitter.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.