Mike Yeadon Interview: How you know your government is lying about Covid-19 To summarize what Dr. Yeadon has to say in this lengthy video: 2. PCR Tests as they are being conducted are meaningless 3. Lockdown is ineffective as a means to prevent transmission: the correct action is to quarantine the sick not the healthy 4. Covid is less of a threat that the flu, except to the elderly and those with certain predisposing conditions 5. Immunity to infection depends not on antibodies, but on T-cells* 6. Cheap non-proprietary drugs are highly effective in reducing covid infection and treating those already infected. * Here's the controversial bit: that immunity to Covid infection does not depend on antibodies. Is that true. As a non expert, I don't know. But the whole objective of the mRNA vaccines is to induce antibodies. And in particular, it is claimed that the antibodies produced are "neutralizing", which means that they resist infection. It is on this point that Yeadon is in total disagreement with vaccine specialist Geert vanden Bossche, who argues that immunity achieved with the mRNA vaccines will be lost as genetic variants of the virus emerge that escape control by the antibodies induced by the vaccines. Yeadon has gone so far as to call vanden Bossche's position evil, i.e, deliberately false. 7. Yeadon claims, correctly I believe, that Covid variants will not escape Covid T-cell immunity. With respect to this point, however, it is the case that apart from those who have already been infected with Covid or a sufficiently closely related Corona virus, none have Covid T-cell immunity. Moreover, Yeadon does not deal with the question of neutralizing Covid antibodies, i.e., whether the mRNA vaccines can in fact work, or whether even minor genetic differentiation in the circulating virus result in immune escape from vaccine induced antibodies. Rather, Yeadon turns to the "top-up" vaccines being prepared now to induce antibody immunity to the antibody immune-escape variants. These booster shots, he fears, are designed not to restore Covid immunity but to use genetic technology to kill you. Unfortunately, there is no real public debate among experts to discuss these issues. Specifically about: (a) How effective can antibody immunity to Covid be (the number of so-called break-through Covid infections of vaccinated individuals suggests that it is not very effective) and how rapidly is Covid escape from antibody immunity through genetic differentiation occurring; and (b) What possibility exists that an intentionally lethal mechanism could be included in a supposed antibody inducing mRNA vaccine? Instead, we have merely propaganda deployed against anyone who questions the pretty certainly badly if not catastrophically flawed public policy response to Covid-19. |
| BS ALERT: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has recommended that people who have recovered from the Covid-19 virus get vaccinated, arguing that health officials don’t know how long natural immunity lasts.
But even if you have already been vaccinated, IT IS POSSIBLE AND ACTUALLY QUITE LIKELY that you could be infected with the virus that causes COVID-19. But Note: of the two, immunity due to past infection should provide much greater protection than the immunity induced by the so-called "vaccines"since it includes the full spectrum immune response, including long-lasting, probably life-long, T-Cell immunity, as well as the short-lived antibody response induced by the vaccine. _____ *Presumably what the CDC is trying to say here is that "you could be re-infected with Covid-19, not that you "could be infected with the virus that causes Covid-19 again." Note: there is no virus that "causes Covid-19 again," there is just a virus that causes Covid-19, which, allegedly, may infect you again and again unless you have the vaccine -- a claim in support of which there is little if any evidence, and given the known limitations to the effectiveness of the so-called vaccine, is almost certainly untrue. |
Look at this, CS:
ReplyDeleteMay 4, 2021
COVID Bites: May 4, 2021
By Meghan Festa
COVID Surge, visitation at FMH, alarming rates in Fairbanks, unvaccinated travel, COVID Roundtable discussion
COVID SURGE: FHP and the community are in the midst of a dangerous COVID surge. The number of COVID positive inpatients at FMH yesterday was higher than we have seen throughout the entire pandemic. These patients are younger (we have patients in their 20’s) much sicker and taking longer, sometimes 2-3 weeks in the hospital, to recover. This is worrisome for several reasons:
The sicker the patients are, the greater the risk that they may not recover.
A two-three week stay for patients…
I bumped into this because I was curious about the places in Fairbanks offering vaccination.
If this is true, it means the age stratification of Covid19 has altered. WTF? It is terrifying, if true.
https://www.foundationhealth.org/covid19/fhp_covid_19_updates
Looks like a repeat of the India story. Covid plus the pseudo vaccine = viral immune escape + tens of thousands of variants, some much more dangerous than the original Wuhan strain.
DeleteIt is not out of the question the above surge is due to vaccination. We won't know until someone bothers to inquire.
ReplyDeleteIt is either brought on by the vaccination or is the result of the emergence of variants of the original virus.
I don't know, but it does not seem likely the age risk profile of the same organism would suddenly change so dramatically.
There is a change in the demographics of the disease in India, too.
ReplyDeleteNow watch this. It had started to be well known the poorer, more undeveloped countries of the world had suffered far fewer fatalities than the wealthier. This seemed a paradox until one recalled the age stratification of the disease. Older people are most affected and there are far fewer older people in these countries.
But what we're seeing now, wow! Death is ravaging places such as India.
It might be now we're in the midst of a terrible, terrible health care crisis such as has never been. And you've got to wonder how we got here.
Covid + "Vaccine" = Global depopulation bomb.
DeleteFertility rates were already down in 2020. But we may not have seen anything yet.
It looks like Geert vanden Bossche was correct to raise the alarm about vaccine-dependent immune escape, and Michael Yeadon, formerly of Pfizer Inc. is a shill for the coverup.
One thing to look out for are direct effects of the virus on reproductive capacity.
Are we living through the end of our civilization? The massive stupidity and evil of this is beyond comparison. We're making mistakes we know better than to make. We're playing with fire and we're already burned, burned, burned.
ReplyDeleteIt did appear India had made it through the crisis quite well and had even reached herd immunity.
Nevertheless the mass vaccination program was indiscriminately forced on millions of Indians, whether at risk or not, whether with prior immunity or not. And now masses of people are dying in what may be round one of decimation or worse.
I don't agree Yeadon is a shill for the coverup. Back when you linked to his thoughts I was heartened when you asked whether in substance there was any difference between Yeadon and Geert vanden Bossche. There really was a question if they were saying the same thing in different words. It is hard to believe a shill for the coverup would claim the purpose is massive depopulation. (And now we may indeed be seeing the first of massive depopulation.)
I would never take the other side of the bet about reproductive capacity. I just betcha we'll see such a thing in the next couple years. Good Lord.
"I don't agree Yeadon is a shill for the coverup"
DeleteThere is something in what Yeadon is saying that seems to make little sense. Or at least Yeadon is failing to make his argument clear.
I have attempted to focus on what seem to be the critical issues in my boxed summary and comment on Yeadon's recent (May 15 interview, see link to video above).
Yeadon is surely very bright, but I have an uncomfortable feeling that he has either gone nuts, or he has an agenda that prevents him dealing straight-forwardly with the facts.
However, what he says about T-cell immunity is surely correct and important, and it suggests that the best public policy would have been, as Yeadon asserts, to treat Covid in the same way that flu is treated, but taking extra care to protect the elderly and other vulnerable individuals.
That way, we'd have achieved herd immunity by now, including durable T-cell immunity, with little economic or social disruption and the virus would have died down or disappeared entirely.
Thanks for that summary of what's at issue between Yeadon and von Bossche. There's a lot here to ponder.
ReplyDeleteIf I was an expert, I would lay low, not out of cowardice, and even if I had a strong opinion.
I would lay low because the correct answer very well could be WE DON'T KNOW.
We're basically in a kind of phase 3 or phase 4 test and at the end of the test, probably experts will be in a position to tell us what happened and why.
Notice the experts who spoke out very strongly all fell silent. I figure they think they at least tried and now it is not going to accomplish anything to get themselves murdered or in some other nasty way permanently silenced. (Complete discrediting could work quite well.)
I also notice some of the critics are retired and are "former" this or that. That's reminds me of retired general's syndrome, speaking out against war after a long career of making or fighting wars, or the various professors emeriti who dare criticize global warming or climate change or whatever it is now called.
"If infected, children are rarely symptomatic and, like asymptomatic adults, they do not spread the disease. However, as a result of infection, children get full spectrum SARS2 immunity, including long-lasting T-Cell immunity from infection."
ReplyDeleteWhat precisely can this mean? Does it mean when infected children do not develop a heavy enough viral load to show symptoms? Or does it mean they do get symptoms, but very, very mild ones, such as feeling a little tired and run down but not actually sick? Or a slightly runny nose, which clears up quickly and is hardly noticed? (Parents observe it and decide to keep an eye on it, but not worry unless it gets worse?) It certainly means children do not become severely ill, require hospitalization, or require hospitalization and then die.
But do we really know if children are infected? Do we know anything about who has been infected and who has not?
In part this comes back to T-cell immunity and your comment about T-cell immunity testing, while available, not being offered. (I assume this T-cell immunity testing is not bogus, as is the PCR testing.) If this testing were offered on the same wide scale as the PCR testing, we would not only know who had T-cell immunity, we'd have a much more accurate reading of who had been infected in the first place. What's more, we'd have a wide sample to compare who had antibodies through vaccination, who had antibodies and T-cells, and who had T-cells-- and who became re-infected. That, it seems to me, would go a long way to making heads or tails of this messy situation. It would also answer the question about Yeadon being right or wrong: we'd know.
Here's a week-old paper indicating the status of Covid T-Cell immunity testing. Apparently such tests are feasible, although currently expensive. I think the Adaptive Technologies test costs US$500.00.
Delete