Mike Yeadon on the toxicities deliberately designed into the Covid ‘vaccines’

This is the second in a series of edited extracts of James Delingpole’s recent podcast with Dr Mike Yeadon (PhD in respiratory pharmacology, co-founded a biotech company and conducted research at Pfizer) to discuss the evil WEF, their own faith journeys, ‘Gollum-class AI’ and more.

Before their emergency authorisation, Dr Yeadon warned the European Medicines Agency that these gene-based vaccines were not safe. Since then he has come to believe in a sinister agenda behind their determined rollout. What follows is the part of the podcast where James questions him on this. Mike explains rational drug design and how he saw obvious ‘designed-in’ toxicities in the mRNA and DNA Covid ‘vaccines’.

JAMES DELINGPOLE: How do you persuade me that these vaccines, which were, due to the miracle of modern medical science, rolled out very quickly to deal with an unprecedented, hitherto unknown viral . . . variation on a virus, possibly leaked from a biolab, that these vaccines were actually part of a global depopulation programme?

DR MICHAEL YEADON: How would I persuade you that that’s what they were for? Well, [if] you are thinking of someone like, for example, Boris Johnson [might have been], I don’t believe for a moment he was any part of the plan, but at some point, he knew something . . . 

JD: Yeah. Yeah. 

MY: I don’t think very many people know, even on the perpetrators’ side . . . that these injections are designed to kill people. But I bet Boris Johnson had no idea that they were designed to injure people . . .  I think very few people would have thought this will be, you know, a depopulation event. If you’re asking, ‘Mike, in a few sentences persuade me that there’s something . . .’

JD: Yes, that’s what I’m saying. 

MY: So, I would say, I’d point out to people that drugs, pharmaceuticals, are designed. They don’t just fall out of the sky. So unless you extract them from a plant, they’re synthetic, someone has to design them. You don’t just grab a handful of atoms and hope it does something. You do what’s called intelligent or rational drug design. You think about what you’re trying to accomplish. And, you [will]know, from hundreds or thousands of examples in the past, what kind of chemical structures would potentially allow that objective to be met. So if it’s an oral drug, you don’t pick something that’s a thousand molecular weight because high molecular weight drugs don’t tend to be absorbed. 

There are some rules. About the size, about the kind of chemical structures, about the charges on them and so on. You use all of these skills and knowledge, various databases, and you try to design a molecule to do what you want. And you try to combine a synthesis of a test drug – a prototype and a test and you iterate between the two, trying to get closer and closer to the objective. Sometimes you get to select a clinical candidate and sometimes not. 

I point all of that out to say that this so-called rational drug design is what I did for over 30 years. And I was reasonably good at it. You learn generalities and then some specialities and so on. So when I look at the structure of something, I can often see intent in that structure, because I put myself in the mind of the designer. What were they trying to accomplish, looking at the structure? 

When I apply those rational drug design skills that I have, and I look at the vaccines, I can see three or four obvious designed-in toxicities that cannot possibly be there by accident, because people like me would have been designing them. So although people say, ‘Oh, you’ve never worked in vaccines,’ no, I didn’t. [But] these are not vaccines. You know, in no way are they typical. So if I’d had 25 years’ experience in traditional vaccines, it would be of no use, folks, because these are not like that. What they’re much more like are the kind of molecules I worked in. They are larger, these are macromolecules. I tended to work in smaller molecules, but the design principles are the same. What did you want to accomplish? What kind of structures, formulations, requirements and ‘must not haves’ would have to be there? When I look at the vaccines, I can name two of them because they’re so easy that other people can get them too. So the first is that they have a genetic code for a piece of protein that we’ve all come to know and love called spike protein, which is at least allegedly the sticking out spike bit on the surface of these floating things that look like mines, you see them on your TV and the media, those spike proteins. 

JD: And we saw them at the Olympics opening ceremony before that. 

MY: In 2012. It’s astonishing. You cannot miss it. If you watch that opening ceremony, there it is, a copy of coronavirus. Anyway, here’s the point, I ask people this question: what is it about your immune system that means that you play nice with yourself most of your life and your immune system doesn’t attack you, and yet under certain circumstances, your body absolutely goes to war and unleashes all weapons it’s got against something? I say it’s recognition of self. 

So your immune system, when you were being developed as a foetus, all of the components of your body were being introduced to the components of your immune system, which are being formed by some, like, random selection at binding sites. And basically it was like, ‘This is James, this is James, this is James – don’t attack it.’ So by the time you were born, you had a very powerful immune system that would attack anything that wasn’t James, but which leaves James or ‘self’ alone. So when you’re injected with something that made your cells manufacture a non-self protein – because that’s what a viral protein is – guess what your immune system did to every single cell in your body that took that diabolical stuff up and made non-self protein – I’m afraid the answer is autoimmune lethal attack. 

I’ve spoken to at least ten immunologists and I’ve put it to them, and they’ve gone, ‘Yeah, you’re right.’ I said, ‘Could I be wrong?’ No, it’s immunology 101. That’s how your immune system fundamentally plays nice with you, except when you get some circumstances, like developing cancer sometimes, you can destroy cancer cells, because they start to make different proteins than normal, and they’re recognised as non-self, and you can often kill them. It’s called immune surveillance, you do it every day, your body kills off single cell cancers, or potentially single cell cancers. Every day, your clever immune system goes, ‘That shouldn’t be here.’ They leap on it and kill it. 

So if you take an injection, whatever it is a third of a ml, bang it in your shoulder, hundreds of billions of particles float around your body. Wherever they land, if they were taken up and that cell started to grind out non-self protein, I’m afraid your immune system recognises non-self is in the offing and it absolutely goes to war. And that is by design. It cannot but happen that way. 

So the moment I saw it – actually, that was not the first thought, at first, I thought, ‘Oh, you’re expressing a dangerous protein, this spike protein is toxic,’ and it is. But after a little while, I thought it wouldn’t make any difference what protein it is. If it’s not you, if it’s going to trigger autoimmunity. So that’s the first thing I’ll tell you. 

All of these gene-based so-called vaccines are dangerous. Please don’t take any of them. So if they tell you there’s a flying Ebola and you must take this mRNA vaccine, please do not take it. Because if it encodes a piece of the alleged Ebola, flying Ebola, it will kill you. Your immune system will recognise what you’ve just made, when you copy that instruction, it will recognise that it is not belonging to your body, and it will kill the cell that’s making it. 

Now, what I’ve just told you fits perfectly with the observed pathology, because this stuff randomly landed up in various tissues. If it landed in your heart, you might get pericarditis or myocarditis. If it landed anywhere in your neurological system, you could get various neurological conditions. If it landed in the back of your eyes, you could go blind. Your pregnant uterus: miscarriage. And so on, you know, kidney failure. So, I think there’s lots of pathologies. I think there are several. But I think this one is one that always occurs. And it maps exactly on to why you’ve got just a tremendous range of anatomically different conditions. You know, why aren’t people inquisitive about that? How could . . . so, for example, if you take an overdose of paracetamol, I can assure you, you don’t end up with, I don’t know, your heart generally doesn’t stop beating. What happens is your liver is killed, because your liver converts it from a not very nice substance into a really very toxic substance. And if you take large doses, you end up, I think it’s centrilobular necrosis. It kills your liver. If you take lower doses over decades, it kills your kidneys through glomerular foot process loss, something like that. So it’s quite unusual to take a single substance that has produced 1,200 different side-effects that vary. One person would get blood clots in their brain, and someone else would lose their baby. 

What I’ve just explained fits perfectly. Now, it may not be perfectly correct, but all that I have said is true. Anyone who’s had even the first introduction to immunology will recognise this self/non-self dichotomy is at the heart of how your immune system works. So that’s the first thing. That is unequivocal evidence that all four companies designed . . . conspired to produce something that your body . . . would lead your body to kill itself. 

The second part is, at least in the case of the Moderna and Pfizer products, they are wrapped in what are called lipid nanoparticles. They’re quite funky. They essentially mimic the fatty outer coating of yourself. Your body is divided into tiny compartments called cells. They’re so small you need a microscope to see them. But, you know, that’s what they are. They’re like little bubbles or balloons, and they’re surrounded by a lipid bilayer – that’s its cell membrane. And it allows itself to regulate what’s inside compared with outside. So lipid nanoparticles look a bit like that. And so they just, in a stealthy fashion, go all the way around your body and slide into various cells. And if you didn’t have something like that, your body would recognise and destroy the foreign genetic information. I mean, it’s not surprising. Your genetic inheritance is the thing that you would want to preserve, right? If you’re going to have offspring, you don’t want your own genetic inheritance to be coloured by foreign DNA and RNA. And so we’ve got extraordinarily good systems designed to stop foreign DNA and RNA entering our cells. 

But if you coat it in this lipid that makes it look like a cell, you probably don’t notice it, by analogy you miss it, it goes past in the corner of your eye and you don’t notice. But you might think, ‘Well, that’s not evidence of depopulation.’ Ah, but I’ve got a factoid for you, James. People who work in formulations, it’s a special area, you know, formulation, R&D [research and development] is itself a discipline. It’s difficult to know how to make the right salts of a particular drug, and people become good at this stuff over decades of formulation R&D, process R&D. These departments were as big as my department, it’s that difficult. 

I happened to come across a piece of literature that was ten years old at the time of rolling out these vaccines that told us that lipid nanoparticle wrapped macromolecules – big molecules – preferentially accumulate in various organs, including the ovaries. So we knew for certain that if you wrapped the Moderna and Pfizer jabs in this stuff and then injected it into girls and women, it would accumulate in their ovaries. 

I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that’s what it’s doing. Well, why would you do that if you were trying to produce immunity to a respiratory virus? And the answer is you wouldn’t. Would you do this if you were trying to harm their fertility? Yes, you would. Especially if you combine the two things I’ve said. Because if a girl or a woman’s ovaries expresses this non-self protein, her own immune system will destroy her ovaries. So I guessed in 2020 – and we have it in writing – that there was a risk of reduction in live babies. And I’m afraid I’ve not followed the field, because I’m not competent to do it properly. But I followed some demographers who are competent to do it, and it looks pretty awful, that between 10 per cent and 20 per cent reductions in live births everywhere – everywhere we look that there’s been intensive injections. So yeah, so on the first part, your immune system will kill you. On the second part, it will damage and potentially render you infertile. And there’s no excuse for either of those things. There were well known hazards of doing the two things they did.
If someone would like to write to me and tell me why I’m wrong, I would love to be wrong. But I’ve been saying it for three years, and no one has pointed out why I’m wrong.

Yeadon, Delingpole and the pandemic myth

JAMES DELINGPOLE: You and I would agree that the human immune system is a marvel of God’s creation.

DR MICHAEL YEADON: Yeah.

JD: So marvellous that we never needed vaccines. Even in the days of cowpox and smallpox, we never needed vaccines to protect us from things that our body was perfectly capable of dealing with all by itself? 

MY: Yes. We’ve even got the evidence in the case of influenza, whatever that really is, that the industry made vaccines against influenza, which is at least similar to the claims for Covid, in that we were told they were both respiratory viruses transmitted in your breath, I guess, and the people who are most at risk are the ones who are elderly and they’re already ill. I think that profile is the same. And in fact, in my view, there’s never been a pandemic, and Covid-19 is a psy-op, and it’s really just flu-like illness misattributed by using an untrustworthy diagnostic method, the PCR.

I remember thinking, immunologically, ‘Why is it that elderly people are vulnerable to these illnesses?’ And I think the answer is because they don’t respond well to the illness, whether it’s viral or whether it’s not viral. Either way their homeostatic mechanisms to return them to good health are either not responsive enough or they’re almost clipping the trees already in terms of health – and a small deficit and they die. In which case, if they won’t respond well to whatever this disease is, why in the world would anyone think they would respond well to a piece of the organism? 

And the answer is you’d be mad to think so, because they wouldn’t, would they? If you don’t respond to the whole illness, you’re not going to respond to a bit of the illness and suddenly become protected. It’s illogical. It’s so illogical. And I remember people saying to me, ‘Oh well, you clever dick, we’ve got flu vaccines and they work.’ And I said, ‘No, no, the boot’s on the other foot, they don’t work.’ And that might be why they don’t work, that the people they’re given to are not capable of responding to them, because it’s the same problem for why they’re vulnerable in the first place. In other words, back to your comment, James, [Covid] vaccination was never an appropriate . . . was never, ever an appropriate response.

JD: No. 

MY: Even if we pretend for a moment – because I can’t lie, I don’t believe the narrative at all – but if we just accept the narrative was true for a moment, that there’s a new pathogen, the elderly and frail are most vulnerable, it would be mad to try and help them with a vaccine, because the reason they’re vulnerable is because they don’t damn well respond to this novel threat. Why would they respond to a vaccine? And they don’t. 

What you should’ve done, if there had been a pandemic, which there hasn’t, but if there had been, you would want to support them with good nutrition, you know, keep them cheerful, make sure we get in the sunshine, not lock them away and make them wear masks and make them stressed – that’s guaranteed to make more of them die than necessary. 

But as I say, there hasn’t been a pandemic. And two words. Denis Rancourt.  I’ve cited him many times. His data’s very good. He looks at all-cause mortality, only looking at age, sex and date of occurrence. And he did that every week for each of the individual 50 states of the US. And there was no pandemic. There were no excess deaths until the nice man who heads the WHO told us there was a pandemic. And countries adopted all sorts of, in my view, murderous protocols, you know, mass inappropriate mechanical ventilation. You never ventilate people who can breathe for themselves through an area that’s not obstructed and a chest wall that isn’t punctured with a knife or road traffic accident. So, in other words, if a person turns up and they’re breathing, you don’t sedate, integrate and ventilate them. And if you do, they’ll probably die. What you do is you give them an oxygen mask with a higher concentration of oxygen and probably a low-dose Valium and an arm round their shoulder and a cup of tea. And I bet you, in an hour they’ll be feeling a lot better. 

JD: A cup of tea would be good. 

MY: 2mg of diazepam, a cup of tea and a biscuit, arm round the shoulder and give them an oxygen mask. I think most people would have gone home, but instead they admitted them and murdered them. That’s what they did. 

JD: What I was hoping you were going to do was give me a crumb of hope, and when I was talking about the immune system, the miracle immune system . . . I was hoping you were going to say, ‘But what they hadn’t planned for was the ingenuity of the human immune system, which will yet do something to offset all this damage.’ But it sounds to me like what you’re describing is a very deliberate attempt to bypass the human immune system, and kind of immobilise it to destroy it, so our last defences have been . . . 

MY: Yes. If this material lands in your lymph nodes, you know, where there’ll be lots of sleeping T cells ready to come out and fight invaders. If it lands in your cells of your immune system, I’m afraid other cells of the immune system will think they’ve been infected and kill them too. 

But here’s the thing. Most people who have been injected have not been made ill. And although it’s an appalling death rate, I think it’s something like 1 in 2000, maybe 1 in 1000, varying tremendously between batches. This is on average. So let’s say it’s 1 in 1000, that’s about 10 per cent of the normal annual death rate, which is about just under 1 per cent in a population. So 0.1 per cent is . . . it’s like an extra month’s worth of dying. So most people have not become very ill and died. Now, my sincere hope is, is that it’s for the better of the two reasons I can think of. One is that it’ll get them later, which I know Dolores Cahill worries about [but] because my knowledge of pharmaceutical manufacturing, I think the most likely explanation for the fact that most people got away with it, lucky them, was because they were injected with something that just like junk, not particularly good for you, but not particularly dangerous. 

So if we were able to say, ‘We’ve had enough, folks, you can all go home with your WEF and your WHO and lies and your diabolical plans,’ things I think would go pretty much back to normal. They’ve killed, you know, they’ve only killed a small fraction over the numbers who normally would have died –  which is still awful. I’ve heard estimates of between 10 and 20 million, you know, deliberately murdered. But the population of the world is very big, humanity flourishes if left alone to get on with it. So we’re nowhere near the end. 

But here’s where I do get very worried. Mandatory digital ID or just digital ID, I saw this morning, James, that the EU and the WHO have announced that they’ve entered into a partnership to develop some kind of international digital health passport. Some sort of digital vaccine record. And you know, you don’t need this. They need you to have it. I’m afraid that there will be people who will say, ‘Oh, well, I’d better register for this so I can go on holiday.’ I mean come on, you’re weaklings. You’re weaklings. Just don’t go on holiday for a couple of years. Seriously. 

That’s the only thing that we can choose not to do. Of all of the things [this is what] they must install in order to gain control over us. The other one is central bank digital currencies. I’m not aware of anything that even James Delingpole can possibly do to stop them doing that. Obviously, we’ll sign petitions and talk to our MPs and demonstrate, and they’ll do what they like, because it’s something they’re going to do. And if they want to deprive us of cash, or make it increasingly difficult to spend cash, again, I really don’t know what I can do about that, other than, you know, keep the pace up of cash purchases. 

But the thing you can choose not to do is not to sign up to the digital ID. Yes, it will involve you in inconvenience. For example, they might not let you leave the country or get on an aeroplane, but if you sign up, they can put in place the three components that will, I think, begin the human slaughterhouse. If you have a digital ID, and they’ll say, ‘Oh, you only need it to get on an aeroplane.’ And then it’s, ‘Ah, you also need it to enter large retail spaces like Bluewater or something like that.’ And then it’s like, ‘Oh, you need to use it when you go into a supermarket with more than three checkouts,’ or something. You can imagine the slithery way, it becomes an everyday thing. And then eventually, eventually you’ll need it in order to do anything. Like, before you can get cash out of a cashpoint – assuming it still exists – I bet you they’ll say, ‘Present your digital ID’, and they’ll say ‘Valid. Now what transactions do you want, Dr Yeadon?’ 

So that’s one half of the system that uniquely identifies you in a globally consistent single format database. There is no such thing at the moment. So when people say, ‘Oh, we’ve got passports’, no, we’ve got 198 different formats of passports. This would be one format. It won’t be run by your government, but by some corporation. So don’t sign up for it. You do not need it. I keep saying, they need you to have it. But in terms of central bank digital currencies and ultimately depriving us of cash, if they’re prepared to ignore the wishes of their electors, citizens, which they probably are, we can’t really stop them doing that. But we can choose not to sign up. I’ve publicly said I’m not going to sign up, even if they say, ‘Well, you’ll need it to get access to your bank accounts,’ I’ll say I’m going to have to put them in the hands of a proxy, then, because I’m not damn well signing up for digital ID. I’m not doing it. Once that’s in place, they can do whatever they like. So don’t sign up, please, it’s the end if you do. But I still think we’ll win, James. I do think this lot are going to be able to murder a lot of people. I don’t think they’re going to take down everybody. And then this Gollum-class AI will pull their life support, or something like that. They’re not going to win.