Day: December 4, 2022

• An international vaccine passport, digital identity, a social credit system and a central bank digital currency (CBDC) form a digital control system that will lock down the population in perpetuity

• Facial recognition is an essential part of the control structure, as it’s the “password” to your digital identity

• By the end of 2022, there will be 1 billion data collecting surveillance cameras in the world, all connected to the internet and artificial intelligence (AI). Cameras and audio recording devices in cell phones, automobiles and smart appliances also collect and share data

• All these data are then used to give each person an individual score, based on their behavior, expression and interaction with the world. Ultimately, your social credit score, will dictate what you can and cannot do, what you can buy and where you can go

• Artificial intelligence (AI) is an absolutely crucial component, without which the control system cannot work. The easiest way to push against this system is to starve AI of data by refusing to use technologies that collect and share your personal data

In the video above, Maria Zeee with ZeeeMedia interviews computer scientist Aman Jabbi about the coming international vaccine passport, digital identity, the social credit system being built in the West, and central bank digital currency (CBDC).

All these factors are now coming together to control the global population. As noted by Zeee, this digital prison, which is already mostly built, will be the final lockdown of mankind.

In the video, Jabbi goes through a presentation that explains the digital prison that is your digital identity — in other words, how your digital identity ties in with the coming social credit system and will control what you can and cannot do in your everyday life.

As noted by Jabbi, surveillance cameras with facial recognition software have already been erected around the world. They are an essential part of the control structure, and this surveillance will be linked together with digital identity, the social credit score system, carbon footprint tracking, CBDCs and more.

Facial recognition has been sold as a great convenience and security feature. With facial recognition, you don’t need to remember pins or passwords, and since no one has your exact face, it’s supposed to keep your personal accounts more secure.

But, as with most other technologies sold under the guise of convenience and security, facial recognition is ultimately a tool for mass control and an essential part of your individual digital prison. As explained by Jabbi, the Chinese control system is based on facial recognition in combination with a social credit system.

He describes the Chinese social credit system as a feedback system that responds based on your behavior. Unbeknownst to most Westerners, an identical system has already been set in motion behind the scenes in Western countries — they just haven’t told you yet.

By the end of 2022, there will be 1 billion data collecting surveillance cameras in the world, all connected to the internet and artificial intelligence (AI). The United States actually has the most surveillance cameras per capita. China is second place and the U.K. in third.

In addition to all of that data collection, cameras and audio recording devices in cell phones, automobiles and smart appliances also collect and share data, even when you’re at home.

All these data are then used to give each person an individual score based on their behavior, expression and interaction with the world. Ultimately, that score —  your social credit score — will dictate what you can and cannot do, what you can buy and where you can go.

As noted by Jabbi, there are also additional control mechanisms already built into the hardware being erected. For example, many smart light poles have built-in charging stations for drones, which in the future will be used for law and behavioral enforcement purposes. We will largely be policed by AI and machines.

These smart light poles can also be weaponized. Built-in are LED incapacitators. Sometimes referred to as “puke rays” for their ability to induce severe nausea, LED incapacitators are weapons designed like a flashlight that emit an extremely bright, rapid and well-focused series of “differently-colored random pulses.” According to Jabbi, these lights can also induce brain damage, spinal damage, sickness and likely even death.

LED combined with radar on some smart poles can also be used to identify people carrying guns, and could theoretically be used as a weapon to selectively take out people carrying weapons.

Digital identity has been described by the World Economic Forum (WEF) as a new chapter in the social contract. The problem, as noted by Jabbi, is that the WEF’s new social contract is one that none of us has agreed to. It’s being revised by the WEF and its allies and thrust upon the rest of us, without our consent.

The vast majority of people don’t even know what this new social contract actually entails, or how it will affect their personal day-to-day lives and individual decision-making ability. That, for obvious reasons, has never been fully delineated because, if fully understood by everyone, virtually no one on earth would accept it. After all, few people with normal intelligence relishes having their lives dictated by someone else.

As shown in the graphic above, your digital identity will be required to unlock all aspects of life, from logging onto the Internet to accessing social services, travel, food, shopping and financial services. If your social credit score is too low, one or more of these aspects can be turned off and made unavailable to you. “So, by default, you’re always a prisoner,” Jabbi says.

Your digital identity is confirmed through facial recognition, and is tied to your social score, carbon footprint score and CBDCs. As your social and carbon footprint scores go down, so does your purchasing ability.

As noted by Zeee, the international vaccine passport proposed at the 2022 G20 meeting is, at least right now, THE key to the entire effort to get everyone into the digital ID system. So, preventing the adoption of vaccine passports is a central component of resistance to the digital prison system in its entirety.

“Once we accept digital identity, it’s Game Over for humanity.” ~ Aman Jabbi

You must also reject the vaccine passport unless you’re willing to be a medical lab rat for the rest of your life. Zeee cites documents stating 500 new vaccines will be ready by 2030 that are targeting most common diseases. It is likely that having an up-to-date vaccination status will be one of the requirements to maintain a valid passport, which will also serve as your digital identity.

In other words, vaccine refusal can be used to nullify or “lock” your digital ID, leaving you unable to do, go or buy anything. The question is, what will those vaccines be? Basically, you’ll have no choice but to comply, even if you believe or know that a vaccine can injure or kill you, as is the case with the COVID jabs.

As explained by Jabbi, the new social contract created by the WEF and its allies is a zero-trust system. In a physical prison, prisoners are under a zero-trust policy. In other words, the guards don’t trust the prisoners and there are security measures in place to make sure they behave. The new open-air prison system envisioned by the WEF is based on the same premise.

Everywhere you go, you must prove who you are and that your compliance metrics are in alignment with the prevailing rules. So, to buy food, you have to not only identify yourself so that your purchase can be permanently logged as one of your purchases, but you also have to meet certain compliance standards, or else your CBDC won’t work.

The default in this system is denial, so everything you want to do — absolutely everything — must be unlocked by your digital ID. As noted by Jabbi, “Once we accept digital identity, it’s Game Over for humanity.”

To enforce your conditional access to life, geofencing will be used. Smart light poles equipped with LED incapacitators can be used to prevent you from going beyond your designated geofence, but there are also other geofencing mechanisms. For example, your CBDC can be programmed to not work outside your district, and your smart car can be programmed to shut down past a certain perimeter. Jabbi also reviews the inexorable push toward smart cities, which will:

• Limit your mobility and eliminate car ownership

• Control you through weaponized surveillance

• Ration water, electricity and gas consumption

• Surveil your speech

• Track your actions and whereabouts 24/7

Jabbi cites a formula created by the WEF’s philosophical guru Yuval Noah Harrari, to describe technocrats’ ever-growing ability to hack humans: B x C x D = AHH

B stands for biological knowledge, C is computing power, D is data and AHH is the level of ability to hack a human being. As noted by Jabbi, the ability to hack humans is dependent on AI being fed a constant stream of data.

It’s a “beast system” in the sense that AI is the beast, and it needs to be fed. Its food is data, gathered through a vast array of data conduits such as cameras, recording devices, facial recognition, GPS and sensors of all kinds that make up the Internet of Bodies. You can learn more about this in “Manufactured Dystopia — Globalists Won’t Stop Hacking Humans.”

AI is an absolutely crucial component for success of the digital prison. Without it, it cannot work. The answer then, is to starve the beast, and we do this by withholding our data. “No amount of legislation can stop this,” he says, “it has to be done by the people.” In short, we must refuse to use the technologies that gather our data.

We won’t be able to avoid them all. Smart light poles and traffic cameras, for example, cannot be avoided unless you avoid certain areas, which could include your own street. But there are many we can avoid, such as smart watches, fitness trackers, smart thermostats, smart TVs, AI assistants and Ring surveillance cameras just to name a few.

We can also fight, on a local level, to prevent the expansion of facial recognition cameras and 5G, and we can refuse the coming vaccine passport, and the push toward virtual reality. As noted by Jabbi, one way in which people are surreptitiously led into the digital prison is by relying on apps that offer convenience, such as apps that allow you to order food or transportation.

Eventually, they’ll phase out apps on your phone and transfer them to virtual reality googles, so that you have to be in the virtual world in order to use them. It’s important to understand why this is done. It’s to force you deeper into the digital prison system, which includes digital clones and living much of your life in a virtual reality.

At present, China is being rocked by massive protests against the Zero-COVID policy that is used to imprison tens of millions of people in their homes for weeks on end. You’d think an American company like Apple would stand for American values like freedom but, no, it does not. It’s working with the Chinese government to quell dissent.

As reported by Bloomberg1 November 9, 2022, Apple is limiting its iPhone file-sharing tool, restricting AirDrops from non-contacts to 10 minutes. The wireless file-sharing feature was used to share pictures and videos from the protests, thereby encouraging more people to join.

According to Bloomberg, while the change was only made to phones sold in China, Apple says it plans to roll out the same limitation globally. Why? Are they predicting anti-government protests elsewhere?

According to a Twitter user named Songpinganq,2 the video above shows iPhone workers clashing with police over the country’s Zero-COVID policy. In response, the Chinese government is alleged to have remotely switched all of the protesters’ COVID passports to “red,” which prevents them from entering public spaces.

If they try to enter a building, for example — including residential complexes — an alarm will go off and they’ll be detained and escorted to a quarantine camp which, by the way, they have to pay for. That’s how easy it is for the government to eliminate undesirables from society once this kind of control system is in place.

(For the record, I cannot confirm that the featured video is indeed iPhone workers, or that they’re specifically protesting the COVID measures. Regardless, the basic premise remains true, which is that government would be able to control large masses of people remotely, through their digital identity/vaccine passport.)

The video3 below is said to be from a Chinese quarantine camp. A health worker walks through the complex measuring the detainees’ body temperature. The second video4 shows the inside of a quarantine cubicle.

The good news is people around the world are starting to realize what’s happening. As explained by legal philosopher Eva Vlaardingerbroek (video above), the reason there are now mass protests around Europe is because they’re realizing that the COVID vaccine passport system rolled out in Europe is a control system that has no expiration date. They’re realizing it’s meant to be permanent, and that it will be expanded.

In the video below, a young Chinese man describes how the digital ID, CBDCs and the social credit system operates in China. By 2017, they already had the technology to automatically deduct fines from your account for infractions such as jaywalking, and the control network is only getting larger and more sophisticated.

Is this what we want in the West? Is this what you want for your children and your grandchildren? If not, you need to participate in the movement to prevent it, and that starts with making changes in your own life to starve the beast of your personal data, and educating your family and friends about this necessity.  

>”,”action”:null,”class”:null}”>NEXT ARTICLE >>

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

• A study estimated the incidence of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and compared it with expected rates in British Columbia; a significantly increased risk of myocarditis was found following COVID-19 jabs

• While seven myocarditis cases would be expected within seven days, the study found 99 cases among those who’d received the shots

• Within 21 days post-vaccination, 141 cases of myocarditis occurred. The expected rate was 20

• This worked out to a myocarditis rate of 1.37 per 100,000 COVID-19 doses, compared with an expected rate of 0.39 per 100,000 people who did not get the shots

• Rates of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots were highest among males, those aged 18 to 29 years, people who received a Moderna COVID-19 shot and people who received two doses

• The rate of myocarditis among males aged 18 to 29 who received Moderna’s COVID-19 shot was 22.9 per 100,000

Yet another study has revealed people who receive a COVID-19 shot are at an increased risk of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart muscle.1 With symptoms similar to a heart attack, including chest pain, shortness of breath, abnormal heartbeat and fatigue,2 myocarditis isn’t something that young, healthy adults typically experience.

But soon after mRNA shots for SARS-CoV-2 became widespread, reports of myocarditis, including sudden death, began to emerge.3 In Canada, more than 32 million people had received COVID-19 shots as of September 2022.4

“Prelicensure study data did not suggest any risk of postvaccination myocarditis,” researchers with the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control wrote in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ). However:5

“[P]ostmarketing studies have suggested an association between mRNA SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and mRNA-1273 [Moderna]) and myocarditis, among other adverse events after immunization, which has raised concern regarding the safety of mRNA vaccines, specifically among younger populations.”

This prompted the featured study, which estimated the incidence of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and compared it with expected rates in British Columbia. A significant increased risk of myocarditis was found following COVID-19 shots.

The study used data from the BC COVID-19 Cohort study, which included more than 10.2 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 shots given to people 12 and over. Cases of myocarditis that occurred seven to 21 days after the shots and required hospitalization were examined. While seven myocarditis cases would be expected within seven days, the study found 99 cases among those who’d received the shots.

Within 21 days post-vaccination, 141 cases of myocarditis occurred. The expected rate was 20. This worked out to a myocarditis rate of 1.37 per 100,000 COVID-19 doses, compared with an expected rate of 0.39 per 100,000 people who did not get the shots.6 Rates of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots were highest among:7

• Males

• Those aged 18 to 29 years

• People who received a Moderna COVID-19 shot

• People who received two doses

The rate of myocarditis among males aged 18 to 29 who received Moderna’s COVID-19 shot was 22.9 per 100,000.8 The researchers concluded:9

“In this study, we found higher observed rates of myocarditis after receipt of mRNA vaccines than expected … We observed a higher rate of myocarditis among males aged 18-29 years after receipt of the second dose of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine compared with those who received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) …

Comparisons of observed with expected rates also confirmed these findings, with the highest observed-to-expected ratios among males 18–29 years of age after the second dose of the mRNA-1273 vaccine.”

Many case reports exist of myocarditis following COVID-19 jabs, but they’re still recommended as safe and effective in the U.S. The Journal of Cardiology Cases described the case of a 23-year-old man who was otherwise healthy, who experienced chest pain for three days after receiving the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot.

Myocarditis was confirmed via MRI and other medical tests, and he was diagnosed with “acute myocarditis after COVID-19 vaccination.”10 In another example, researchers reviewed nine case series and 15 case reports involving 74 patients of myocarditis after mRNA COVID-19 shots. Again, most of the patients (94.6%) were male and young, with a median age of 17.6 years.11

In a September-October 2021 case report with literature review, it was concluded that “the outcomes of this case scenario confirm myocarditis as a probable complication of COVID-19 vaccines.”12 Another study from Israel detailed myocarditis following Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab in six male patients with a median age of 23 years.13

A similar study published in Pediatrics reported seven cases of acute myocarditis or myopericarditis in otherwise healthy adolescent males. Each had experienced chest pain within four days of receiving the second dose of Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab.14

Data published in JAMA Cardiology by physicians from the Navy, Army and Air Force also revealed a higher-than-expected rate of myocarditis in U.S. military personnel who received a COVID-19 jab.15

And a real-world case-control study from Israel16 revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,17 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.18 Other elevated risks were also identified following the COVID jab, including lymphadenopathy (swollen lymph nodes), appendicitis and herpes zoster infection.19

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) acknowledges that COVID-19 shots are associated with an increased myocarditis risk, stating:20

“In April 2021, increased cases of myocarditis and pericarditis were reported in the United States after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna). Data from multiple studies show a rare risk for myocarditis and/or pericarditis following receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.

These rare cases of myocarditis or pericarditis have occurred most frequently in adolescent and young adult males, ages 16 years and older, within 7 days after receiving the second dose of an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna).”

The CDC is now investigating long-term effects of myocarditis after COVID-19 shots and is contacting people who have experienced chest pain, shortness of breath and feelings of having a fast-beating, fluttering or pounding heart following a COVID-19 shot. In order to meet the CDC’s case definition of myocarditis following a COVID-19 shot, you must also have “medical tests to support the diagnosis of myocarditis and rule out other causes.”21

However, despite the risk, the CDC is still advising children aged 12 and older to get the jab, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted full approval August 23, 2021, to Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA injection, now sold under the brand name Comirnaty, for people aged 16 and older.22

FDA does list myocarditis on the prescribing information for COVID-19 shots,23 and in its approval letter for Comirnaty, the FDA ordered Pfizer to conduct research to investigate the risk of inflammation in and around the heart, as voluntary reporting mechanisms are insufficient.24

The FDA accepted Pfizer’s suggested timetable for the post-approval study to evaluate incidence of heart and heart sack inflammation, which includes the submission of an interim report at the end of October 2023, a study completion date of June 30, 2025, and submission of a final report October 31, 2025.

Britain’s Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization (JCVI) recommended against COVID-9 injections for healthy 12- to 15-year-olds. JCVI member Adam Finn told Reuters:25

“… the number of serious cases that we see of COVID in children this age are really very small. There are uncertainties about the long-term implications of (myocarditis), and that makes the risk-benefit balance for these children really quite tight and much tighter than we would be comfortable to make the recommendation.”

In contrast, the CDC has downplayed the risks, stating that most people should still get jabbed: “The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) and CDC have determined that the benefits (such as prevention of COVID-19 cases and its severe outcomes) outweigh the risks of myocarditis and pericarditis after receipt of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines.”26

Others, however, aren’t so sure. Cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra has spoken openly about the shots’ downfalls. He said in “Safe and Effective: A Second Opinion,” a documentary by Oracle Films:27

“Having been double jabbed and being one of the first to take the Pfizer vaccine, I have — after several months critically appraising the data, speaking to eminent scientists in Oxford, Stanford and Harvard, speaking to two investigative medical journalists and being contacted by two Pfizer whistleblowers — reluctantly concluded that this vaccine is not completely safe and has unprecedented harms, which leads me to conclude that it needs to be suspended until all the raw data has been released for independent analysis.”

Myocarditis reduces your heart’s ability to pump and can cause rapid or abnormal heart rhythms that can be deadly. In severe cases, myocarditis can cause permanent damage to the heart muscle and lead to heart failure, heart attack, stroke and sudden cardiac death.28 Tragic stories have accumulated worldwide:

• In August 2021, New Zealand reported the death of a woman following Pfizer’s COVID-19 jab, which they believe was due to vaccine-induced myocarditis.29

• A previously healthy 36-year-old mother of two died 11 days after receiving a Pfizer COVID-19 shot; her death was deemed to be caused by myocarditis due to the shot.30

• Dr. Neil Singh Dhalla, a CEO of a major health clinic, fell asleep four days after he got a COVID-19 booster shot — and died from a heart attack.31 The autopsy stated myocarditis. He was only 48 years old and had never had heart problems in his life.

• In another example, epidemiologists confirmed that two teenage boys from different U.S. states died of myocarditis days after getting the Pfizer shot.32 Both had received second doses of the shot. In a study that examined the autopsy findings, it’s reported that the “myocarditis” described in the boys’ deaths is “not typical myocarditis pathology.”33

If you’re wondering why you haven’t heard more about these and other cases, it’s because Big Tech has tried to censor these stories and keep them from getting out. But the truth has a way of finding the light.

A U.S. judge ruled that the White House must release correspondence regarding a “massive censorship enterprise” with Big Tech; it’s alleged that federal agencies communicated with social media companies to suppress private speech during the pandemic.34 35

Open debate and access to data from all sources is crucial to proper informed consent, including learning why some experts believe myocarditis due to COVID-19 shots “will kill kids,” without a doubt.36

>”,”action”:null,”class”:null}”>NEXT ARTICLE >>

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.

• By November 2020 there were no excess deaths from COVID-19 even though cases increased

• Data showed that many deaths — primarily people aged 45 to 65, with equal distribution between the sexes — was mainly due to heart disease, stroke and cancer, which suggests they were excess deaths caused by lack of routine medical care due to the pandemic restrictions

• The PCR test is not a valid diagnostic tool and should not be done on the scale we’re now doing it. The high rate of false positives is only fodder for needless fearmongering

• Virtually no one who is asymptomatic has the live virus, but when you run the test at a cycle threshold over 30, meaning you amplify the viral RNA more than 30 times, you end up with a positive test even if the virus is inactive and noninfectious

• According to Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer, very few people need the COVID-19 vaccine as the mortality rate from the infection is so low and the illness is clearly not causing excess deaths

I’ve written several articles about scientists and medical doctors who question the official narrative about the COVID-19 pandemic and the global measures put into place because of it, from useless testing, mask wearing and social distancing, to lockdowns, tracking and tracing and the baseless fearmongering driving it all.

In the video above, British journalist Anna Brees interviews Michael Yeadon, Ph.D., a former vice-president and chief scientific adviser of the drug company Pfizer and founder and CEO of the biotech company Ziarco, now owned by Novartis.

In this 2020 film, he discusses several concerns, including his belief that widespread PCR testing was creating the false idea that the pandemic was resurging, as the total mortality rate is completely normal. He also discusses his concerns about COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

As I explained in “Asymptomatic ‘Casedemic’ Is a Perpetuation of Needless Fear,” by using PCR testing, which cannot diagnose active infection, a false narrative has been created.

At the time, rising “cases,” meaning positive tests, were being used as the justification to impose more severe restrictions, including lockdowns and mandatory mask wearing, when in fact positive tests have nothing to do with the actual spread of illness.

According to Yeadon, at the time of the interview, the U.K. had tested an estimated 30 million people, or close to half the population. “A large number of those tests have been recent,” Yeadon says, noting that the definition of a “coronavirus death” in the U.K. was anyone who died, from any cause, within 28 days of a positive COVID-19 test.

“You cannot have a lethal pandemic stalking the land and not have excess deaths. ~ Michael Yeadon, Ph.D.”

So, what we’re seeing now is a natural death rate — about 1,700 people die each day in the U.K. in any given year, Yeadon says — but many of these deaths are now falsely attributed to COVID-19. “I’m calling out the statistics, and even the claim that there is an ongoing pandemic, as false,” he says.

He challenges anyone who doesn’t believe him to seek out any database on total mortality. If you do that, you will find that the daily death count is “absolutely bang-on normal,” Yeadon says.

For some months, the death count is actually slightly lower than the average norm over the past five years. And, he adds, “You cannot have a lethal pandemic stalking the land and not have excess deaths.”

The slight uptick in deaths that are now being reported simply aren’t directly due to COVID-19, he insists. Data show these deaths — primarily people aged 45 to 65, with equal distribution between the sexes — were mainly from heart disease, stroke and cancer, which suggests they were excess deaths caused by inaccessibility of routine medical care as people are either afraid or discouraged from going to the hospital.

These deaths may be characterized as being COVID-related, but that’s only because they were falsely lumped into that category due to false positives being recorded within 28 days of death.

Again, people are being tested very regularly, and the rate of false positives is extremely high. All hospital patients to this day are also tested upon admission, so when they die — regardless of the cause — they’re likely to have a false positive on their record, which then lumps them into the death tally for COVID-19.

“The longer you stay in hospital, the more likely you are to die, obviously,” Yeadon says. “You would be released if you were well and improving. So … long-stay patients are both more likely to die statistically, and much more likely to be tested so often that they’ll have a false positive test.

That is what I think is happening … It’s a convenience for someone playing some macabre game, because I don’t think it’s an error anymore … I’ve spoken to people in [public health] and they’re embarrassed that they’re not even being allowed to characterize and publish the information you would need to know to work out how useful the test is. That’s not being done.”

Yeadon also says he’s “sick and tired” of people claiming that immunity against SARS-CoV-2 may wane after a short time, leaving you vulnerable to reinfection. If you’ve been ill with COVID-19 and recover, you will have antibodies against the virus, and you will be immune, he says.

He understands that journalists may get this wrong, or may be given incorrect information, but if a scientist says this, “they are lying to you,” he says. Yeadon categorically denies the premise that you can recover from COVID-19 and later get reinfected and experience severe illness again.

According to Yeadon, there are only two ways by which COVID-19 would not provide lasting immunity. The first would be if it destroys your immune system. The HIV virus, for example, which causes AIDS, disarms your immune system, causing permanent impairment. Hence you do not become immune to the HIV virus. Coronaviruses do not do that.

The second way is if the virus mutates, which is common among influenza viruses — and which we now know in 2022 did indeed happen. (For transparency, there were already reports in 2020 of SARS-CoV-2 mutating,1 and some people did get reinfected with a slightly mutated version of the virus that made them sick again.)

Not only that, after the COVID antiviral came out, many people began experiencing rebound COVID cases.2 One reason for a reinfection is because when a virus mutates, your immune system may not fully recognize it and will have to mount a defense again, thereby creating another set of antibodies. Rebound infections can occur in previously infected persons as well as after receiving Paxlovid, either from insufficient drug exposure or from having no immunity to the mutations.3

As noted by Yeadon, people are now changing the laws of immunology, which simply shouldn’t happen. This should not be a political issue, but somehow it is being treated as one. He claims to have no ideas at all as to why these false narratives are being created, and why scientific truth that contradicts the mainstream narrative is being censored.

Others, however, have become more outspoken about this issue, pointing out how the pandemic is being used as a convenient excuse and justification for redistribution of wealth and the technocratic takeover of the whole world under the banner of a Great Reset to a “more equitable” social order and greener commerce.

It’s being used to usher in social changes that simply could never be introduced without some sort of calamity, be it war or a biological threat, because they involve a radical limitation of personal freedoms and the elimination of privacy. Those in charge of pandemic response measures also refuse to take into account the price of these measures.

When making public health decisions, you need to calculate the cost in terms of lives saved and the price in dollars and cents of saving those people, against the cost of not implementing the measure in question. This is not being done. The question is why is such an illogical stance being taken?

Toward the end of the interview, Yeadon addresses the issue of COVID-19 vaccination. Many are nervous about it becoming mandatory, and rightfully so. Vaccine passports are already being rolled out, and all the indicators point to vaccination becoming a requirement for travel, perhaps even within national borders.

Having spent his career in the pharmaceutical industry, Yeadon fully supports vaccination, believing they prevent large numbers of deaths. However, when it comes to SARS-CoV-2, he believes the vaccine will only benefit the elderly. For those over 80, a vaccine might give them a few more months of life.

“Nobody else needs this [vaccine],” he says. “You don’t vaccinate a population because 1 in 1 million might have a bad outcome [from the infection].” He also strongly believes the vaccine must be voluntary:

“It’s an appalling … public platform to suggest that the only way we get our lives back is to mass vaccinate the population. Something very smelly is going on. It’s simply not appropriate. I don’t even think it would work.”

In an open letter to the British health minister, Yeadon wrote:4

“I have read the consultation document. I’ve rarely been as shocked and upset. All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been in development for more than a few months. If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent.

This is because there are precisely zero human volunteers for whom there could possibly be more than a few months past-dose safety information. My concern does not arise because I have negative views about vaccines (I don’t).

Instead, it’s the very principle that politicians seem ready to waive that new medical interventions at this, incomplete state of development, should not be made available to subjects on anything other than an explicitly experimental basis. That’s my concern.

And the reason for that concern is that it is not known what the safety profile will be, six months or a year or longer after dosing. You have literally no data on this and neither does anyone else.

It isn’t that I’m saying that unacceptable adverse effects will emerge after longer intervals after dosing. No: it is that you have no idea what will happen yet, despite this, you’ll be creating the impression that you do …

I don’t trust you. You’ve not been straightforward and have behaved appallingly throughout this crisis. You’re still doing it now, misleading about infection risk from young children. Why should I believe you in relation to experimental vaccines?”

In his interview with Brees, Yeadon suggests medical professionals, especially those who are members of a professional society, who disagree with further pandemic measures — based on the medical facts — write an open letter to the government, urging them to speak to and heed the recommendations from independent experts.

Arm yourself with mortality statistics and the facts on PCR testing, so you can explain how and why this pandemic simply isn’t a pandemic anymore. First and foremost, there are no excess deaths. The same number of people have died this year that, on average, have died in previous years. This simply wouldn’t be the case if we had a lethal pandemic.

Second, the PCR test is not a valid diagnostic tool and should not be done on the scale we’re now doing it. The high rate of false positives is only fodder for needless fearmongering. “People should demand to know what [the false positive] rate is,” Yeadon says.

Additionally, “testing people who are well — it’s just a madcap thing,” he says. Virtually no one who is asymptomatic has the live virus, but when you run the test at a cycle threshold over 30, meaning you amplify the viral RNA more than 30 times, you end up with a positive test even if the virus is inactive and noninfectious.

“Let’s get back to the facts,” Yeadon says. “There are no excess deaths. But that’s not what you hear from the BBC now, is it? I’m never going to trust the BBC again, by the way. I’ve watched BBC for 41 years. [They’re] never coming back into my ears, because they’ve lied in my face all year … There’s a fraud going on …

You’re walking into voluntary house arrest when there are no excess deaths. Why are you doing that? Seriously? … I’m fearful, because it doesn’t make any sense and there are no benign outcomes.”

It’s easy to get so confused that you can no longer think straight these days. As explained by Dr. Peter Breggin, featured in “Psychiatrist Blows the Whistle on Pandemic Fearmongering,” when you add uncertainty to fear you end up with anxiety, a state in which you can no longer think logically.

If this applies to you, I urge you to turn off mainstream media news and turn to independent experts, such as Yeadon. Do the research. Read through the science. Reorient yourself to the facts and turn off the propaganda. Next, join a group so that you can have support.

A number of groups have formed around the world that are now rising up against mask mandates, mandatory vaccinations and lockdowns. A few examples of such groups include:

• Us for Them, a group campaigning for reopening schools and protecting children’s rights in the U.K.

• Keep Britain Free

• The COVID Recovery Group (CRG), founded by 50 conservative British MPs to fight lockdown restrictions5

Additional sources of information and groups fighting for truth and transparency that are worth checking out include:

• The Great Barrington Declaration,6 which calls for an end to lockdowns. As of November 30, 2022, it had been signed by 47,278 medical practitioners, 15,989 medical and public health scientists, and 870,827 concerned citizens7

• Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s The Defender, a newsletter that publishes “banned” news

• The German COVID-19 Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (ACU2020.org), which is launching an international class-action lawsuit against a long list of authorities over the global pandemic response

• In the U.S., doctors have formed a group called America’s Frontline Doctors, which is fighting for medical freedom rights

Subscribe to Mercola Newsletter

Disclaimer: The entire contents of this website are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola, unless otherwise noted. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked.

The information on this website is not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and is not intended as medical advice. It is intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional. The subscription fee being requested is for access to the articles and information posted on this site, and is not being paid for any individual medical advice.

If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your health care professional before using products based on this content.