Dr. Mike Yeadon - The holy relics of the Pharma : antibodies, PCR tests and viruses - PART 2 : The question Steve Kirsch didn't want to ask.
Biased, one-sided reasoning ? You decide.
NOTE :
When sending the message about the new article, there is a text limit. This is a version of the article that unfortunately can only be supplemented within half an hour after the message has been sent. Please log in to Substack again to be able to read the full version of the article. Thank you for your understanding.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
FOREWORD :
Dr. Mike Yeadon, June 16, 2024 :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/1470
There was recently what was tagged as a debate between Steve Kirsch and Andrew Kaufman about viruses.
While I didn’t watch the event, I commented yesterday on Steve’s brief Substack piece referring to it.
Steve demands people answer questions that he thinks are relevant, for example “how come millions of people have samples taken & all contained the same sequence, if there wasn’t a pandemic?”
This is called “leading the witness”.
The right place to start isn’t with sequencing, a process which nobody but the high priests of sequencing can even claim fully to understand. It’s certainly not a field Steve knows anything about.
Surely better places to start are by asking the question “Can you show me the evidence that there even was a pandemic?”
If there isn’t any, then questions relating to what was allegedly found using “sequencing” become totally irrelevant.
That data is the answer to a non question. A better question is “Why are wealthy people running a global sequencing operation, when there clearly wasn’t a pandemic?”
There’s only one answer, and Ockham has his Razor in his hand. To deceive the unwary with distracting information.
Best wishes
Mike
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Dr Mike Yeadon's comments ( plus a few others ) on the following article and video by Steve Kirsch :
https://open.substack.com/pub/stevekirsch/p/how-can-millions-of-people-all-exhibiting
Source : https://kirschsubstack.com/p/how-can-millions-of-people-all-exhibiting/comments#comment-59045024
Part 1 of the article :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/dr-mike-yeadon-the-holy-relics-of
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Steve Kirsch
12 hrs ago, edited 10 hrs ago
Pinned
I'm still waiting for some to answer my questions above if viruses don't exist.
There are over 1,000 comments yet AFAIK, no one has explained how, for example, all the sites (which used denovo sequencing from scratch) could come up with virtually identical sequences on something that doesn't exist. How can that happen? The sequences are 100% determined by what is in the sample. There isn't collusion or a "template." If you think there is, please show us the evidence. WGS doesn't use a template. It is uses randomly generated primers. The only way to get the same sequence is if the sample is genetically identical. I'm surprised this is even a topic of discussion. If I take the same sample to 100 different labs, I'll get the same sequence.
I have laid out all my questions in this article. I've invited Dr. Kaufman to respond to each of the points with a document. No interruptions and no time pressure. I look forward to seeing his response.
Once that is done, we'll have another session with experts on his side and my side.
I'll watch from the sidelines.
……………………..
omarj
43 mins ago, edited 42 mins ago
De Novo Sequencing by which company? Illumina? Tell me you're not seriously going to mention this without also mentioning the obvious financial conflicts of interest that this company (and other companies) have and the direct incentive they have to FIND whatever they want to find.
I'm talking about the same Illumina that had former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb on their Board of Directors. Gottlieb was also on the Board of Directors at Pfizer, along with his buddy, James Smith (who spent the bulk of his career as President and CEO of Reuters). Smith was the Chairman of the Board.
When Gottlieb was FDA Commissioner, the FDA granted Emergency Use Authorization to Illumina for a "Sequencing-Based COVID-19 Diagnostic Test"(In other words, he granted Emergency Use Authorization to himself, or his other company, Pfizer). Then his buddy James Smith’s Company (Reuters) "fact-checks" in their favor.
So Scott Gottlieb sits on the Board of Pfizer (which stands to make money via the manufacturing and sale of vaccines based on the successful sequence of coronavirus) and his other company is providing the machine that does the alleged “sequencing” - which they all profit handsomely from. This is a direct, undeniable conflict of interest.
Then when honest scientists explain why it wasn’t property isolated or sequenced, James Smith uses his fake fact-checking company to “debunk” these claims so that these criminals can continue scamming the world and making more money. This is also a direct conflict of interest.
And you're participating in this crime, Steve. Without mentioning the company that actually manufactures these fraudulent "sequencing" machines, how do you expect ANYONE who has done their homework to take you seriously?
……………………..
omarj
13 mins ago, edited 10 mins ago
Your level of dishonesty is really quite extraordinary, Steve. You throw around these terms like “muh sequencing” and wave your magic wand without actually telling your readers about the real fraud of sequencing machines. So, let’s talk about ”sequencing” with another example from the Lancet:
Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant Among Vaccinated Healthcare Workers, Vietnam
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733
In the paper above, they claim they “sequenced the virus” using the ARTIC Protocol which comes from the ARTIC Network. The ARTIC Network is funded by the Wellcome Trust, founded by pharmaceutical pioneer Henry Wellcome, current investment portfolio worth well over 30 billion UK pounds.
Wellcome is heavily invested in promoting zero-carbon schemes and pushing Agenda 2030 Climate Change lies and propaganda. They are also active participants in GAVI, CEPI and WHO.
The Wellcome Fund has a direct financial conflict of interest in that IF they can successfully “sequence” a “virus” - these findings would lead to the development of a vaccine from which they will all reap the rewards and profit hundreds of billions of dollars. Their director is Jeremy Farrer who is a direct member of SAGE, which is a body of the UK Government.
The COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator (CTA) started in March 2020 with support from Wellcome, Mastercard and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
At the Wellcome Sanger Institute, 200 staff volunteered to contribute to sequencing the viral genomes in 180,000 samples from Covid-19 infections. The institute helped fund the effort which was part of the Covid-19 Genomics UK Consortium.
Some of their direct shareholders include Microsoft, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, Amazon, Visa, Berkshire Hathaway, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Cisco, Alphabet/Google, Apple, Facebook, Unilver, etc.
The ARTIC NETWORK and Wellcome had a direct financial incentive to “find” a virus or variant via “sequencing” - If they couldn’t find one, then GAVI, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the rest of these racketeers that you pretend you’re fighting against would fire them and hire another company whose machine WOULD find them.
The fact that you make NO MENTION WHATSOEVER about who funded these so called “sequencing” efforts, where the sequencing machines come from or the conflicts of interest that all these folks have in “finding” whatever they want to find, betrays your agenda, Steve. All of the sequencing efforts were produced by the VERY SAME PEOPLE you PRETEND YOU’RE FIGHTING AGAINST.
You’re a liar and a fraud and you’ve exposed yourself for all to see.
………………………
Josh Malone
Because all humans have sequences very similar to SARS-COV-2, within the error of the test. If you take enough sample and amplify it sufficiently you will get a positive match from most or all humans.
………………………….
Rob
Steve, you can't answer this question as it stands because it assumes the test results accurately reflect what they claim to show. We need to move past this assumption to debate the argument properly. The assumption fails for two reasons:
Not all people who test positive are actually sick with the disease.
Some people with identical symptoms do not test positive.
Essentially, the test designed to detect the virus shows the same results under a microscope for millions of people, whether they are sick or not. What is claimed to be a genetic sequence is inferred from something they cannot see. They are interpreting noise as the virus because it fits their expectations. Why do you trust the test when it has proven unreliable? Moreover, this unreliability undermines your claim that Koch's postulates have been met.
……………………….
Joy Lucette Garner
Great answer! Kirsh assumes the PCR test is telling us the truth about something, when in fact the inventor of the PCR staunchly denied it was capable of diagnosing a viral infection.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
A conversation about bacteriophages, June 15, 2024 :
……………………
moando, June 15, 2024 :
Phage therapy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phage_therapy
"Phage therapy, viral phage therapy, or phagotherapy is the therapeutic use of bacteriophages for the treatment of pathogenic bacterial infections.[1][2][3] This therapeutic approach emerged at the beginning of the 20th century but was progressively replaced by the use of antibiotics in most parts of the world after the Second World War. Bacteriophages, known as phages, are a form of virus[4] that attach to bacterial cells and inject their genome into the cell.[5] The bacteria's production of the viral genome interferes with its ability to function, halting the bacterial infection.[5] The bacterial cell causing the infection is unable to reproduce and instead produces additional phages.[4] Phages are very selective in the strains of bacteria they are effective against.[5]"
…………………………..
kordelas, June 15, 2024 :
Phages are not proven to exist. No one has observed them, identified them, isolated them and experimented on them.
……………………….
moando, June 15, 2024 :
This therapy has been used in Russia for DECADES and is studied in the west as a replacement for antibiotics which are now longer functioning well:
https://www.bacteriophage.news/antibiotic-resistant-bacteria-with-bacteriophages/
The 'no virus' team is outing themselves on this one.
………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon, June 15, 2024 :
I know that bacteriophages are a thing.
What people choose to call them is a different matter.
They work as you described.
We used them in industry in a technique called "phage display".
As far as anyone can tell, iirc, they're a signalling system used by certain monocellular organisms.
As regards bacteria, anyone doubting their existence is welcome to make a refreshing glass of squash using the contents of an unflushed toilet.
Let me know how you get on.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
NOTE
by Suavek
The article linked by A. Michael below turned out to be interesting :
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
A. Michael
Steve, here ya go....oh, and I will BANKRUPT you...why not debate me....and we can put a substantial financial wager on the line....are you up for it? imagine a man with your wealth possessing the intellect of a 5th grader...that you can't understand conceptually why the sequencing process actually disproves virology...hahahahaha....hit me up, I'll give you my information and then proceed to drain your of your wealth...Kaufman is a soft and docile, me, not so much.....
https://theviraldelusion.substack.com/p/revealed-the-sars-cov-2-sequencing
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Michael Wallach
Mike Wallach: The Viral Delusion
11 mins ago, edited 10 mins ago
Hi Rob, I don't think you understood the article, so let me try to re-explain it. When 1000 labs around the world do whole genome sequencing and "find" the "virus" all they are really doing is asking the question: can you assemble a hypothetical sequence from this particular person's lung fluid dna. And the answer is: sometimes. That "sometimes" answer doesn't correlate with sickness. Sometimes these people are sick and sometimes they aren't. So there isn't even the most basic of reasons to believe that there is a connection: correlation. But beyond that, the fact that you can sometimes assemble a hypothetical sequence from a person's BALF dna doesn't prove anything. It doesn't mean the hypothetical sequence is IN the BALF, it just proves you can assemble it. I can assemble a lego sasquatch from the lego pieces in a 1000 homes around the world - it doesn't mean that everyone has a lego sasquatch in their home. Do you understand? It doesn't mean that ANY home has a lego sasquatch. In order to know if ANYONE has built a lego sasquatch we need to find at least ONE of them to start. But virology has never even done that. It's all smoke and mirrors.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Michael Wallach
Mike Wallach: The Viral Delusion
What don't you understand? The reason the whole genome sequencing shows (almost) the same results around the world is because showing that result is BAKED into the methodology. Let me give you a metaphor, because you don't seem to understand how this works. if thousands of people around the US all search for Santa Claus by (a) going to the mall on Christmas and then walking around the mall and searching for someone who is fat and wearing red, then many of them will "find" Santa Claus. That doesn't mean Santa Claus is real. Similarly, if you run the same mathematical sequencing algorithm on the roughly 56 million rna fragments in a BALF sample (no matter who you got it from), you will sometimes be able to have the algorithm stitch together the same sequence. Tada. Wow. Doesn't mean the sequence has any significance. Doesn't mean all the rna in the sequence came from a single thing in the balf. Definitely doesn't mean it came from a virus.
Here is a substack article that breaks it down in detail:
https://theviraldelusion.substack.com/p/revealed-the-sars-cov-2-sequencing
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
henjin256
In the patent for PCR that was issued in 1986 to Kary Mullis et al., they wrote that one application for PCR would be to diagnose the presence of pathogenic microorganisms including viruses. [https://patents.google.com/patent/US4683195] Mullis was also the last author of a patent from 1989 titled "Detection of viruses by amplification and hybridization", where they specifically wrote that PCR can be used to detect HIV, and they wrote that HIV has been sequenced and that there are isolates of HIV available. [https://patents.google.com/patent/US5176995A] Kary Mullis was additionally one of the authors of a paper published in 1987 titled "Identification of Human Immunodeficiency Virus Sequences by Using In Vitro Enzymatic Amplification and Oligomer Cleavage Detection". [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC254157/pdf/jvirol00096-0400.pdf]
When Kary Mullis said that "quantitative PCR is an oxymoron", I believe he meant that PCR was not an accurate way to quantify viral load, and not that PCR was not an accurate way to determine whether a sample contains a virus or not. John Lauritsen wrote: "With regard to the viral load tests, which attempt to use PCR for counting viruses, Mullis has stated: 'Quantitative PCR is an oxymoron.' PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers." [https://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/jlprotease.htm]
In an interview with Gary Null, Mullis also said: "PCR came along right about the same time that HIV did. And it was in that [unintelligible word] that people started looking with PCR for HIV. That was the only way to see it, except for culture. Which was a long protracted procedure, which a lot of times didn't turn right. [...] The culture - the whole method - cell biology is a bunch of magic half of the time. And people who say that they can do quantitative estimations of HIV from culture, they're just - they're fooling themselves." [https://www.bitchute.com/video/8SjzUDxBZL9t/, time 9:05] But by "quantitative estimations", I think Mullis was again talking about estimating viral load.
HIV is typically detected using antigen or antibody tests and not PCR, but the main use of PCR tests in the case of HIV was traditionally to measure viral load. PCR tests for HIV are commonly called "NAT tests" or nucleic acid tests, and they are further divided into quantitative and non-quantitative NAT tests depending on whether their aim is to measure viral load, even though some NAT tests for HIV also use transcription-mediated amplification instead of PCR. So the typical use of PCR tests for HIV is different from the typical use of PCR tests for COVID.
The CDC's website says that "Most rapid tests and the only HIV self-test approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are antibody tests." [https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/hiv-testing/test-types.html] And the CDC's website also says that a NAT test "can tell if a person has HIV or how much virus is present in the blood (HIV viral load test)" and that a NAT test "should be considered for people who have had a recent exposure or a possible exposure and have early symptoms of HIV and who have tested negative with an antibody or antigen/antibody test" (so basically a NAT test is used as a fallback for antibody and antigen tests).
In the year 2006 in Australia, there was a court case where someone was convicted of three counts of endangering life after he had unprotected sex with three women without telling them that he was HIV positive. [https://web.archive.org/web/20070709210442/http://garlan.org/Cases/Parenzee/2007-SASC-143-Parenzee.pdf] He appealed by stating that HIV has not been proven to exist, and testimony in his favor was provided by Eleni Papadopolous-Eleopulos and Valendar Turner from the Perth Group. After Mullis's comments about PCR were brought up the Perth Group, Mullis was sent an e-mail which said: "I am assisting the prosecution in an Appeal to the Supreme court in South Australia about a conviction for criminal transmission of HIV. The basis for that Appeal is that HIV does not exist and that the PCR technology is flawed. So in effect the technical basis for identification of virus is on trial. The group of denialists giving evidence are people from Perth who quote you as indicating that PCR technology is erroneous and misleading. Can I ask you to comment on this statement." [http://aras.ab.ca/articles/legal/McDonald-Mullis.html] But Mullis responded by writing: "I will not try to convince anyone that PCR can be used successfully to specifically make multiple copies of any nucleic acid sequence that can be uniquely defined by two 'primer target sequences' comprising the termini of the sequence of interest. The veracity of this no longer has anything to do with me. I think this has been confirmed by a huge number of laboratories around the world. The rapid spread of this simple technology would not have occurred had it been ineffectual or flawed in any persistent way." And Mullis also wrote that "the AIDS/HIV issue is what is not settled scientifically, not the effectiveness of PCR".
……………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon
Whats written in a patent is a claim. It doesn't necessarily have to be capable of being "reduced to practise".
I suspect, because I've done it myself, is to disclose a use OTHERS might want to patent. You do this because then you've "prior arted them".
They cannot secure a patent unless something is NEW, INVENTIVE and USEFUL.
If its disclosed already, you cannot get a strong patent on anything using that which is in the public domain already, because your invention lacks novelty.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon
Steve,
I am asking why you're STILL talking of infection.
Unless you believe Rancourt is mistaken, or is a bad actor, his epidemiological analyses show there was no pandemic.
Thus, the question of "infection" doesn't arise. Its a lie.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon
Would you please help me by citing ONE good quality paper showing that a person, sick with an acute respiratory illness, has ever made an adjacent person sick with broadly the same symptoms.
There is a century (since 1918) of clinical research and no study has ever shown that this very simple, reasonable request actually occurs.
……………………………
Steve Kirsch
these are separate issues.
Perhaps you can explain why people who exhibit COVID symptoms invariably are sequenced with the virus.
…………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon
Dr Mike Yeadon
There is no such illness.
If there was, there would by now be a clinical consensus as to exactly how the symptoms differ from other acute respiratory illnesses.
……………………………
Joy Lucette Garner
21 hrs ago, edited 13 hrs ago
And perhaps you can explain why the PCR test was shown to produce a 97% rate of false positive results? Or perhaps you can explain why so many perfectly healthy people with no symptoms of covid tested positive?
Or perhaps you can explain why people who showed up at the hospital with fresh bullet wounds were classified as "covid" deaths even though their ONLY "symptoms" were clearly related to the hole in their head?
Or perhaps you can explain why 94% of the so-called "covid" deaths were in people with an average of 2.6 comorbidities, i.e. OTHER things that they could DIE from?
Or perhaps you can explain the fact that in the year they told us "covid" was killing everyone, the regular expected yearly deaths from the flu disappeared almost completely? Do you HONESTLY believe that covid cured the regular seasonal flu?
Or maybe you can explain why, in the year "covid" (the deadliest virus in history, for which we were told we must forgo our right to travel, shop, etc.) hit, overall excess deaths went DOWN?
And by the way, if you look up the "symptoms" of snake venom poisoning, (and even radiation sickness) you'll see that they align almost perfectly with so-called "covid" symptoms.
Did something (particles, parasites, poison, whatever) get into a great many people? Clearly we're being poisoned. It turns out the "regular" yearly flu shot was covertly CHANGED in the fall of 2019 and those who got it were already getting the new stuff, the nanotech (lipid nanoparticles) with all the other crap, mRNA, etc. Nobody was informed that this had happened, and MANY people lined up for an injection of this new tech.
It does appear something terrible was spreading/shedding, and still is. But this doesn't mean I am open to believing these same genocidal maniacs who brought us the "warp speed" death jabs as to what it is, or what to do about it.
……………………………
kurt
I wonder if the excess death patterns noted by Rancourt, which led him to conclude there was no evidence of a new, respiratory pathogen, could have been caused by a deliberate poisoning. If I remember correctly, the patterns were mostly geographical, and he explained them as the result of nonuniform application of administrative measures on unhealthy populations, but they might also be consistent with poisoning by air for example. On the other hand, I definitely remember him saying the age distribution of death was not as skewed towards the elderly as one would expect based on clinical experience or the Diamond Princess outbreak.
……………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon
NOTE :
In this reply, Dr Yeadon used another account that also belongs to him. Please do not be confused. This reply did not come from anyone else.
I agree that, if there were local spikes in all causes mortality, but not in adjacent areas, poisoning is a logical possibility.
My key point though is that prior to the “pandemic declaration” there was no sign of a pandemic.
QED there wasn’t one.
AFTER what I’ve just established was a fraudulent declaration, we know there was poisoning, but this was hidden under the guise of medical treatments.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Allen
Imagine locking down the whole world for a computer software virus and calling it a pandemic.
That is what they did. Imagine when all these people find out they took a vaccine for a COMPUTER SOFTWARE VIRUS.
The “full genome” of any virus is not obtained by sequencing an entire intact “virus” that they have isolated, the product of cell culture experiment tainted with multiple sources of genetic material is taken and assembled via computer program into a “full genome.”
Genomic sequencing is a software trick. There is a virus (or whatever) template and you fit the nucleotides on this template, and voila-a new "virus" is created! It is a model on a computer that is 100% fabricated out of thin air.
Whatever one thinks about the "no virus" question it is an important question to work through as the likes of CEPI, GAVI, WHO, CSIS etc. and the governments run by financial parasites have made it perfectly clear that "waging endless war against viruses" is THE next phase of the Global War on 'Fill In the Blank' with copious funding (think trillions) going to these pathogenic Ponzi Schemes.
They plan to loot the public for the foreseeable future using "The Virus™" as their raison d'être. This is all being "war gamed" as we speak with plans for this to be THE cash cow for the Biosecurity Complex for the next many, many years.
So yes, this is more than a little relevant and goes far beyond the Covid Con.
Beyond the scientific and intellectual necessity of examining the entire discussion around germ theory the political and economic consequences simply can't be overstated. Why this discussion sets some people off is curious and quite irrational.
I am on familiar terms with the leading proponents of "no virus" and I can say without question that these are some extraordinarily thorough individuals who approach this with the utmost intellectual rigor.
It must also be noted that virtually all, if not all, of these individuals assert that "viruses have never been scientifically proven to exist" rather than the blanket statement, "viruses don't exist." There is a big difference between these two statements and again none of these individuals have come to this position casually. The burden of proof is on the claimant of the positive claim that an entity X does exist - those that argue that viruses exist nearly always turn this obligation on it's head for the obvious reason that they don't have evidence to support that claim.
For any who have looked into this with any detail to attention and honest scientific exactitude I can't see they could come away from their analysis with anything other than the conclusion that the process by which viruses are allegedly isolated is at best utterly preposterous when not outright fraudulent.
It's also extremely important to understand the history of how we got here.
Virology/Germ Theory have never been unique, solid scientific explorations or discoveries they were political maneuvers that were established by some of the more scurrilous scientific and political actors of the day, as is the case today, and supported financially and institutionally by the wealthiest robber-barons in the world- who then built another financial empire (the medical industry) on the backs of this quack theory.
The entire history of what is called "disease" is built on a foundation of lies and these lies are invented for less than savory purposes and to conceal the real causes of illness.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Rogier’s Substack
An article about the fraudulent PCR tests :
Dr. Yeadon Explains For First Time How The Covid Tests Can't Detect Proteins Like WHO Purports! Pandemic THEORY Is Wrong & We Will PROVE IT! Pandemics Do NOT Exist.
WHO recommended those tests - because they are so wise we need to pay them MORE $ for more great tests... Time to cut off the pseudo science cabal. What a racket!
Feb 02, 2024
Source : https://rogiervanvlissingen.substack.com/cp/141385749
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Dr. Mike Yeadon writes on another occasion about the antibodies. June 30, 2024 :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSC-jysc9mw&lc=UgzvQa6bWU8oi26ePnl4AaABAg
( … ) Antibodies could never be the defenders of the body against respiratory pathogens (if they existed). ( editor`s note : that is, “if the pathogens existed” ). This is because the alleged pathogens land in the airway and are said to damage us thus making us ill by multiplying there. By contrast, antibodies are large molecules that don’t routinely leave the blood. Thus, the antibodies & the alleged pathogen could never meet. For this reason as well as others, an injected material, purportedly a vaccine, could never protect a person against an airborne pathogen. You’ve believed a lie. ( … )
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Photo : Dr. Mike Yeadon
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Here you can find Dr. Mike Yeadon and his statements :
Substack by Dr. Mike Yeadon : https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/
The Telegram channel of Dr. Mike Yeadon ( other Telegram channels with his name are fake ! ) :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel
There is also a chat channel connected to the channel linked above, which is managed by his friends : https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannelChat
When searching for Dr.Yeadon's videos only two browsers are recommended :
Yandex :
and Mojeek :
Censorship is omnipresent on Google or Safari.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Afterword
by Suavek
Part 3 will also be published on this topic, although I have already published all of Dr Yeadon's existing statements in the previous parts. However, some of the statements made by other commentators were so interesting and insightful that I would like to publish at least a couple of them.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Related articles :
Part 1 of the article :
https://suavek1.substack.com/p/dr-mike-yeadon-the-holy-relics-of
Wicked Truths
Kary Mullis
For a study Mullis was working on at the time, he wanted to add a reference to the scientific paper that proved HIV caused AIDS. To his surprise it turned out it simply did not exist.
Later on the medical industry started abusing his PCR invention to “prove” HIV infections. From then until the day he died, he spoke out against it as PCR is incapable of proving infection.
Moreover, Mullis was convinced HIV was not the cause of AIDS.
Full article / Video :
https://wickedtruths.org/en/kary-mullis/
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
 | A guest post by
|