TOXIC BY DESIGN - PART 18. Dr. Mike Yeadon : "These products aren’t vaccines." And : A new bio-distribution study, as one of the many pieces of evidence.
"It’s so bad that I regard it as axiomatic that being injected with anything purporting to be ‘based on mRNA technology’ will injure you. It cannot give rise to any other effect, in practise."
Dr. Mike Yeadon, January 23, 2025 :
https://hedleyrees.substack.com/p/open-letter-to-ms-emer-cooke-executive-02d/comment/87968408
These products aren’t vaccines. Nor are they even human medicinal products. They’re merely pretending they are.
Legally, and hidden from us entirely, they’re classified as “Countermeasures to be deployed in the event of a public health emergency”, like traffic cones or police tape.
Chapter & verse on how this deception has neatly been accomplished in the USA has been painstakingly described in detail by Katherine Watt & Sasha Latypova (see separate Substacks).
( Editor's note: Katherine Watt's Substack: https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/, and Sasha Latypova's Substack: https://sashalatypova.substack.com/).
We don’t have the same legal paperwork detail elsewhere but it’s inconceivable that they’re properly regulated “vaccines” outside the USA and “countermeasures” under the control of the Health & Human Services agency in USA. HHS reports into the DoD, as does CDC (staff have military titles).
This is a global crime of epic proportions, planned for years.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The new study
…………………………………..
A new study provides insights into the field of bio-distribution. The results are neither new nor shocking to us, but they prove that Dr. Yeadon's claim is correct. Or does anyone still believe that a real drug for a respiratory disease can spread throughout the body and cause inflammation everywhere? Only a poison can do that. I know that this mental connection is very simple. So I'm not doing an intellectually demanding "somersault" or anything like that. But that's exactly what it's about, because it's all the more surprising that there are doctors and scientists who still refer to this disgusting genetic mRNA soup as a "vaccination." Here is the study, and if you click on the link below, you can even see good photos of the poison being distributed :
……………………
Nanocarrier imaging at single-cell resolution across entire mouse bodies with deep learning
Study / Source : https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-024-02528-1
The newly published study proves the distribution of lipid nanoparticles from the mRNA “vaccination” throughout the body. This is nothing new for the readers of this substack. The changes in heart tissue that lead to inflammation have also been clearly demonstrated. The study is entitled:
“Nanocarrier imaging at single-cell resolution across entire mouse bodies with deep learning”
and was recently published in the renowned journal Nature Biotechnology. Some media outlets are writing about the “stir in the scientific community” because the lipid nanoparticles (LNP) used as transport vehicles in mRNA Covid-19 vaccines do not remain at the injection site, as originally assumed. But in 2025, this seems very hypocritical to me, especially since there was already enough evidence for this, which was always denied by the paid liars.
This time a new technology is said to have been used. The name is: “Single Cell Precision Nanocarrier Identification”. This made it possible to precisely track the distribution of these tiny particles in the body.
This showed in mice that the LNPs, which transport the alleged “spike protein mRNA”, reach vital organs such as the heart, liver, spleen, lungs and kidneys, even in extremely low doses.
Dr. Mike Yeadon is certain that another protein unknown to us is expressed (produced), but by no means part of a virus.
Oh, and it is worth mentioning here the "new discovery" of the changes in the immune and vascular proteins in the heart tissue, which corresponds to the reported cases of myocarditis and pericarditis. At this point, one might ask ironically: Who would have thought ?
By the end of 2024, 27,357 such cases had been registered in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) in the USA alone, with the reported cases representing a fraction of all actual cases after the mRNA injection. Many statisticians point out that VAERS only publishes 1 to 5% of the "adverse side effects". I write this in quotation marks because it is obvious that these are indeed desired effects that have been correctly predicted since 2020 by Dr Mike Yeadon, among others.
……………………………………
Nanocarrier imaging at single-cell resolution across entire mouse bodies with deep learning
Published: 14 January 2025
Abstract
Efficient and accurate nanocarrier development for targeted drug delivery is hindered by a lack of methods to analyze its cell-level biodistribution across whole organisms. Here we present Single Cell Precision Nanocarrier Identification (SCP-Nano), an integrated experimental and deep learning pipeline to comprehensively quantify the targeting of nanocarriers throughout the whole mouse body at single-cell resolution. SCP-Nano reveals the tissue distribution patterns of lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) after different injection routes at doses as low as 0.0005 mg kg−1—far below the detection limits of conventional whole body imaging techniques. We demonstrate that intramuscularly injected LNPs carrying SARS-CoV-2 spike mRNA reach heart tissue, leading to proteome changes, suggesting immune activation and blood vessel damage. SCP-Nano generalizes to various types of nanocarriers, including liposomes, polyplexes, DNA origami and adeno-associated viruses (AAVs), revealing that an AAV2 variant transduces adipocytes throughout the body. SCP-Nano enables comprehensive three-dimensional mapping of nanocarrier distribution throughout mouse bodies with high sensitivity and should accelerate the development of precise and safe nanocarrier-based therapeutics.
( … )
Results
( … )
We first optimized the DISCO whole mouse clearing technique to enable sensitive 3D imaging of clinical LNP doses at the single-cell level. We found that eliminating urea and sodium azide and reducing dichloromethane (DCM) incubation time were crucial for preserving the fluorescence signal of Alexa Fluor–tagged mRNAs throughout the mouse body24,25,26,27 (Supplementary Fig. 2 and Methods). Using this refined DISCO method, we imaged mice at a resolution of approximately 1–2 µm (lateral) and approximately 6 µm (axial), revealing extensive cellular targeting of the LNPs, especially in the liver and spleen, even at doses as low as 0.0005 mg kg−1 (Fig. 1d–f and Supplementary Fig. 3), achieving single-cell resolution across the body (Supplementary Fig. 4a–d).
( … )
Full article :
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-024-02528-1
………………………………….
Editor's note:
The study also sheds light on Pfizer's own research ( https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/CDC-2021-0034-1148_attachment_1.pdf ) : after just eight hours, only 22 percent of the injected LNPs were still detectable at the injection site. 18 percent had migrated to the liver and one percent to the spleen.
Please note that this is just one of the many damage mechanisms that were INTENTIONALLY built into the design. Many others cannot be photographed.
Furthermore, we should be clear that perfectly healthy people were forced to consume this toxic broth, even though there was never a real health risk. The recommendation of these substances to pregnant women and children makes it even clearer that there was a clear intention to cause harm. Any scientist who says mistakes were made here is not your friend. No "mistakes" were made here.
If these were "mistakes," they would have been fixed in no time. However, the perpetrators are continuing to develop mRNA technology. The only explanation I can think of, apart from democide, intentional infertility and shortening of life expectancy, is the provocation of general anger against governments in order to make it easier to replace them with the direct power of the financial banksters. This seems to have happened a long time ago (illegally, of course), but the perpetrators' goal, as I suspect, is to have this legalized officially and with the consent of the poorly informed citizens. Everything that has the appearance of democracy or looks like left-wing tendencies should be abolished once and for all. I hope that it seems obvious that the so-called leftists who work in the interests of capital are in fact the rightists. Whether they know it themselves or not is irrelevant. Especially in the USA, such terms were deliberately swapped around in an Orwellian manner, mixed up in many points, and on top of that, embellished with other aspects. In this way, the brainwashing is almost perfect. But that is a topic for another article.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Dr Mike Yeadon, January 23, 2025 :
https://substack.com/@drmikeyeadon/note/c-87959258
( … )
On ANYTHING to do with mRNA, I’ve been very blunt & clear that they are ALL designed to injure recipients.
It’s so bad that I regard it as axiomatic that being injected with anything purporting to be “based on mRNA technology” will injure you. It cannot give rise to any other effect, in practise.
There’s a very good comment under this article about AI, which confirmed & extended my own understanding of it.
1. It cannot do what is claimed for it. It’s fast and impressive but incapable of creating anything truly novel.
2. All AI systems make mistakes, though I suspect a better description for this phenomenon is “Lying”. As I understand it, it is not understood how & why it occasionally & unpredictably tells you things that are not only not correct but things it “knows” are incorrect. We can tell it “knows”, because if it’s challenged, it immediately concedes. For no other reason than this, we must not accept AI infiltrating our lives further than it already is.
The Stargate matter is definitely malign. I can say this with confidence, not only because governments are all now at war with it’s citizens, but because they only lie. Since 2020, literally anything important that we’ve all been told is not true.
Among the many reasons why I no longer consume any “news” is my conviction that it’s all lies and nothing good can come of it.
If an item is going to become important to us all, it’s going to become apparent over time.
I am incidentally slowly developing scepticism about cancer treatments. I’m not yet sufficiently educated about this unique topic to advise myself let alone anyone else, but there some very odd linkages between purported benefits (Why you need to accept this) and axiomatic harms (“If it’s hurting, it’s working”). I’m going to pass this delightful opportunity!
I’m well aware that there is a theoretical application of this claimed technology to selectively kill certain cells. The cheek of it is that the way this is supposed to work is through EXACTLY the same mechanism that was the core reason I sooke out against gene-based mRNA technology as products for the mass market.
Setting aside for now the technical specifications for this miracle of oncology, does anyone here have any residual trust for the industry that manufactures this and the class of products to which they belong? How about medicines regulators, ready to trust them?
Just set it aside totally.
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Dr. Mike Yeadon, January 5, 2025 :
https://t.me/DrMikeYeadonsolochannel/2356
From Prof Arne Burkhardt (RIP) an important contribution to attribution of death and to disability post injection:
““Our review reveals that actually in 77% of the 75 autopsied persons; the vaccination had an important impact on the death process.”
Best wishes
Mike
Linked :
https://coronanews123.wordpress.com/2024/12/30/24687/
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
“I’m sure they don’t make spike protein.”
…………………………………………………………………………………………
Dr Mike Yeadon, October 29, 2024 :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/one-of-substacks-best-information/comment/74555398
I’m sure they don’t make spike protein. I of course AssUMe’d they did, because we were informed that was what was encoded in the mRNA.
However, numerous analyses have confirmed we were lied to.
I’m not sure what’s in any injection but to the extent there is some mRNA & apparently lots of cDNA, the victims cells will attempt to make whatever is encoded, which presumably varies.
Even a short piece of polypeptide if foreign should get expressed on cell surfaces in conjunction with MHC class II & that may be enough to trigger cell attack.
It isn’t good, that’s for sure.
………………………….
currer, November 4, 2024 :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/one-of-substacks-best-information/comment/75498991
"I’m sure they don’t make spike protein"...."However, numerous analyses have confirmed we were lied to"....
Mike, how do you account for the antigen staining on histology slides being positive for spike? is this cross reacting with some other protein?. Sasha Latypova thought that the spike sequences were truncated but similar enough to spike to show up as positive.
Remember Dr Burkhardt's slides.
…………………………………….
Dr Mike Yeadon, November 12, 2024 :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/one-of-substacks-best-information/comment/76741052
I account for it by pointing out that we’re only told that is what those commercial antibodies bind to.
I don’t think they do anything of the kind.
It’s easy to raise commercial antibodies to bind to whatever you immunise the source animal with.
There is no independent evaluation of these probes.
…………………………………
currer, November 12, 2024 :
https://drmikeyeadon.substack.com/p/one-of-substacks-best-information/comment/76791161
However Burkhardt said in his evidence to Doctors for Covid Ethics, that he tested the histology tissues for Sars cov 2 nucleoside protein and it was negative. The only positives were for Sars cov 2 spike, which he interpreted to mean that these tissues had been damaged by the vaccine spike and not by a natural infection with Sars cov 2.
Not a finding the other side would want.
I suppose if there is no spike at all, and the commercial antibodies are reacting to something quite other, this could also account for this finding. But why leave this trail of evidence behind? Would it not be better to fix the nucleoside test as well - in other words all the antibody tests for Sars Cov 2?
……………………………..
Editor's note:
The above comments by currer have since been deleted. However, I saved the conversation beforehand. I think it's important to reproduce the entire conversation to better shed light on the topic.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
For the most reliable information about the "Covid" scam and deceptions of the system, read Dr. Mike Yeadon's daily statements :
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. But you can also try other, smaller browsers, too.
Censorship is omnipresent on Google or Safari.
Many statements and videos from Dr. Mike Yeadon can also be found on Suavek's Substack, which is recommended by Dr. Yeadon on the main page of his Substack.
Both links lead to Suavek`s Substack :
I understood Katherine Watt's comment to mean the small differences between the mRNA products. These have been around since 1990 and were never approved before 2020 due to their high toxicity. What is unclear to me, however, is Katherine's subsequent conclusion that these products (due to the minimal differences?) are "vaccines". I don't understand it, because gene therapies were never allowed to be called "vaccines" before 2020, and in my opinion, they are not even similar to vaccines. However, I have a suspicion.
This comment can be considered a kind of "thinking out loud" because I have a puzzle to solve that is related to Katherine Watt's comment. However, I don't know if my guess is correct.
Since I can't think of a better explanation for Katherine's point of view at the moment, I imagine the following. I don't know whether that is exactly correct. Perhaps she meant the similarity of the effects attributed to these products by the pharmaceutical industry, such as the production of antibodies, etc., which will prove to be false upon closer inspection. From the point of view of the "no virus community", the question arises: antibodies against what? And from the point of view of conventional medicine, we can point out that the conventional "vaccines" have never worked either, and that the level of antibodies could never provide an accurate picture of immunity, because this area is also fraudulent. (I have already prepared a corresponding article on antibodies). This means that Katherine was only referring to the similarities that have been attributed to mRNA technology by the pharmaceutical industry, but which turn out to be misrepresentations.
The question of the general ineffectiveness and toxicity of these substances does not have to be taken into account in this consideration, and the difference to conventional "vaccines" is also irrelevant at this point. The theoretically attributed effect that the pharmaceutical industry is talking about seems to be the decisive factor from Katherine's point of view. I can only hope that I have understood this correctly, because I am only relying on assumptions. Because "vaccines" are (unfortunately) understood in common parlance as "protective immunizations," I have suggested this simplified definition.
Since these substances cannot protect a healthy person from future diseases, I found the term "vaccine" inappropriate. Although I personally would be very reluctant to refer to gene therapy substances as "vaccines," I do not deny that there can be other points of view. Because so far it has been pure poison, I also find the term "therapeutic" inappropriate and propose that the conventional "vaccinations" should also be written in quotation marks.
"As I understand it, it is not understood how & why it (AI) occasionally & unpredictably tells you things that are not only not correct but things it “knows” are incorrect. We can tell it “knows”, because if it’s challenged, it immediately concedes."
I discovered the truth of this a few weeks ago when doing research for a Substack article I was writing. I asked who funded a certain alternative media personality and the AI that automatically pops up on my browser gave me a name that was different to my previous research. I asked the AI for the source document used to come by the name. It immediately told me it had made a mistake. I thought that very strange.
AI can't be trusted. I think they (the ones used by prowsers anyway) are intentionally programmed to do this periodically because we are easier to control when we don't know what to believe or how to find the truth in all the noise out there. It shepherds people towards "trusted sources" like media and government.