We Might Have 10 Million Dead

Transcript of Dr Jane Ruby interviewed by Mike Adams: (Mar 24 2022) [608]

Dr Ruby:

  • We're asking people to stop using the term "vaccine".
  • It is precisely under that label that people are literally being murdered worldwide.
  • (The pharmaceutical companies) are claiming that they don't need to do these safety studies because they are a "vaccine".
  • Everybody can go to the FDA website; just look up "clinical guidance documents". There are thousands of them. And those are the directions, and the steps that pharma companies must go through. They have not taken them down yet. So it's very easy to match that with what has not been done.
  • And we are uncovering through "Team Enigma", if you're familiar with that group. We are uncovering a lot more of the fraud, and the crime that is really buttressing, what Dr Martin calls the "Criminal Conspiracy". And it certainly is. It's vast. And it's worldwide. And it's very frightening.
  • Dr Jane Ruby on Telegram: "DRJANERUBY"

Mike Adams:

  • You were one of the first to report on the airline pilots dropping dead.
  • Also you reported on the morticians pulling this long stringy rubbery vein-clot things.
  • I was horrified. I can't even watch.
  • What are the big stories from the last year that you've seen, that you think are important for people to understand?

Dr Ruby:

  • I think it's the fact that on any given day, anything could be in these vials. That's the way it has been.
  • There are up to 1.5 million doses in one single lot number, that's been verified by hackers that got into the Pfizer and the Moderna. Not their websites, their systems, and validated that.
  • So knowing that this is like a "Russian roulette on steroids". I often say to people, if you're playing standard Russian Roulette, you're going to get one of two things: you're going to get air, or a bullet to your head. In this case, with these vials and these shots, there are hundreds of chambers, so on any given day, it's the most dangerous risk that I've ever seen in my life.
  • I've seen the proof, that there are multiple things. There are things in there that won't even manifest for years to come. And I say that because there are partial RNA strands that are allowed to be in there, and we don't even know what they're coded for.
  • We have this great story, we have this mRNA that gets on every cell on the body, and forces the cells to make this synthetic never-before-seen-in-nature spike, that infiltrates the body and causes havoc.
  • That's just one possibility. These companies are not disclosing.
  • You mentioned the Delta pilots situation. The next day Delta was on the phone with Stew (Peters) demanding we retract the story. We said "no, we're not going to do that, because we have sources".
  • You don't hear anything from these pharma companies.
  • The other clue that is really stunning is that cut-throat industry, like pharma, not a single company is saying "I didn't get away with that; why are they jumping over human-kinetic trials before they do lethal dose testing on human population?" No one is saying a word. I've never seen such collusion and silence. That really concerns me greatly.

Mike Adams:

  • It's extraordinary.
  • Just yesterday, Dr Francis Boyle was with Owen Shroyer on InfoWars, and Dr Boyle's interview was a bombshell [613]. He said, "this is a nazi death cult of bioweapons engineers". He specifically named Anthony Fauci, Francis Collins (NIH), Rochelle Walensky (CDC), Ralph Baric (UNC Chapel Hill), Peter Daszak (EcoHealth Alliance). All the different players involved with this.
  • And Dr Boyle openly is calling for life in prison sentences for these people.
  • He refers to them as war criminals, essentially.
  • Last year you also started to talk that this must be a depopulation, or extermination type of weapon system. It's clearly not medicine. It's something different.
  • And I've even seen others, even Dr Robert Mallone hinting in that direction. And Dr Peter McCullough openly talking about it.
  • Don't you find it interesting?
  • First I want your thoughts on that. A lot of science-minded individuals, at first, were very reluctant, obviously, to quote leap to that, but as the evidence came in, it became undeniable. What are your thoughts Dr Ruby?

Dr Ruby:

  • When you think about Pfizer, the largest pharmaceutical company on the planet, by any metric: number of employees, number of drugs, revenue, whatever you want to measure.
  • They spend a lot of tax dollars, thanks to Fauci, that has gone into this terror.
  • But they know what they're doing. They've launch hundreds and hundreds of products. They are not going to do something like this and put billions of dollars into it, if they don't know what they're doing, or on a whim.
  • That's clue number 1.
  • It's incredibly dangerous. These companies are running the tables worldwide.
  • The other clue is: you have tens of thousands, that we know of, of deaths and injuries. Probably millions really. Look at the Harvard "pilgrim study" [609] that said that less than 1% of all vaccine adverse events are reported in the VAERS system.
  • So you give a 100 multiplier there.
  • So there are probably millions of people dead, worldwide, because of this, and these companies haven't said a word about it. They are not even sorry. Nothing. It's because they know what they're doing.
  • We've also learned from "Team Enigma", who studied very cleverly these lot numbers, and the rates of death and disability, according to these lots. And they looked at the patterns, and when they looked at Pfizer and Moderna, and they overlaid the deployment pattern, they were the same! They're working together! That's not by chance!
  • And I've seen the statistical methods they've used, and the results. From my past experience in health economics, which I'm most published in PubMed. Their approach is solid, and I can say that it's not by chance.

Mike Adams:

  • If it's not by chance, as you've said, then it's on intent. What's their motivation?

Dr Ruby:

  • Obviously, the money is huge. People need to take notice. Because there was a financial statement that just came out, this is Arvinas and Pfizer, there are at least 10 more mRNA-based vaccines coming for all kinds of diseases. I'm sure they've already set into motion with these shots.
  • We'll have some rough times ahead, if we don't corral these companies.
  • I've tossed directly, and this is of no surprise for many of you who know me, but I've tossed directly with some senators, most recently with Senator Ron Johnson, in private emails. And I just say that I told him to spare me the faint indignation, sorry to offend anyone, because, as long as these hearings don't go anywhere, they don't result in action, these are United States Senators. They have the power to defund the FDA, to dismantle it, to reconstruct it, to call in these companies, to nationalise them, and get to their documents, and yet, all we get is a "donate" button.

Mike Adams:

  • So imagine a world where we are all enslaved in a medical system where you're "vaccinated" with DNA-damaging gene therapy injections, at a very young age, that are designed to grow tumors in your body, which is what these do, and then you're "saved" by Big Pharma with cancer-defeating gene therapy, which is really what the mRNA technology was actually designed to do.
  • And then, Big Pharma is held up as the "saviour", saving humanity, saving millions of lives from cancer. It's the cancer they gave you!
  • And then, we're all stuck in this system.

Dr Ruby:

  • And the way they laid it out, right? The way these illnesses are happening. People will not connect the dots to these shots now. They can't even connect it when someone dies two days after the second Pfizer shot, when they're 30 years old and perfectly healthy. How are they going to connect it, five or ten years from now, when they're riddled with cancer and they say "I was unlucky, my cancer came back"? They're just not putting it all together.

Mike Adams:

  • You know, on a personal note, I'm really relieved, actually very happy that brilliant minds like yours have been ... you have focused on these issues.
  • One of my personal fears, I'm not afraid to share this with the public, is that I've been talking about Big Pharma's death machines since 2005, 2006. We actually had cartoons showing Big Pharma hiding cures from the public, and all kinds of things.
  • For most of this time, it's been called a "conspiracy theory". And most people thought "it was no way that big pharma companies are going to try to kill you; they're here to help humanity" ... and so on and so forth. But now, of course, that's all changed. And it's people like you, and I have to mention Steve Kirsch, Alex Berenson, Robert Mallone, Edward Dowd (from the Financial Insider) [610].
  • He hired statiticians to analyse the CDC's own data, and he's come to the conclusion, backed by data, that we now have 1.5 million excess deaths in the United States, due to these vaccines.
  • So you're right, Dr Ruby, when you say "millions are dead, around the world". Absolutely true. It could be 10 million dead right now.

Dr Ruby:

  • It absolutely could be. We don't know what the exact numbers are. Even in the unredacted pages of some of the Pfizer's recent data dump, you can still see small redacted areas. Even within the company, they were redacting and hiding information. I've just never seen anything like it.
  • I think, in part, it's because our institutions have collapsed. We really need to pay attention to that. We have no FDA, we have no DoJ, we have a weaponised FBI that's chasing mums that are screaming at school boards for masking their children, while this death and destruction moves forward.
  • I just want to understand how they're running their tables worldwide.
  • This should have been shut down a long time ago.
  • As the months went on, and I started watching and watching, I thought: no, this is way too much. There seems to be no threshold of death, that will get anybody's attention and stop this.
  • So now, logically, I have to flip back into: this is intentional, people are been paid off, people are doing this purposefully. There's no other logical explanation.
  • I've learned early, in March 2020, ... I'm a nurse practitioner, I'm trained in protecting yourself in infectious disease ... and yet I got this illness. So, my doctor called me and told me I was positive. I said, "OK, phone in the prescription for Hydroxy-chloroquine (we didn't know about Ivermectin yet), and everything will be OK". He said "I can't do that; you'll have to wait until you're in an ICU". Talking medical person to medical person, so I said "Why would you wait until I'm that sick?" And what he said after that changed everything to me. This is a trusted doctor I worked with in DC for years. He said "Jane, you're just going to have to tough this one out". And then he hunged up on me.
  • And I thought to myself: "what? I'm a prescriber". As I recovered, I got he was getting that from the Department of Health, by the governor of my then state.

Mike Adams:

  • These are crimes against humanity: withholding effective treatments from people who are sick and dying.
  • Hospitals have become homicide hubs.
  • Medical murder has become normalised by the medical profession.
  • I don't know anybody who trust doctors anymore, by the way.
  • People trust lawyers now more than doctors, if you can believe that.

Dr Ruby:

  • And I never thought it would happen. In fact, funny you mention that about the hospitals. I've been very involved with Stew (Peters) and attorney Tom Renz and Dr Eric Hensen from Texas [611]. And I'm sure many other people in little groups are doing this all over the country. But, in getting this word out, and participating to air-lift and mercy-flight people out of these dangerous hospitals into safer hospitals.
  • They're actually killing people intentionally. They are coming out dehydrated, emaciated, they have severe organ damage from unnecessary harsh drugs.
  • Now I have called attention to hash-tag nurses that stayed. I said to them there's no excuse now. Sorry, you're actually enabling a system that is killing people intentionally by this "CDC Death protocol". It's unheard of.

Mike Adams:

  • You're not describing, and we were told about, Nazi Germany and the holocaust.
  • The message that was said to us by our school teachers was "this could never happen again because we remember the horrors of Nazi Germany, and there were a bunch of evil people. But America is good, and we are the defenders, and we defeated Hitler."
  • And then now you realise that the bioweapons Deep State has become the Fourth Reich of the Nazi regime. That Fauci IS the Joseph Mengele. And that other people in the system, Collins and so on, are like the JP Morgan bankers that funded the whole operation so that Nazis could exterminate millions of Jewish people.
  • It's all come back, and now the American Deep State is the regime. It's just incredible.

Dr Ruby:

  • Yes, and one of the biggest clues is: since when does the government gets involved in blocking access to life-saving treatments? If that isn't a big clue that something is really off, and we're on somebody else's timeline?
  • Look at what they are doing to our military. They are literally decimating our military. I've been in contact, I can say it now, for many months, with somebody I admire greatly, Lt. Col. Dr Theresa Long. I've known of the devastation and the destruction.
  • How can somebody corral our DoD into poisoning our troops? With what purpose? It's very frightening.

Mike Adams:

  • First of all, it's treason, in the military sense, because we are at war. A biowar was launched on America in late 2019. We've been on a war.
  • And it's also a crime against humanity, from a medical perspective.
  • It's also illegal under international weapons treaties that block the development of gain-of-function bioweapons.
  • This is illegal at so many levels; even beyond what the Nazis did, which was horrifying.
  • The Nazis killed, according to history, 6 million Jews. We are already over 6 million people dead from this "vaccine", I believe. And specially if you combine SARS-CoV-2 and the "vaccines", way over 6 million, at this point.
  • Your thoughts.

Dr Ruby:

  • I also believe so too.
  • Now you have to add the deaths from the hospitals. I have to bring it back to the hospitals. They are part of the system, to depopulate.

Mike Adams:

  • Now, continuing, see the CEO of Pfizer ordering everybody to take another booster shot, as if the company that profits from this is now dictating public health policy. He is a veterinarian. He is not even a doctor. He doesn't have the clinical trial experience. He says "everybody has to take the 4th shot".
  • And Fauci steps in and says "yes, everybody must take the 4th shot".
  • Don't they know that people are already rejecting that?
  • Don't they know it's already over, for most people?
  • Even the people they sucked into three shots are saying "no, no more, I've already have enough side effects".
  • What do you think?

Dr Ruby:

  • The problem is, there's still enough people, I think, that will continue to belly-up for this.
  • It's amazing to me that people see, they see in front of them, that if two shots do not work, they want to go for the next shot. Where is the logic in that?
  • The way people have been drawn into this is just unbelievable.
  • All you have to do is talk about "delta, omicron, this variant and that variant", which I don't believe in, because first of all, you can't diagnose it, right?
  • There is no validated diagnostic tool on the planet. You're welcome to try to prove me wrong.
  • How do you know there is a variant?
  • I know this challenges Dr McCullough, who I respect very much, but I challenge him on it. You can't diagnose it.
  • Viruses burn down, they don't burn up. Unless you tweak them in a gain-of-function lab.
  • All these guys Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric, they're all animals zoologists, veterinarians. What are they doing in these positions?
  • And, I think we are done. We have enough of the population who's eyes have been opened to the fact that these people don't know what they're doing. They have just been pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.
  • Look at what they did to natural immunity. I called people's attention to this. First, Rochelle Walensky and the CDC said: "nature doesn't know what it is doing; you don't have natural immunity".
  • Then they overcome that, saying "well, you have natural immunity, but you don't have durability". Get out of here!
  • Then they overcome that lie, "well you've got it, and it probably lasts life long, but it won't hurt you to have a little more protection".
  • That's why we need to stop calling it a "vaccine". Because vaccines conjure up an impression, a perception, of future security, and future protection. And we all know that these don't do that.
  • Something that instigates immunity, instigates two things:
    • a surveillance system for that, and anything that looks like it, and,
    • an army, a little killer-T group that knows to go after it.
  • People need to remember these (so-called "vaccines") don't do any of those.
  • In fact, they do the opposite. They are going to make you sick. And I have an answer for people who say "Dr Jane, I know a whole community or family who took the shots, and they're fine."
  • Yes, it's parsed out. You don't think they'll be stupid enough to have everybody die at once, right? 20-50 hundred million people die at once? That would have shot everything down. It would have been devastating to the world. But, No. It's paced out. And unfortunately, I believe now from the evidence that I've seen, that it's paced out over many different types of illnesses, like cancer.
  • We've seen evidence now, really interesting, from PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans, of people who completed their first two Pfizer shots, for example, and then had a PET scan, then a week after their booster they just had an explosion of, not only swelling in the entire lymphatic system, but lesions that appeared. So we've got imaging proof, we've got chemical proof, we know it gets into the DNA, and we know that it situates itself in there and changes the configuration (from the Sweddish study that use the human liver cells). We are not short on evidence. We are short on something to do about it.
  • One of the things these companies did that I thought was really blatant, and I've been calling attention to it, as an insider, is that when a drug gets approved, you get the "package insert". As a prescriber, a need to look at that. I need to see that it should contain everything from the fully completed studies. I need to know the pharmaco-kinetics. I need to know the absorption rate. How the body eliminates it. What's its half-life is, so that I know the time, and how to dose it.
  • These companies, now we know from the data dump, I knew they have not done any safety and pharmaco-kinetics in humans, because I don't see the evidence anywhere. They probably couldn't because it's dangerous. Instead, what I've found in these documents, is just what I suspected. They did a tiny little bit, and they only used about 3 rats. It's outrageous!

Mike Adams:

  • Three rats? Would that be Collins, Fauci and Welinsky? Are those the names of the three rats?
  • You're getting into an interesting fascinating area here, and the documents you're referring to are the Pfizer foyer documents that were submitted to the FDA. [615] Correct?

Dr Ruby:

  • These are the documents that were supposedly held for 75 years. Correct.

Mike Adams:

  • You mentioned pharmaco-kinetic studies, I know that there was one out of Japan that was a bombshell. One of the first bombshells, at least from my view, was that we learned that mRNA PEG nano particles circulate throughout the body, they accumulate in the ovaries and the testes, and adrenals, and lungs, and spleen, and so on. That was one bombshell.
  • Then another bombshell, more recently, was that the mRNA doesn't just go into the ribosomes in the cell. [223] Some of it penetrates the cell nucleus and it can interfere with the DNA repair mechanism. The non-homologous joining NHEJ which repairs the double-strand breaks, like ionized radiation causing chromosomal breaks. From there, it became obvious this is going to cause a massive wave of cancer.
  • Cancers are going to grow like crazy on people, even been just exposed to sunlight, or mamograms, or high altitude flights. We are going to have a cancer tidal wave off the charts.
  • And then now Pfizer comes out and releases they have mRNA to treat cancer. Wow!
  • But all along they lied and said that the vaccine stays in the arm. Lie, after lie, after lie.
  • And they are killing us at the genetic level.

Dr Ruby:

  • And nobody is doing anything.
  • But let me call your attention to the Chief Medical Officer of Moderna, Tal Sakz, who brags that this technology is "hacking the software of life". What audacity is that?
  • Specially to do it without our informed consent.
  • And on their web site they show you that they believe that you're just a series of organs, made of cells, and you have a code (and you do: you have a God-given code). They are going to hack it, because they believe that they are spart enough to be able to control and prevent illness, whatever their fantasy is.
  • But you know that they are criminal, because they never tested it properly.
  • One of the advantages of being a former pharmaceutical developer is that you understand that there is a stepwise process for human-drug developemnt. The reason you cannot do these trials together, if you look at the Pfizer protocol in clinicaltrials.gov, they put it in the title "Phase-1/2/3". You can't do those trials consecutively! Why? Because each subsequent trial has to be designed based on the results of the previous study. "Phase 1" are your human basic pharmaco-dynamics, pharmaco-kinetics, your dosing in healthy people (staying away from your lethal dose and your sub-therapeutics). And then you go to "Phase 2" which is larger numbers of people.
  • People don't know this. We'll try to teach people so that they understand where do the deviations come from. Where the FDA has committed its own crimes, by violating and ignoring.
  • I even submitted a sworn affidavit under penalty of perjury, that's been submitted in a couple of federal courts, so far, on behalf of military, but applies across the board to all citizens, stating, trying to create a foundation to these judges, that every authorisation is illegal. Its effectively illegal because these companies never finished their trials. The trials themselves are usually about 24 weeks. That's not a long-term study, for safety, but is what the FDA generally requires in most trials.
  • They were allowed to "break their blind", how convenient, because when you "break your blind" you loose your placebo group. And then you loose your ability to find your safety signal, when you don't have a placebo comparator group.
  • Some of this is a little technical, but they should get outraged.

Mike Adams:

  • I want to translate that into lay persons language: to "break the blind", this is absolutely critical, so you have one group of people that you vaccinate, and another group of people that you don't vaccinate. And then you compare the side effects between the vaccinated group and the unvaccinated gorup. And that's how you know the difference.
  • So what Pfizer did was to say "the vaccines are working so great that we have to vaccinate everybody, so it won't be ethical to not treat these other people." They vaccinated the blind group, and then there is no blind group. And then all the side effects just cancel each other out now, and they say "look how safe it is".
  • That is so fraudulent ! It's criminal, fraud, what they did !

Dr Ruby:

  • It is.
  • But you know what? Fauci has a history of doing that.
  • He has done it with a number of drugs.
  • When he started to see the safety signal, he tells the company to pull the blind. And people need to understand that there is, in general, only one study design that is appropriate, that is required to yield the type of data that is submissible for review to be approved for human use. And that is a randomised, double-blind placebo control trial.
  • "Double blind" so that the investigators, the people giving you the treatment, don't know what they are giving you, and you don't know as a recipient.
  • And, by the way, those data dumps, those forms of the post-authorisation adverse event thing that goes, that actually start Dec 1 2020, and it's just 12 weeks, and it goes to Feb 28th 2021. But within that you have about 42,000 people. That number, those people, are discussed in the Comirnaty package insert. On page seven, at the top, they tell you that they broke the blind and that they gave the option to the placebo group. Scared people took the real thing. Imagine the time frame.
  • Every number that you see in this document, when I see 8,000 Guillain-BarrĂ© cases, that's out of the 42,000 that took it.

Mike Adams:

  • You have a background in psychology. I know there is a phenomenon in psychiatric drug trials where people are told that if you get the real drug and not the placebo, you might expect side-effects. The people have been so brain-washed by the media to want the drug, so that when they start to feel side-effects they conclude "oh, I must have the real drug", and it makes them happy. And they report "happiness", and then that's the evidence that the drug is "working".
  • So, the more you suffer, the happier you get.
  • This is like "democrats celebrating higher gasoline prices".
  • This is pure insanity.

Dr Ruby:

  • The other one along those lines was the lie that when you get these severe side-effects, you can barely walk for a few days, you have fever, you're really sick and people say "that's because the vaccine is working".
  • That is not founded on any science. That is not supposed to happen.

Mike Adams:

  • I can see these people: "my leg stopped working, I can barely talk, thank God for medical science."

Dr Ruby:

  • It teaches them to be greatful for having side-effects.
  • I want to give a warning: you saw these 10 other mRNA technologies coming for other diseases.
  • I do not trust seasonal flu shots.
  • I do not trust the childhood vaccination schedule.
  • I think they may be using and slipping their technology into those inoculations.
  • People have to be very careful, very judicious, and be careful bringing your children. Even for seasonal shots.
  • Right now, you cannot trust these companies.

Mike Adams:

  • Anybody watching this video is never going to allow themselves to be injected with any so-called "vaccine" ever again.
  • If anyone out there is trusting a flu shot, you must be insane.
  • These companies are literally trying to murder you. There is no other way to state it.
  • They put a murder weapon into a vaccine and call it whatever they want. Anything to get you there to get injected.

Dr Ruby:

  • Exactly.
  • And when they come around the corner saying "hey, this is for your yearly influenza". You're going to trust them?
  • They are not even forthcoming. We don't even know what is in these shots. I really want to emphasize that to people.
  • There are things that we may not even know for years.

Mike Adams:

  • What is your long-term prognosis, because cancer can take many years, specially to become fatal.
  • We have neurological issues, reproductive issues, endocrine system disruptions ...
  • How do you think this is going to play out amongst those people who have already taken these mRNA injections?
  • What are they looking at over the next decade or so?

Dr Ruby:

  • I'm not sure we know the extent of the illnesses and injuries. I think it is going to expand, the broad base of illnesses.
  • You have just listed the body systems: neurological, cardiological, reproductive, auto-immune.
  • So these are going to be so difusely distributed throughtout the population. I think we are going to have a lot of dark days and dark pockets.
  • We are also going to have pockets of people going about their business, over the next 10 or 20 years. Maybe even for this generation.
  • But I think there's still going to be people like us who knew this, who write about it, who talk about it, who create content and videos on it. And people are going to look back and make some connections.
  • I think we are in for some confusing times, even if we find a way to stop this criminal programme that is going on worldwide.

Mike Adams:

  • I can't wait to see Fauci serving life in prison.
  • I'll be right there with Dr Francis Boyle.
  • I want to visit Fauci in prison to lecture him. Do you want to come along with me? We can do it together.
  • I think he will be indicted and then he'll commit suicide.

Dr Ruby:

  • These are such evil people.

Mike Adams:

  • We need those evil people to tell their stories. That will be more valuable to society.
  • I won't even insist on him going to prison if he laid out everything he did since the 1980s to lay it out for the historical record. A full confession. That would be like a 50-hour documentary, of every evil he did.

Dr Ruby:

  • As long as you disengage him from any power or money. So he won't be able to do this again to people.

Mike Adams:

  • House arrest or something. He can't leave his apartment.
  • Do to him what they did to Julian Assange, and set Assange free. Trade places.

Dr Ruby:

  • He (Fauci) committed so many crimes.

Mike Adams:

  • Worse than Mengele.
  • Dr Ruby, any final thoughts.

Dr Ruby:

  • I want people to stay hopeful and optimistic. I do think we'll get to the other side of this.
  • Pay it forward. Take care of each other. Start where you are locally. Form alliances. Repurpose your skills.
  • You don't cease to become a doctor or a nurse when you leave that horrible hospital system.
  • Repurpose, connect with others, and take care of each other.
  • We are all on this together, and we're going to get through it.

Mike Adams:

  • Thank you, Dr Ruby for all that you're doing. Please keep doing what you're doing.
  • Many people are being inspired by your work, your courage.
  • Don't let the fact-checkers bother you. They're all ran by Pfizer (Reuters is an extension of Pfizer; who cares!).

Premeditated Murder

Interview to Dr Michael Yeadon, by Dr Reiner Fullmich: (Jan 8th 2022) [304]

The Lies

  • Dr Yeadon: The reason I'm speaking out is because I noticed advisers to the UK government lying, lying on directly on television. First, it was just kind of fascinating. But through the sprint into the summer of 2020, I came first alarmed and then later in the year, frightened. I still remain frightened.

  • Why? Every country in the world had what was a pandemic preparedness plan for things like this or influenza, more typically. And I read them, I read all of them, from the G20 countries, plus the WHO.

  • In essence, they have only two things to recommend: (1) if you are asymptomatic, stay at home and away from other people, until you're better. And that's because we've known for decades that symptomatic people drive respiratory viral infections and epidemics. (2) And the other measure was wash your hands more frequently than usual, because with any new pathogen we don't understand transmission properly. So, that's a good precaution.
  • The next nine pages of these pandemic plans involve telling us what they shouldn't do. None of them involved border closures, unless you lived on a small island. School closures, business closures, mass testing of the well, lockdown, masking, anything like that. None of them. Absolutely.
  • All the things that we have been told are essential, were missing and explicitly ruled out by the previous plan.
  • So I would say the strongest evidence I can offer for my assertion that there is a supranational plan to take over all of the liberal democracies, is this. That all of the countries had somewhat similar pandemic preparedness plans that were very simple, and they all discarded them in the weeks of March 2020. All of them. And they replaced them with the same narrative script, and I just described them.
  • I call them the eight COVID lies. Every single one of them is an untruth.
  • And I think the objective was to frighten people to death. I think it worked. So how could it possibly be that Germany, Italy, the United States, Iceland, the Scandinavian countries, have all got the same bunch of wrong information, all at the same time? There's only one way that can happen: if they all agreed to do it beforehand, really.
  • There is a long recording with the program called "The HighWire with Del Bigtree" [322], Nov 17th 2020, and I go through them (exposing all of the lies) in painful detail.
  • What did they say? They told us thinks like "this is an extremely lethal virus. You can't see it, you're ill, you really could die". Remember the falling man, face down in Wuhan.
  • It never happened anywhere else. It's pure theatre. It turns out that it's not a particularly lethal virus. If it exists at all, it's about the same as a bad seasonal influenza.
  • They used PCR testing repeatedly off swabs, up noses and throats, and led you to believe that these were highly accurate and could distinguish a clinically infected person from something that's not.
  • Even the inventor Kary Mullis, who died, won a Nobel Prize for this technique, said you should never use it for this purpose, so I won't waste any more time. They are still using these tests, and they're not reliable. They don't tell you anything, really.
  • They also say you should wear masks, but masks have been extensively studied. Cloth masks, if anything, make you more likely to catch an unusual bacterial pneumonia, because you're breathing through a filthy cloth. And the blue medical masks are, they're not masks, they're splash guards. Their purpose in hospitals is to stop blood and bodily fluids going into the nose and mouth of the attending healthcare worker. They've never been for filtering your breath, and obviously they don't do so. But they told you to wear masks, and I think the purpose, certainly in me, it causes anxiety. I feel really awful wearing these things.
  • Then they introduced lockdowns where you are all to stay at home, mostly unless you are a poor manual worker, and then you have to go out to work. But the intelligentsia pretty much got paid to stay at home for very long periods of time, three months initially, in the case of Britain. Lockdowns, they told us, would slow the spread of transmission of this virus, and lots of people thought it must obviously be so because the disease spread from person to person. But it didn't. It didn't chime with me, and I'm embarrassed to say it took me months to realise why they wouldn't work.
  • And it comes to this next lie: The idea of "asymptomatic transmission", that "you could be bearing the virus in your airways, yet have no symptoms, but nevertheless be able to spread enough of the stuff to infect a person nearby". That's not true. That's a flat lie. And whenever a scientific adviser, medical adviser to a government tells you things like asymptomatic transmission, I want you to know that they're lying. Because it has been studied and it's simply not true.
  • If asymptomatic transmission doesn't occur, and, I'm certain, it's epidemiologically irrelevant, why do you need to wear masks if you're well? Why do you need to test somebody who has no symptoms? Why do you need to close your business, or you school, or the economy?
  • So again, they've lied to you with the objective of both frightening you and, I think, also, learning from financially experienced people, the other objective was to begin to destroy the economy and the sovereign currencies, and I think, that's a continuing objective.
  • They also lied to us, and told us that there were no treatments for this respiratory viral infection. And I will take my hat off to Dr Peter McCullough as a leader. But he is a representative of very many brave physicians who push back on this nihilism, and they have determined half-a-dozen really quite good therapies used progressively. So early on they want to treat replication, in the middle phase inflammation, in the terminal phase coagulation. And if you understand this multiphase infection, you come to the conclusion, which is mine, that this is the most treatable respiratory viral illness ever. It's really quite surprising.
  • But the use of those treatments have been denied, almost all around the world, to the extent that people will be fined, or stroke off (de-registered) as physicians. Yet another lie there.
  • And then they would say things like "well, we're not sure when you had it, if you've become immune". Well, I would say Immunology 101, tells you that that's simply not true. We know that the default understanding would be, once you shrugged off this virus, you will have taken "high-resolution pictures" of it, as it were, using your immune system. And if you see it again, or something related to it, like a variant, you'll not get clinically ill. Not for months, possibly for many years. So that's another lie.
  • And then the final one, and we'll come back to this, is that the vaccines are safe and effective, but that's a whole whole other story.
  • So I've said that the evidence of a supra-national plan is the discarding of simple, well-established pandemic preparedness plans, and replacing them with these bunch of lies. And all the countries did it. And if someone would like to write to me with an explanation, an innocent explanation for this, I would love to hear it. I want to be wrong, but unfortunately, I don't think I am.


  • So the motive is fear. And the ultimate aim is control. We will come onto this.
  • The control mechanism that we can see being installed all around us, are the so-called "vaccine passports", a certificate first on paper, and eventually a QR code on your phone, that tells anyone who needs to know that you received the requisite number of doses of these materials. Again, we'll come back to this. But again, that's nonsense.

Economic Destruction

  • Economic destruction, I think, is on its way.
  • There was a person who is very experienced in the city of London, and I heard them phoning into a radio show, three weeks ago, and they said, "I don't know anything about viruses, but I do know a lot about finance", and they said "the amount of money, it's not even been borrowed, it's just printed. It actually created new money with an IOU from the government they haven't sold, give gift certificates to investors". And he said, "it is my view that the sovereign currencies are already destroyed and the exchange rates ought to be moving violently against each other, and they're not if you're going to look". And that's because, as Catherine Austin Fitts tells us, this is a conspiracy led by the central banking clique and their clients to take over the world, I think. Once they'd done that, destroyed the economy, again I'm paraphrasing from Catherine, a great financial reset which will have us using our VaxPass, a Digital ID, and Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which you can look up. They are real, and they have been talked about by all central banks. You won't like those. It will be the end of cash, and of any privacy, of any transaction.

Event 201

  • And, I know I go further than many, but I'll really quite concerned that there is a serious intent to kill a very large proportion of the population of the world. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but all of the measures required to get to this point of control through Vaccine Passports, Digital ID, and also to repeatedly vaccinate people as we'll all come onto.
  • They certainly set the scene where a bad actor could introduce a gene sequence that will rob you of your health and kill you, in a fairly predictable way, at a fairly predictable rate per million doses and so on. So if somebody does want to depopulate, the setup is so perfect that it isn't completely crazy.
  • Before I move on to the vaccines, and this is a concern I had, lots of people have said to me, "Mike, this cannot possibly be the way you describe it. It looks compelling, I understand, but come on, you can't have a global conspiracy like this. It would leak and involve far too many people. You must be wrong."
  • And I suggest to them that they look for a video on YouTube, by a German journalist called Paul Schreyer, and there is a one-hour documentary called "Pandemic Simulations - Preparation for a New Era". [309] When you watch that, your last rickety defences that this isn't a well-organised, long planned event, I think, will disappear. Your heart will be in your boots by 20 minutes.
  • Basically, all of the actors you see around that table, including, say, in Event 201, that took place at the end of 2019, all of those players are currently taking the roles they had in simulations and all around the world; and doing exactly the things they did in the simulation. [310]

    • Tom Inglesby, the host, from the John Hopkins Center for Health
    • Christopher Elias, of the Gates Foundation, also Advisory Board on Global Health for the German government
    • Stephen Redd, the director of the American Center for Disease Control (involved in Ebola, Zica, H1N1 outbreaks)
    • George Gao, the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control
    • Adrian Thomas, the Vice President of Global Public Health at Johnson & Johnson
    • Matthew Harrington, the global chief operating officer at Edelman, the world's largest public relations and communications firm
    • Latoya Abbott, Marriott International, (pushes vaccines)
    • Hasti Taghi, media/journalism, and World Economic Forum partner
    • Martin Knuchel, Lufthansa Airlines, related to Swiss Health Ministry
    • Eduardo Martines, UPS Foundation, former chair of WEF
    • Sofia Borges, UN Foundation, Agenda 2030
    • Jane Halton, ANZ Bank Group; Clayton Utz, Australian Strategic Policy Institute
    • Timothy Evans, McGill University, Inaugural Director and Associate Dean of the School of Population Global Health (SPGH), co-founder of GAVI
    • Brad Connett, president of Henry Schein's US Medical Group
    • Avril Haines, Senior Research Scholar at Columbia University, former deputy director of the CIA
    • Lavan Thiru, Chief Representative of the Monetary Authority of Singapore.
  • Those were the rehearsals and there were more than a dozen of these damn things.

The Anglo-Americans

  • And one of the bitter moments for me was to realise that we were doing it to ourselves, that the US, UK, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada, the "Five Eyes", I think, are the leading players.
  • I don't know. I'm not going to say Russia is not involved, or whatever, but it looks like the Edward Bernays School of Psychological Management has been used by the military intelligence people and have directed their weapons at their own people for two years, through all these lies, repetitive messaging.
  • What we want to do is to wake people up, because if we don't wake up, we are finished as a set of liberal democracies.

Things Are a Mess Everywhere

  • I'll say two things that are not original sayings, but they strike me. It's very appropriate.
  • I've seen on many message boards, when this comes out, and this all comes out, don't ask me how I knew. Ask yourself why you didn't.
  • Honestly, the evidence that things are a mess, are so stark, that you literally have to avert your eyes, not to realise that things are really bad everywhere.
  • And there's another thing, is an old saying I've heard this before, it makes me chuckle a little bit: "if you're one step ahead of everybody else, you can be seen as a genius. You're two steps ahead, you're a lunatic". I'm afraid, that's what I've been. My job as a scientist was to spot faint patterns in sparse data. That's what you do when you're trying to work out something that's new. So I think I've been a couple of steps ahead and probably sometimes wrong. But broadly, I think it is sadly, roughly, what I've said.

Safety of Vaccines

  • I worked for the pharmaceutical biopharmaceutical industry for 32 years. I'm pro innovative new medicines, provided they're well-developed, use appropriately,and of course, the profile is safe, safe enough considering the utility.
  • If you were treating a terminal cancer that had evaded surgery, currently in a therapy, radiotherapy, and so on, then you might be willing to take a drug that might kill 5% or 10% of the people. If it might stretch your life outfit for many years, especially if you're offered the chance to a cure. And some of these are gene-based vaccines, I think were the original intent of people like Dr Malone, and others, was indeed to treat things like that. You could put a protein from your cancer into one of these vaccines and force your immune system to recognise it and destroy it, and that could provide exquisitely safe novel chemotherapy.
  • But if you're going to treat effectively everyone on the planet, you shouldn't do it that way, but that's certainly the stated intent. "You need safety, safety, safety", as Peter McCullough would say.
    That's your first concern. Even more than "does it work?". You need to make sure that it's very safe because you're going to be giving it potentially to billions of people.
  • And I did say that my original training included toxicology, and I was taught by at least two people that founded the discipline of mechanistic toxicity, professor Tim Bridges, and Dennis Park. They reminded us that in the 1950s we didn't do toxicology in the drug industry, and they would give it to two dogs and five chickens. If the drug didn't kill them, it literally would start giving them to people. That's how bad things were 60-70 years ago.
  • We had some strong wake-up calls at the end of the 50s, early 60s, with Thalidomide, for example. It's a case that most people know about. At the time, they thought that babies were safe in the mother's womb, so it wouldn't be a problem if you gave a pregnant woman a drug. And we now know that their fetuses are exquisitely sensitive to perturbations in their environment. So we never, ever, give novel medical interventions to pregnant women. Right? We'll come back to that. So they're definitely doing that.
  • Because of my toxicological training, if a good understanding of what is required in drug R&D, as soon as I looked into the vaccines, I was quite frightened because there were a novel type. These were never been mass-dosed to human beings at all. So there would be no way of knowing what kind of unwanted effects might come about. And of course, what you'd do is carefully empirical study. You should do all of the possible studies if you have a worry. Rule of thumb would be: if you can think of a worry, you need to show why it's not going to happen. To design an appropriate experiment, you have to "find drowning your own puppy", as we used to call it. It's not a good job, but you have to do it. You can't just hope it'll be alright in the night. It rarely is.
  • And when I looked at the vaccines, I had a number of concerns. One was, all four of them (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen). They all were fundamentally the same design. Whether they used mRNA or viral communicated DNA, they encoded only the spike protein, the soft sticky-out-bit from the ball, and stick model of the virus that you've got.
  • And I don't know to this day how they all chose just the spike protein, because, I guess, and we now know that it's true, that human immunity relies much more on understanding the depths of the molecular structure inside the ball, than the spikes, so I thought it was bad, just immunologically, uneducated thing just to pick the outside part.
  • Secondly, certainly I don't know more than half an hour of searching for research papers, abstracts, and so on, not so much on coronavirus' spike protein, because it's relatively new, but similar external proteins on other viruses, and within the half an hour, I realised that all of them have some kind of biological properties that are unwelcome. They're not just for anchoring the virus to the surface of the cell, which they do, but they're also biologically active, as you might expect, really. They interact with the immune system and also coagulation system.
  • In fact, I saw Wolfgang Wodarg earlier, and he led off and I joined a two person appeal, a petition to the European Medicines Agency to say, don't approve these vaccines at this time; here are a handful of concerns that we think are going to occur, and you need to slow down. And I think two of the four are being tested and proved correct, and the third one was looking pretty ropey.
  • So the design of them, I would say, it was toxic by design. It was always going to harm people.
  • Next, unlike a classical vaccine, which is usually an Achilles piece, or kill preparation of the infective organism in a little bit of oil or something like that, that's a unit dose. So you know how much you inject into each person.
  • With these vaccines, we're given unit dose of code. Now, that code could be taken up well, copied into protein very efficiently, and might do so for a long time, in one person. In another person it might be taken up badly, copied inefficiently, and briefly.
  • So what I'm saying absolutely certain about this, as a pharmacologist, and toxicologist, is: by choosing this design, the range of outcomes is probably a thousand times worse that it would be for a conventional vaccine, because the actual amount of protein produced will vary by orders of magnitude more. It will. And I though that was the explanation for why it is that many people had no side effects whatsoever, and others appeared to die. People would say, "how can that possibly be true?" And I've just explained it, that with an encoded vaccine, an unlucky individual might take up large quantities of it in their heart, in the coronary vessels, or in the cerebral veins in their head, and produce lots of spike protein for a long time. And those people might get Myocarditis, or cerebral venous sinus thrombosis and die. And in someone else it might be spread around the body in a sort of less dangerous place and not make so much spike protein.
  • I thought that was an adequate explanation, but I don't think that's the whole explanation any more. I made an assumption, that the same stuff from a given manufacturer is in every single vial, in the little glass vaccine vial. I believed, and was entitled to believe, that within a fraction of a percent, we had the same consistent quality, purity, in every single injection. And therefore, the observed variation in behaviour in people must be down to something such as the thing I just suggested.
  • Unfortunately, we're now absolutely certain it's not the same stuff in every dial, and that means criminal acts are being committed. We will come onto that.

Vaccines, Immunity and Transmission

  • Normally, a vaccine, if you release it to a person, will usually be one dose, sometimes two. It's never going to be a whole train of them. I'm seeing some countries already giving the fourth vaccines and others have talked about an open-ended series. You need to know: vaccines are not like that. You do not need to be repeatedly dosed with something that would earn the title "vaccine". One or two doses at most. If it's more than that, it's not public health, and it's not public health.
  • But, here's the thing: a vaccine ought to, at minimum, prevent you from becoming ill with the pathogen against which you've been vaccinated. But it doesn't do that. I'm afraid, it's not a vaccine.
  • As a consequence of protecting you against that organism, and it does that usually by killing off a new infection at an early stage before you're even symptomatic. That would mean you have low viral load in your airway, so that's what keeps you safe after the vaccination, if you've acquired immunity. And the consequence of that is it usually reduces, if not stops, transmission.
  • And we know now, lots of work in the literature, that people who've had this virus are immune to becoming ill a second time, from either the original virus or variants. And they don't transmit either.
  • So we can see what good immunity can look like. We've seen lots of cases of natural immunity.
  • And authorities do agree; they can see that these vaccines do not prevent you catching it. They don't prevent you growing the same amount in your airways as an unvaccinated person, and they don't prevent transmission. So, if someone's going to claim that they reduce the severity of your symptoms, I'd like to know what "black magic" is invoked, because I've just told you it goes to your airway. It grows in the same way, and transmits them the same way. I actually don't believe there's a mechanism now for this to suddenly intervene and stop me getting ill. I don't believe it.
  • So I think the most likely outcome now is they don't do anything useful at all, but they are, unfortunately, very harmful. They are certainly toxic.


  • So just a brief introduction, to one of the best tracking systems in the world: Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS). It's a US system. It was put in place about 30 years ago, and, anyone who has an adverse event following vaccination, even if they don't, not necessarily, claim it's caused by it. But in order to track the possibility, you're urged to report that. But unfortunately, the reporting rate is typically between 1-10% of adverse events. And that has continued in the recent years and in the years since the vaccine has been rolling out. And yet there have been more adverse events and certainly many more deaths associated just with the COVID-19 vaccines than all the other vaccines in history that have been taken through this VAERS system. So there is no question, it's public data. It's your database. 85% of the reports are put in there by a qualified health care professional. So it's not true, as some have asserted, that people are just putting in spoiler claims, that they're not real. They are absolutely real.

Bradford Hill Criteria of Causation

  • It's often said that correlation is not causation, and that's true. Just because there're lots of reports doesn't necessarily mean that it's the vaccine. But there are things called Bradford Hill criteria, which lists 10 criteria of causation:
    • Strength of association
    • Consistency
    • Specificity
    • Temporality
    • Biological Gradient
    • Plausability
    • Coherence
    • Experiment
    • Analogy
    • (Reversibility)
  • It gives you methods whereby you can determine whether correlation is indeed causative or not.
  • So just give you a quick example:
    • If there is acute toxicity in the vaccine, then you would expect to see a spike in injuries and deaths in the first few days after administration.
    • If there's no connection whatsoever, then you would expect a much more smooth low level profile, that would pay not much attention to when you were vaccinated.
    • And when you look at it, more than a third of the adverse events occur on the day of dosing or the next few days, and then it rapidly falls off. So that's one of the Bradford Hill criteria.
  • Another one, is plausability: if you have a theoretical reason for believing that it'll make your left leg turn blue and you look at the adverse events and look, it's lots of blue left legs, that's much more compelling than if someone ended up with a sore elbow for which you had no predictive power.
  • And on this occasion, we believe that these agents cause so-called thromboembolic disorders. So the effect coagulation, and you may bleed, or clots. Also any vessels that are plugged up like clots, like strokes, or heart attacks, deep vein thrombosis, or bleeding, like subarachnoid hemorrhage, any of those things are you would predict, and lo and behold, they are present in VAERS at enormous numbers, unprecedented numbers.
  • So the timing, and plausability convinces me that these are causative, mostly they are causative. And other people who are used to doing this, pathologists, and others, have done a very thorough job. Unfortunately, it's definitely causative. Large numbers and it's causative.

  • So when it comes to vaccines, you would expect them to be deployed, only in the people who are at extraordinary risk from the pathogen. In this case elderly people who are already frail, and that's how they started. But very swiftly this started coming down to the working age population, 50s-40s, and as you probably aware, they're now been trying to encourage people to get their children vaccinated.

Do not Vaccinate Children

I don't know about your part of the world, but in Sweden and Germany, I looked at the public record, not one healthy child has died as a consequence of being infected by this virus, not one. So if I tell you that there are novel technology agents that are being proposed to be injected into your child, a child who is not at any risk from the virus, and who also are very poor at transmitting it to other people, because they generally don't get symptoms. And I just told you earlier that asymptomatic transmission is a lie. - So, I'm begging you, whatever your neighbours, or school teacher, or your government adviser say, I'm afraid they're lying or mistaken. - You MUST NOT vaccinate your children.

Those Who Might Benefit

  • We should target these interventions to those who might benefit from them because they generally will be willing to bear whatever the side-effects are in exchange for that benefit.

Healthy Younger People

  • So, healthy younger people, certainly 60 and down, really should not even have been on the map for vaccination, because they survive. Secondly, there are really good treatments, as I mentioned. So, with good therapies and people's strong immune system, if they're younger and well, there was no need to vaccinate the world.


  • Pregnant women, I may have made a special examination of this for my toxicological background. I was appalled when I heard a leading doctor, from the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynecology in London. The Royal College is meant to be the ACME of medical quality, hopefully, and ethics. And this woman appeared on national radio and proceeded to tell people that "if they are pregnant, they really should be vaccinated, and don't worry, these are perfectly safe".
  • I'll look you in the eye now and tell you that the studies have not been done to examine the safety of these vaccines in pregnancy. There's been no formal study, and there's no reproductive toxicology that's complete in industry.
  • I worked in this industry for 32 years. I can tell you we are not allowed to dose healthy female volunteers of childbearing age, without insisting that they use highly effective contraceptive methods. And, generally, we didn't do it at all. We didn't do it until we had reproductive toxicology, because we were all rightly fearful of potential damage to a growing baby.
  • It is literally nonsense. This is one of the things you should wake up to. Any listener knows that Thalidomide changed the landscape forever, in terms of precautions, in terms of medications in pregnant women, for the reasons we understand.
  • So, if your country's policy includes encouraging pregnant women to get vaccinated, when they are, by definition, relatively young and relatively well, they probably wouldn't have got pregnant, and therefore not likely to suffer severe effects of the virus. Why would it make any sense to administer these experimental therapies?
  • And worse of that, I've written affidavits and opinions to say there are two or three lines of evidence that would lead me to be extremely concerned for the potential for harms. And unfortunately, it actually does look like we were right about that, but I'm not going to push it any further.

Who to Exclude

  • But my main point is: if this was a public health measure, you would only administer these vaccines to people who could benefit the most from it. So the people who are most likely to get ill and die.
  • And I would exclude healthy young people.
  • You would certainly exclude children.
  • It would definitely exclude pregnant women.
  • And it would definitely exclude anyone who's had the virus and recovered. There are scores of papers showing that people who've had the virus and recovered have a full complement of T cells and multiple types. That means that they will recognise the virus, and any variants, and remain well. And that is, in fact, an empirical observation.
  • So when you see your government threatening the unvaccinated, including people who've recovered, they're more immune than the people who have been vaccinated.
  • So I don't know why anyone would call me anti-Vax. No. I'm anti conspiracy facts. That's what's going on.

Consistent Manufacturing

  • I came up with an explanation of why many people have no side effects and some people get very ill and even die. The reason I even thought of it was that you should expect pharmaceutical mass manufacturers to be good, at least, at one thing. And they are very good at this: consistent, high quality, purity, manufactured from batch to batch. They are very good at this, because that's what their business is. They manufacture in tablets, capsules, sprays, and injections in the billions of doses. You think of something like Lipitor (a cholesterol lowering drug), it's given to substantial minority of the population in older age. One tablet a day, forever. They all have made tens of millions of doses.
  • Not easy to make these genetic vaccines, but making a few hundred million, would be absolutely in the wheelhouse of Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, and Pfizer. At least Modern was a new company, so I can't say.
  • I trusted that these companies were doing what I knew they were doing, what they did for their business.

  • And then I stumbled across a couple of people independently who had been doing their own analysis of the VAERS database. What they were doing, no one else seemed to have done, was they were pulling the vaccine batch or lot number, 6 or 8 digits, a mixture of alphanumeric symbols, and comparing the profile of adverse events, with one lot to another, of the same manufacturer. And their expectation would be like a scattering of adverse events across all the states in all of the lots. But they didn't find that. This person found that, something like 90% of the adverse events were associated with less than 10% of the lots. I remember seen that months ago, and I immediately knew the significance of it, because as I've said, although I'm not a manufacturing expert, I worked for decades with people who were, and I knew that their pride and the necessity of meeting the sort of anti-adulteration regulations, which require tremendously reproducible product from lots and lots of lots.

  • So I just briefly described manufacturing of medical products like this proceded in two steps:
    • The first step is to make the active molecule. In this case, it would be mRNA or DNA with an attenuated virus. So the first step is drug substance, the actual active component.
    • Once you've got that, it will generally be formulated in some way. In this case, it's going to be in some sort of dilution material, that might be medical saline. Sometimes, though, it'll be mixed up with binding agents, colorings, lubricants, shiny coats on a capsule or a tablet, and that's called a "drug product".
    • So the first step is to make it active, and the second step is to make formulate it and finish with the drug product.
  • Now, each of those steps is associated with a series of acts.
    • You might start with the raw materials and warm them up, and manufacture a third product, then purify that.
    • And the manufacturer submits to the regulator its pharmaceutical production plan.
    • And each of those steps has gone through by experts and the regulator, and they agree that the steps are appropriate, and that the limits, the range of outcomes on testing, are appropriate, and only if they are, we would be permitted to go to the next steps (2, 3, 4, 5, ...) until you've completed all the steps.
  • So I'm elaborating a little bit, to tell you that they don't just throw everything into a bucket like "home brewing beer: stir it a bit, and put it in the packet". All this is done with just incredible levels of control. As you'd expect, you want it to be reproduceable. So, if they follow what's called the "Good Manufacturing Practice", or "GMP manufacturing practices" as required by a medical regulator, even for emergency approved product, it should be the case that the lots effectively contain the same stuff, wherever it was made, whenever it was made, it would be the same stuff. And I know they are capable of doing that now.
  • If that's true, if you draw a lot at random from the VAERS system, and examine the outcome of the performance, that is, the number of people who have reported adverse events, it ought to be pretty similar, from batch to batch.
  • If it very differently, I'm afraid, I can tell you with certainty, I would be able to prove this mathematically, if needed in court, it's not possible to go from 2 or 3 adverse events reported for a given lot, and another lot have 5000 adverse events.
  • It's not possible if you only vary the product a little bit. You might imagine, "well, they're doing this at speed, and it's novel; Mike's being a bit hard on them". No. If you only have a small difference, you only get a small difference in the performance. If you from nothing, effectively, to the worst outcomes ever reported to VAERS, I'm prepared to state and to prove that that means: it's not the same material in the lots that have produced bad side effects.
  • What I've just told you, you may not appreciate the significance of it: It's not the same stuff.
  • So, if you thought it was the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine that was used in the clinical trials, some of the batches contain something different. I cannot know what it is, but it's definitely not the same stuff.

Comparison between the Flu vaccine and the COVID "vaccine"

  • I think this presentation visually will help people.
  • If it contains the same product, the performance should be pretty similar just a little variation.
  • I'm the only person not capable of doing this sort of information technology. But one reason I'm speaking is because of my deep experience with pharmaceutical research and development, and knowledge from people who are experienced about manufacture and what I'll describe is true.
  • Also the people who are doing this work, we're self-starters. We've got a degree of independence, and we're all speaking up because something awful is happening.
  • As I mentioned in my introduction, it's quite normal, I'm afraid, for every medicine it will have some kind of side effects. I think it was a very old ancient physician in Paracelsus that said that all medicines are poisonous. It's just a question of dose. And that is kind of true. Rat poison used at very low doses or its modern analogy can be really useful to thin your blood. But that means you need consistency from dose to dose to dose.
  • For the lawyers, it's very important. My colleague who put this together, taught me something I didn't know. Because those regulations were formed to make sure that badly manufactured products were never again foisted on the public, they said that if it's not made as you have described, and made consistently so, it'll be a tiny variation, fraction of a percent, perhaps that's allowed batch to batch.
  • We will declare it to be "adulterated" (DFA GMP, 21CFR210.1). And the thing is that adulteration, per se, manufacturing and release of materials, which I assert, and others in this team agree, are performing very differently one from another. By definition, means it's not the same stuff.
  • By definition, it's adulterated, and by definition, they have broken various laws. So this is really important.

Product Comparison

  • Again, the initial analyst just looked at the COVID-19 lot numbers and just found that the side effects were not uniformly, even pseudo uniformly, spread across the lots.
  • But what this other colleague has done, is to say "well, let's compare, let's look at the things that are more comparable". So she looked at all the injected products against influenza.
  • And it turns out, as you can see (below), it's decades of data, and it's about 20k-23k manufacturing lots.

Flu v. mRNA Vx Comparison

  • And if you look to the right, the COVID mRNA "vaccines" 5 lines down, similar number 25k. So they're similar number of lots.

  • But if you look at the serious adverse events, you can see like a 5 fold difference there from 9k to 47k (in red).

  • And in terms of deaths, like 8 times worse. So something very peculiar is happening.

  • These next couple of slides are the crucial ones.

Flu Vaccines

  • Flu Vaccines: Along the bottom there (figure below), are the, meaningless to me, numbers associated with all these injectable flu vaccine products, over many, many years.

VAERS Flu Vaccines by Lot

  • And on the vertical axis, are the number of serious adverse events, and you can see there were just a couple of exceptions, one with about 22 serious adverse events. A serious adverse event is something that would bring you to hospital, extend your hospital stay, could threaten your life, require urgent intervention to save your life, something like that. These are not a sore arm, or a bad headache.

  • With the exception of the one on the left there, with 23 serious adverse events, a lot might contain several tens of thousands of doses. We don't know what it is every time, but we can say is that, as I'll show you in a moment, since the number of adverse events can vary thousands of fold, it's not possible for a difference in batch size or lot size to be the whole explanation for the differences. Might contribute to it, but we've done some preliminary examination where we have managed to find out exactly how many doses there were in a group of lots, and when we look at the relationship between the number of doses in the batch and the number of adverse events in the batch, there's no relationship, so that's not the driver.

  • So with the flu vaccines, there were just two lots. We don't know why that was, something went wrong, and there were a relatively large number, 22, and 37. But, look at the rest: hundreds and hundreds, thousands, ten thousands of lots where, on average, why, is telling me that the smooth average is around 4. 4 serious adverse events per lot. But, more important than that, I think you'll agree it looks like "static". You know, it's a "background noise".

  • Remember, if you dose a large population, you can dose them with saline, and you get this effect. Because people do get ill.
  • You might put on red socks today and have a heart attack. Obviously, the red socks didn't cause our heart attack, but if you were tracking the relationship between your new product with socks, and side effects, you would end up with the product with a profile that looks like this.
  • So side effects, associated with an intervention does not necessarily mean that it's bad. As I mentioned earlier this correlation is not causation. And this is really good work by my colleague. I want to show you what we think is a normal, well manufactured, consistent, high quality prodct looks like in the real world, when you give it to millions of people over the time.

COVID "Vaccines"

  • So now, with that established and baseline is around 4, the highest value is 37.

  • So this (figure below), by now should start to take your breath away. These are the COVID "vaccines".

  • There are three manufacturers, because it's the US commercial utilities, it's just these three. We don't know about AstraZeneca.
  • Remember I said that the rolling average was about 4 adverse events. On this image the thin line down the bottom is more than 4.

VAERS COVID Vaccines by Lot

  • And the red line is the worst ever, a single case out of 22,300 flu vaccine batches. That was 37. The representative is somewhere around 4.
  • Look how many batches of COVID products are worse than that!
  • And yet, let me just point out, for example, right in the center, there are 6514833461, looks like or or two, and then its neighbour, one or two.
  • And then, suddenly, you come on this one here EN6201, and it looks like it's 600 serious adverse events. Again, these are the ones where if you had a serious adverse event yourself, you would think that God let you die. It's quite close to death.
  • Look at the number of them!
  • There's a number of things I want to point out here:
    • One is the extreme level of side effects that we are seeing. Orders of magnitude. Just the rolling average here, don't know, between 100 and 200, instead of 4.
    • These are really toxic products! They are really toxic products!
  • And that's bad enough. But as I argued, if you were a cancer sufferer, you might accept a dangerous intervention if on balance it could extend your life, and its quality, by a year or so.
  • But these products have been given to the general public, most of whom are perfectly well.
  • That's the normal deal with the vaccine. You're perfectly well, you turn up at the doctor's office, get an injection, and you leave, and you'll still perfectly well, and all that's happened, you've adquired a defense against a specific pathogen. That's the deal.
  • What we shouldn't have is that you occasionally get seriously ill, and some of you die. That's not a good deal.
  • That is what is happening from these products.
  • And they're being pushed on everyone when, as I'd argue, if you're recovered, in effect, you're immune. If you're a child, you're not vulnerable to the virus. Just healthy young people , not.
    And pregnant women, we do not know that it's safe, and should not.
  • And the precautionary principle, they're administering it, and yet, your governments are pushing these on you.

Deliberate Mass Murder

  • It's not a public health measure. If it was a public health measure, to 3 or 4 things, I would say would be true.
  • It's not a public health measure.
  • And all of the stuff I said earlier about discarding normal pandemic handling plans and replacing them with absurd lies that have had the effect of frightening people, and we think that was the objective.
  • Now you've seen this information.
  • And your economies are on the verge of absolute extinction.
  • I think that's the evil triumvirate, frighten people, damage the economy, force them, persuade them or force them as necessary to accept these injections, some of which are killing people.
  • Why would they want to do that?
  • This is why I've got to the conclusion, I could, I wrap my brain. There may be other explanations: it's not money, by the way.
  • The pharmaceutical companies, of course, are having an absolute field, a high water mark in terms of profitability. That cannot be the motive. Is the effect of using Big Pharma to drive these products into the population.
  • It can't be the motive. Why? Because there are huge numbers of industry sectors that are absolutely almost into the ground. They Airline industry, I don't know how they're surviving almost two years of non-normal operation. Hotel, and catering, holiday trade, all of these things.
  • So remember, the only people who could possibly make this happen, or at least have to agree, in order for this to happen in the world, would be the owners, the people who own, what Catherine Austin Fitts calls "Mr Global": Global Big Capital.
  • So I'm absolutely sure that money alone, profit alone, is not the motivation, because there might be a couple of sectors doing really well, but eight sectors are doing so badly, as to more than outweight the benefits that accrue to the drug companies.
  • There's not just this extreme toxicity, but the variability.
  • Now, I pointed out, let's just look at the Pfizer bunch, because there's a "nice" range there. These are people, people who have suffered and some of whom have died. But as you cast your eye across the axis at the bottom, you can see that some of the numbers are associated with very small numbers, they're so small you cannot see them registering on the thickness of the X axis, marked zero, and yet close to it, there're a whole bunch of batches that have got, 400-600 serious adverse events per lot. And they're roughly the same size.
  • That means, there's not the same product that's got this Pfizer COVID-19 "vaccine", it says on the box, or on the vial.
  • It's not the same stuff. I'm certain. It's not an assessment. It's not "maybe". Absolutely certain there are something called "the law of Mass Action", which applies to all biological properties I've ever seen. And if it does come to court, I will talk you through the history of that, why it is that shape.
  • This means, it cannot be the case, that these middle Pfizer lots are of the same material as the ones to the left and to the right. These drug companies are highly professional outfits. They know how to manufacture reproducibly, and we saw that with the flu vaccines over decades. They know how to do it. They haven't done it.
  • I'm afraid I've come to the conclusion that they are doing it on purpose, because they're so professional. And after a year, they know this data. This data is their window onto the world. They can go into VAERS. They can filter into their own products and their own lots, and batch numbers, and they can see what's happening. They know.
  • So, the fact they haven't stopped this, tells me that they're at least okay with it, and I fear, that this is deliberate.

The Media Controls the Message

  • Why might it be? Well, as we have seen over the last two years, Big Tech like Google, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and so on, have persistently said "we're not having anyone making a comment or a recording that disagrees with what the public health officials say, and we're going to call that 'misinformation', and we're going to basically censor you and maybe deplatform you".
  • What that means is that a qualified person like me, and I promise I have no ax to gring whatsoever other than telling you what I think is true, which is that we are facing a global crime. People like me cannot speak to the public because the tech companies have decided not to let me. That's true of mainstream TV, mainstream radio. I've only ever appeared on radio where they maligned me, just told me lots of lies. So I didn't threaten them. And they deleted the recording, which tells you something, doesn't it? That I was correct.
  • So what?
  • It's a combination of Big Tech, Big Media (mainly TV). They control what's coming into your house. If you just turn your TV on, over the last two years, you're only going to hear a one-sided, mendacious, completely misleading description of what's going on, and you'll never hear things like this, and you should. You should see both sides of it. The fact you're not allowed to, tells you that they know there's something bad going on, and they don't make damn sure that people like Dr Mike Yeadon, Dr Robert Malone, Dr Peter McCullough, and so on, will never darken the studios of BBC or CNBC, because, if we were given an hour, I think we could destroy the story, easily. I think we're pausible. We're being honest, and I gain absolutely nothing from making up stories I'm describing in horror.
  • So I said that the variability is extreme, and I've said that the media controls the message, and they censor people like me.
  • If they want to tell you that there's a nasty variant that's just come along that's killing more people than previously, you've not way of knowing if that's true or not.
  • I don't think you should trust anything they say about this, because they've definitely lied about everything else I've been able to hear.

Calibration of a Killing Weapon

But let's say they did said that there's a new variant, or a new virus, 10 times more lethal than COVID. And don't worry, the innovative pharmaceutical industry has rustled up a new vaccine, run and get your top-up, your booster, your new vaccine. - What happens if they choose to give you that one that's called "EN6201"? Well, the answer is, probably thousands of people are going to die. - And imagine all of the manufacturers doing that, over time, and across the world. - All the time the media is giving you a very frightening message, and the appropriate response if these guys were being honest, would be "let's deploy these vaccines as we tune them", and so on. - But it's all lies. It's all misleading. - And I worry that what you've seen in front of you there, I've described it to other people and said "I'm worried that this is calibration of a killing weapon".
That if somebody wanted to say that there are viruses or vaccines that are, say, 10 times more lethal than COVID, they're killing one in 100 people instead of one in 100,000, roughly they could just move along and just deploy batch X or batch Y or batch Z. That's what would happen. - I've got no reason to make this stuff up. I've never been a conspiracy theorist. If anything, I'm the sort of person that would chuckle at other people having conspiracy theories. And of course, now I realise what a mark I've been for the last 61 years, believing what I've been told. - The bottom line, you can see it from here: - It's not the same stuff in each glass bottle. - That's an offense in all sorts of ways against adulterated drug acts. - It cannot be accidental, because they are professionals that know how to manufacture consistently. - It's not possible that this is a small variation in product because it's an emergency situation, difficult to make. No. The law of "Mass Action" would mean that, in order to get these enormous differences in "performance", serious adverse events would have to have a very sizeable difference. I would say, 10 to 100 fold difference in an active if there was an accident that produced these side effects. - I've done hundreds of experiments like that, not with people, of course. And we need to go up in dose by 30, 100, 300 to go from a baseline to these numbers. I'm absolutely sure about that. - Because they're good at manufacturing, because this data is available, is being available to them all the time, they can look as the VAERS data comes in. So they've known about this, and that means they're good with it. - So it's either intentional, or if it has proven too difficult to manufacture, they should still not be allowed to discharge it into the public environment, because they're very lethal. - So people have said to me, "Mike, these are brand new products, as you've said. Early on we heard that the Pfizer product had to be stored at minus 80C. It could be unstable. Maybe what's happening is they're just going off ocassionally, bad handling, people not used to a cold chain". - Well, I don't think that's true: - when products degrade, they generally lose activity. Imagine a car degrading, might loose one wheel, it doesn't suddenly turn into a lethal flying machine. It will lose function. That's what I would expect to happen. - Now on a one off, maybe; maybe a novel approach like this might break in half, and you end up with two super toxic bits of mRNA. - But we're seeing the same thing with 3 products, made by 3 different companies, and we're seeing 2 different technologies: Pfizer, Moderna are mRNA, and Janssen is DNA. - The rule of thumb is degradation results in a lot of functions, not acquisition of exquisite toxicity. And we've got 3 products and 2 technologies doing that.
- I'm more frightened of these vaccines than I was before seeing this work. - So, all of the early stuff, you're been lied to, and I can prove that on several occasions, and I would like to direct people who haven't seen my interview with Del BigTree on Highwire, and I think that will educate you on what I've seen as the principal lies. - There's convincing evidence that authorities knew that asymptomatic transmission was complete garbage. Everything else falls to pieces. - When we come to the vaccines, if they were a public health measure, they'd be directed only to the people who could get benefit from it, and never to children, healthy young people, pregnant young women, and those who have already recovered.


  • There is no unusual threat in your environment, except from your government and their policies, and the pharmaceutical industry.
  • There's nothing going on, other than the psychological warfare, and the economic damage, and these wretched vaccines.
  • We can take our old form back, but it requires a little courage in our hand, and say "I do not comply anymore".
  • You are not doing any good by complying. You're not saving yourself, you're certainly not saving your children.
  • They can't arrest everybody, right? If 10,000 school children say "we're not going to school with masks and testing". That's how you take it back.

Question & Answer Session

(transcription in progress ... to be continued)

What's Coming ...

  • Dr Yeadon contends that the products show various degrees of toxicity, implying intent, as if they are trying to cause damage intentionally, and then trying to measure the damage.
  • Conclusion: This is premeditated murder.