Pfizer is one of the manufacturers of the COVID-19 vaccines. So it is significant that last October, a former vice president of the pharmaceutical giant, Dr. Mike Yeadon, publicly said there was no need for the vaccine because the pandemic was already over.
Mike Yeadon is a scientist, with a Ph. D. in respiratory pharmacology from the University of Surrey, UK, and a B. Sc. with joint honors in biochemistry and toxicology. He has spent over 30 years leading new medicines research in some of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. At Pfizer, he served as Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy and Respiratory until he left Pfizer in 2011 and founded his own biotech company, Ziarco, which was sold to the world’s biggest drug company, Novartis, in 2017.
For a list of Dr. Yeadon’s research publications, go here.
This is what Dr. Yeadon wrote on October 16, 2020 that “current evidence” shows that in the UK “there will not be another large, national scale outbreak of COVID-19. Limited, regional outbreaks will be self-limiting and the pandemic is effectively over.” As a consequence:
There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. I’ve never heard such nonsense talked about vaccines. You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects. This much I know after 30 years in the pharmaceutical industry. Yet there are such moves afoot. One thought piece suggests that anyone who refuses vaccination should be subject to indefinite house arrest (Mello et al, 2020). In some countries, there is talk of “no jab, no job”. There have even been job adverts for openings in NHS [National Health Service] Wales for people to “oversee the vaccination of the entire population”. Any such proposals are not only completely unnecessary but if done using any kind of coercion at all, illegal. I would completely understand and would consider accepting early use of a vaccine only if done with fully informed consent and, even then, only if offered to the most vulnerable in our community. Other proposals have, to me, the whiff of evil about them and I will oppose them as vigorously as I have followed the pandemic so far.
I am not an epidemiologist. I’m not a mathematician, either. I do think, though, that I’m a highly experienced life scientist, who has held positions of significant responsibility in large organisations set up to identify and advance experimental medicines. I have had to make big decisions from time to time, using every ounce of experience, imagination, ingenuity and often found myself reading at speed into new areas, tentatively getting to grips with new concepts and knowledge. I’ve always been a collaborator, seeking to work with the most talented individuals I could. I’ve done this repeatedly across a more than 30-year career in new drug discovery. To this day, in notionally early retirement, I advise clients who are building new biotechnology companies, who are dealing with very diverse diseases and novel therapeutic approaches. I respectfully suggest that this background has ideally placed me to assess others’ propositions and assumptions and to bring well-grounded science to bear on complex issues, of which the SARS-CoV-2 is but one, albeit perhaps the most important work I’ve ever done.
Some businesses, states (e.g., Oregon) and even countries are requiring vaccine passports or proof of you having been vaccinated against the COVID-19 Wuhan virus.
Many Americans, including health care professionals (in March 2021, as many as 48% of all health care workers had not taken the vaccine although they were eligible) refuse this vaccine for reasons that include the following:
(1) In the cases of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines that are most widely deployed in the United States, they really are not vaccines in the traditional sense because they do not inject DNA of the actual coronavirus which would stimulate your body’s immune system to produce antibodies. Instead, a wholly new method is employed by injecting molecules of a synthetic RNA (ribonucleic acid) into your body. Those molecules act as messengers (thus, mRNA) that cause an “adaptive immune response” that presumably would lead your body to identify and destroy the COVID-19 virus.
(2) There are known side-effects of being vaccinated, ranging from fairly mild effects like pain and swelling in the injection site, headaches, chills, fever and fatigue (CDC), to severe side-effects in allegedly “rare” cases, including “temporary” paralysis and allergic reactions that have led to death.
(3) Rushed into production, the vaccines did not undergo the usual protocol of lengthy human trials, which means possible long-term effects of these vaccines are unknown. That would explain why in the United States, the vaccine manufacturers are exempt from legal liability. From CNet:
At this point, it’s way too early to determine whether the COVID-19 vaccines cause long-term side effects, although experts are. The CDC, WHO, FDA and other health institutions will continue to monitor long-term effects and collect data as more people get vaccinated.
In other words, and to put it bluntly, vaccinated people are being used as guinea pigs in a massive medical experiment.
For people who refuse to receive this experimental “vaccine,” below are images of the front and back of the CDC COVID-19 Vaccination Record Card showing you’ve been vaccinated against the Wuhan virus. (H/t Elizabeth)
Here is source link, where additional info can be found: https://s2underground.files.
In March 2020, a Pew Research Center survey found that “white liberals” were more likely (46%) to have been diagnosed with a mental health condition compared with their moderate and conservatives peers.
The disparity was especially pronounced among young people, aged 18-19:
Here’s the latest example.
Disproportionately more Democrats or liberals have chosen to receive the COVID-19 vaccine of whatever manufacturer, none of which has gone through the usual protocol of human trials, which means we simply don’t know what the long term effects of these vaccines are.
While I believe that everyone has and should have the freedom to decide whether they want to be vaccinated, have you noticed that those who are vaccinated are downright hostile toward people who decline to be vaccinated?
Some time ago, a Facebook friend (I have one friend on my fake Facebook account using an alias in order to access content that is only available if I have an account) posted that she was considering not getting the Covid vaccine and asked her friends (who number 1,650) if they would get vaccinated. I responded, pointing out that the vaccine’s long term effects are unknown. The reaction to my comment was one of fury (angry emoji) from others who were incandescent rage at my pointing out a fact, a truth. If I had been their Facebook friends, I’m sure they would have unfriended me.
Kate Mulvey is a free-lance UK journalist who regularly writes for The Telegraph. In an essay for The Telegraph on June 2, 2021, Mulvey related that when a “friend” said she declined the COVID-19 vaccine, Mulvey found herself “fuming” and “increasingly angry at those who refused to be vaxxed.”
Mulvey called those who refuse to be vaccinated “vaccine-dodging idiocy”. Applauding TV personalities (Countdown presenter Nick Hewer and Good Morning Britain host Adil Ray) who ditched friends who had decided not to have the Covid vaccine, Mulvey declared she too is “no longer seeing those friends who refuse to get jabbed.”
Here’s another example of their mental illness and irrationality.
A new study by German scientists at Munich University found that lockdowns had little effect on controlling the coronavirus pandemic. The statisticians found “no direct connection” between the German lockdown and falling infection rates in that on three occasions before a national lockdown was imposed in April, November and December 2020, infection rates had already begun to fall.
Notwithstanding the demonstrable ineffectiveness of lockdowns, a new Gallup survey found that as many as 71% of U.S. Democrats want healthy people to stay home “as much as possible,” even as vaccinations soar and new Covid infections have plummeted. In contrast, 87% of Republicans surveyed and 64% of independents said it was time for people to start living normally after more than a year of pandemic shutdowns and working from home.
There is a rumor going around on the net that the COVID-19 vaccines contain luciferin (an organic compound) or luciferase (an enzyme). But that rumor was debunked by a Reuters fact-check:
The novel coronavirus vaccine manufactured by Moderna does not contain luciferin, an organic compound involved in bioluminescence, or the enzyme luciferase, contrary to claims on social media. While luciferase was involved in some COVID-19 research in the summer of 2020, none of the available vaccines contain either ingredient.
Suggesting a Satanic link, a post on Facebook reads, “MODERNA VACCINE CONTAINS “LUCIFERIN” IN A 66.6 SOLUTION. YOU CAN’T MAKE THIS STUFF UP (here). Other posts making this claim can be found here , here and here….
A fact sheet on the FDA’s website here discloses the ingredients in the vaccine. It includes mRNA, lipids, cholesterol, 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, tromethamine, tromethamine hydrochloride, acetic acid, sodium acetate, and sucrose.
It does not list luciferin, an organic compound that produces light through oxidation (here), in its ingredients, or mention anything about a “a 66.6 solution,” as the posts claim.
However, Reuters determined that the enzyme luciferase is used to develop COVID-19 tests:
While the enzyme is not a vaccine ingredient, researchers at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston last July isolated luciferase from fireflies to develop more accurate COVID-19 tests and potential treatments (here).
Scientists at the University of South Florida College of Public Health conducted similar research (here).
Reuters airily proclaimed that “Lucifer,” “luciferin” and “luciferase” all come from the Latin lux, meaning light, and ferre, meaning to carry, and that despite their shared etymology, the compound and enzyme are not related to the fallen angel.
Since the root word of “luciferin” and “luciferase” is the Latin “lux,” meaning light, if “light” is what is meant, the enzyme and compound in question should more accurately be named “luxferin” or “luxferase.”
Instead, “luciferin” and “luciferase” were chosen — deliberately — with full knowledge of the meaning of the word “lucifer” for Christians.
One must ask why.
Why would anyone name this enzyme “luciferase” or the organic compound “luciferin” after the fallen angel Lucifer, aka Satan?
Through the years on FOTM, our DCG has diligently chronicled the weekly toll of gun homicides in the Democrats-ruled city of Chiraq or Chicago.
Now, in addition to gun homicides, Chicago is under siege by rats, which makes it a public health crisis.
The UK newspaper The Guardian reports on May 14, 2021 (bold red emphasis supplied):
An animal shelter in Chicago has released 1,000 feral cats throughout the city to combat a rat crisis.
Through a program called Cats at Work, the Tree House Humane Society, a local animal shelter, releases feral felines on to city streets. The initiative places two to three cats, all spayed, neutered and vaccinated, outside of residences and businesses to sustainably deal with Chicago’s rodent problem….
Local homeowners or businesses can sign up for the program, as long as they cover food, water and shelter for the cats. The popular program currently has a “long waitlist”, as stated on its website.
Issues with vermin aren’t new for Chicago. For the sixth consecutive year Chicago has beaten out major cities like Los Angeles and New York to be named the “rattiest city” in a poll conducted by Orkin, an American pest control company.
And that is why I call Democrats, Demonrats!
Studies have found evidence that forgiving another confers mental health benefits on us.
Now, those studies are confirmed by a longitudinal study, every two years since 1989, of 54,703 female nurses from 14 states.
Interestingly, the Nurses’ Health Study II survey specifically assessed forgiveness that was spiritually or religiously motivated, with the specification that “Because of my spiritual or religious beliefs, I have forgiven those who hurt me.”
The study found that:
Led by epidemiologist Katelyn N. G. Long of the Harvard T.H. Chan Institute of Public Health, the study was published on October 1, 2020, in the journal, BMC Psychology.
Police officers respond to many different types of calls. Probably the most rewarding for them is being able to save a child’s life.
Grab a tissue…
If you have a need for this, go here to learn about infant/pediatric CPR.