Dr Michael Yeadon’s Full Statement on the Experimental Gene-Based Jab

Statement by Dr. Michael Yeadon on experimental COVID-19 gene-based vaccine dangers to women’s fertility & preborn children, and the media’s complicity in lying to the public about the safety of these products

Download this statement: Yeadon Statement on infertility and media complicity

Thursday, January 27, 2022 (emphasis below by the White Rose UK)

On December 1st 2020, Dr Wolfgang Wodarg and I filed a substantial petition with the European Medicines Agency about the covid19 gene-based vaccines as a class.
We detailed a series of mechanistic toxicology concerns which we believed were reasonable to hold, unless and until proven not to occur. Among those was that adverse impacts on conception and ability to sustain a pregnancy were foreseeable.

It’s important to note that none of these gene-based agents had completed what’s called “reproductive toxicology”. Over a year later, this battery of tests in animals still has not been done. So there was and still is no data package supporting safety in pregnancy or prior to conception.

Dr Wodarg and I explained the reason for our concerns, which were that the spike protein from the virus, which was encoded in the products, was related, albeit weakly, to a protein essential to successfully carrying a baby to term.

As a society, we’ve practiced the precautionary principle most assiduously in relation to conception and pregnancy ever since the tragedy of thalidomide, over 60 years ago. So we had hoped that some at least in the media would take this with the seriousness it deserved. Did that happen? No. Instead, we were attacked, smeared and vilified in every medium, from Twitter to the BBC.

During 2021, I came across two further pieces of evidence which made it much more likely that there’d be adverse effects on pregnancy from covid19 “vaccines”. It looked like someone had tried to dismiss our concerns by testing for evidence of the particular problem we’d warned about in Dec 2020. Unfortunately, all they did is to reinforce our concerns.

We’d envisioned the risk that, in responding to the synthetic piece of virus spike protein, women’s immune systems would also make an immune response to their own placental protein. That’s exactly what was reported in the pre-print paper.

Based on this concern alone, all of these experimental products as a class should have been completely contraindicated in women younger than menopause. Did that happen? No. Instead, major broadcasters actively lied to the public, explicitly stating that these agents were completely safe in pregnancy.

I call out Emma Barnett of BBC Radio 4 for hosting a special episode of “Women’ Hour”, during which she directly attacked me by name on air in the most unpleasant terms. She also had her guest, who was from the Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology repeat the lies that it was perfectly safe for young women to be injected.

The guest raised the stakes further, by lying that otherwise fit and well young women would risk severe illness and even death if they caught the virus in pregnancy. All to add pressure to get injected with something they did not need and anyway doesn’t work.

The other piece of information wasn’t new but we’d simply not seen it before. We’d missed it because, at the time of the regulatory submission, there was no reason to hunt for it. The concern was that the mRNA products (Pfizer and Moderna) would accumulate in ovaries.

An FOI request to the Japanese Medicines Agency revealed that product accumulation in ovaries occurred in experiments in rodents. I searched the literature based on these specific concerns and found a 2012 review, explicitly drawing attention to the evidence that the lipid nanoparticle formulations as a class do, in fact, accumulate in ovaries and may represent an unappreciated reproductive risk to humans. This was “a well known problem” to experts in that field.

I’ll say that again. The pharmaceutical industry definitely knew, in 2012, that formulating these agents in lipid nanoparticles would lead them to accumulate in the ovaries of women to whom these were given.

No one in the industry or in leading media could claim “they didn’t know about these risks to successful pregnancy”. So it’s with tremendous anger and sorrow that I heard of military physicians blowing the whistle about the evidence of harms in pregnancy that their proprietary safety monitoring database had thrown out.

In the intervening months since journalists (including but definitely not limited to Emma Barnett) chose to downplay or downright lie about our concerns, we learned that women in the US military were experiencing 3x normal rates of miscarriage.

I’m not vindictive but I want some humility and contrition from the BBC and all other media outlets that lied to their audiences. Meanwhile, please do not get injected with these inherently dangerous and ineffective experimental products. Warn anyone you know about the risks to pregnancy, now confirmed by whistleblowers from physicians in the US military.

Please also tell them there are likely to be other reproductive health consequences, even in young girls, because of accumulation in their ovaries.

In closing, I remind readers that the toxicity warned about here is just one of several human safety risks anticipated by Dr Wodarg and me, before any of the gene-based products gained emergency use authorisation. Among them was a strong alert for risks of “acute allergic type reactions” in minutes of injection. We were horrified to hear that, on the very first day of rollout in U.K., two people collapsed shortly after vaccination. As this problem became a recognised medical event, some have been so badly affected that they’ve needed emergency intervention to save their lives and tragically, many deaths have followed such severe, acute reactions.

Having had two of two serious harms we warned about, prior to regulatory authorisations, come to pass in our communities, I humbly recommend that governments and journalists everywhere recognise what you’ve done and lobby for or directly decide to immediately and completely withdraw all these experimental products from the market, before some of the other specified concerns (or issues we didn’t think of) show up in the safety monitoring systems.

Journalists, regulators, healthcare professionals and politicians, as well, of course, the manufacturers: you are way out over thin ice and deep water. I don’t know how you’re planning to get out from under this before the wider public more fully appreciate what you’ve done.

One possibility is that you won’t be able to hide your complicity in the massed harms you’ve done to millions of people. In this case, I look forward to giving evidence against you in a court of law.

Dr Mike Yeadon