Dr. Michael Yeadon (Former Pfizer Chief Scientist) Warns Pregnant Women of the Dangers of Taking The Experimental COVID Vaccine

Study on women showed “vaccine induced autoimmune attack, on their own placenta.”

Dr. Michael Yeadon, a former Chief Scientist and VP of the Allergy and Respiratory Unit of Pfizer, has been very outspoken in his assessment of these “vaccines”, and has called this agenda out several times for being deliberate crimes against humanity. The following video below is an explanation and warning to people – specifically for women who are pregnant or who are of child-bearing potential, to avoid these dangerous injections.

Source: bitchute | WHAT IS TRUTH?/WAS IST WAHRHEIT? |
3 THINGS WOMEN SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE COVID JAB – DR. MICHAEL YEADON

The following text is transcribed from the above video with some embellishment added for emphasis. All words are from Dr. Michael Yeadon.

“You’re being lied to. I’m being lied to. We’re not being treated like adults. And the authorities are not giving us full information about the, the risks of these products. And so I’m going to try and do a non-science presentation, um, because I really want to speak to you who are probably not scientists. You’ll be a lay audience. So I’m going to do my best.

So, uh, three things to tell you about my concerns about the impact of these vaccines in reproductive health, fertility and pregnancy.

The first thing, is so obvious, that you’ll agree with me when I tell you. And that’s, we never, EVER, give experimental medicines to pregnant women. Why do we not do that? Well, you’ll probably will have heard of the word ‘thalidomide’. 60 years ago, through, I think an ignorant failure of medicines regulation, we were more exposed to a new product for morning sickness called thalidomide. And it led to at least 10,000 birth malformations. And we didn’t know at the time, that the studies they were doing at the time simply wouldn’t pick out thalidomide as the actual toxin in the womb.

And I think it also taught us that babies are not safe and protected inside the uterus, which is what we used to think. But in fact, there are a miracle of minute development, critical stages, especially in the early stages, where if they interfered with biochemicals or something else, it can change the course of development to that child irreparably.

So that’s the thing to tell you. You never ever give, really inadequately tested medicines, medicinal products, to a pregnant woman. And that’s exactly what is happening. Our government is urging pregnant women, and women of child-bearing age, to get vaccinated. And they’re telling them they’re safe. And that’s a lie. Because those studies have simply not been done.

So reproductive toxicology has not been undertaken with any of these products. Certainly not a full battery of tests that you would want. So here we are, dosing potentially hundreds of millions of women of child-bearing potential, with products which are untested in terms of impacts on fertilization and development of a baby. That’s bad enough, because what that tells me is that there’s recklessness; no one cares. The authorities do not care what happens. But it’s much worse than that. And remember, I’m a toxicologist as well as a research scientist.

Two things to tell you.

The first only came to light because of a Freedom of Information request made by somebody to the Japanese medicines regulator. So the Japanese medicines regulator had required Pfizer to do a study where they looked at how the vaccine distributed around the body, in this case of a rat, over time. It’s a distribution pharmacokinetic study. And they were not required in America or Europe, because that’s not what you do with vaccines. Another – for another day. But the Japanese regulators required it.

Now I’ve seen a copy of that report, and I’m entirely able to read and interpret it. And to my horror, what we find is the vaccine doesn’t just distribute around the body and then wash out again. Which is what you hope. It concentrates in ovaries of rats. And it concentrates, at least, twenty-fold over the concentration in other background tissues like muscles.

Um, what’s it doing there? Well I don’t know. You don’t want this product in your ovaries. It’s simply not necessary to induce immunity to have a vaccine in your ovaries. And, as it’s concentrating in the ovaries, getting higher concentrations over time, they have not even defined what the maximum levels are or when that occurs.

So, so now we’ve got a second problem; that the vaccine, at least in rats, distributes in the ovaries. And I’ll tell you, a general rule of thumb in toxicology, is if you don’t have any data to counter contradict what you’ve learned, that’s the assumption you make for humans. So my assumption at the moment, is that’s what’s happening to every female who’s been given these vaccines. These vaccines are concentrating in her ovaries.

That’s very worrying. So we don’t know what that will do, but it cannot be benign. And it could be seriously harmful. Because the vaccines will then express the coronavirus spike protein and we know that there are unwanted biologies from that spike proteins. That’s the second one.

I’ve got another one now, and it’s even worse! Because it’s actually, this time an experiment in humans. In females.

I wrote with a German doctor 8 months ago, a petition to the European Medicines Agency. And amongst several concerns we had, one was that the spike protein is faintly similar, not very strongly, but faintly similar to an essential protein in your placenta. Something that’s absolutely required for both fertilization and formation and maintenance of the placenta. So you can’t get pregnant and have a successful pregnancy if this protein is damaged in any way. And we noticed that the coronavirus spike protein is similar. Similar enough that I would worry.

And I wanted them to do some experiments, hopefully to rule out the possibility that when you vaccinate the person, who then makes spike proteins, and they develop an immune response against this spike protein; my worry was that there would be an echo. You know. A faint signal that would potentially bind this similar protein in the placenta. And the studies just came out a few weeks ago and it says, exactly, what I was worried about.

15 women were given Pfizer vaccines, they drew blood samples every few days, and they measured antibodies against the spike protein; which took several weeks to appear. They also measured antibodies against the placenta. And they found within the first 1-4 days an increase of two and a half to three times – a 300% increase, in the antibodies against their own placenta. In the first 4 days. Um, so, I’m sorry to say this, but that is a vaccine induced autoimmune attack, on their own placenta.

And I think you can only expect that that is happening in every woman of child-bearing potential, is generating antibodies against this critical protein required for fertilization and successful pregnancy. Now, what the effect will be we can’t be certain. Again it can’t be benign. I don’t know whether it’s enough to cause first trimester losses. But I would think it would, because I’ve looked at the literature, and women who are unfortunate enough to have what are called autoimmune diseases, tend to have a higher rate of first trimester losses. And what this vaccine’s done is induced an autoimmune response.

So, I’m here to warn you that if you are of child-bearing potential, or younger – so, not at menopause, I would strongly recommend you do not accept these vaccines. Thank you.”

Thank you to Dr. Michael Yeadon for bringing this awareness and research to the forefront and warning people of the potential dangers to this COVID vaccine.

I also want to point out that most vaccine trials take 10-15 years, if not more, to determine safety and efficacy. Yet with the COVID vaccine, it was developed in 2 MONTHS since word of the outbreak hit (some sources are claiming it is because of the wonderful advancements being made in tech and the “stupendous foresight of the NIH” to predict a similar outbreak would happen… if that’s what you would like to believe…) and the clinical trials started soon after. With emergency authorized use only, NOT APPROVED, 9 months later.

With this in mind, even if it becomes “approved” – in which this little caveat has caused more drama and confusion than what was necessary – are we going to still continue to trust the FDA, the CDC, NIH, NIAID on these incredibly unnecessary vaccines, when we can now see the results of this rushed mRNA/spike protein experiment? Not to mention, there are treatment regiments available that are KNOWN to treat this illness, in which the EUA would not be required since under their own regulations they state:

“Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.”https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained

Doctors have proven, IN COURT, that Ivermectin, an already approved medicine, works and nutraceutical bundles are beneficial in treating these respiratory syndromes. Yet they are being SUPPRESSED by the very health agencies that are promoting vaccines every where we turn, even though the vaccines are not approved and are causing thousands upon thousands of side effects and deaths.

Please do your research and use critical thinking and discernment. Doctors like Michael Yeadon get nothing from trying to save your life and help you (except censorship and ridicule from the mainstream media and big tech platforms) and shows genuine concern for our well-being. While pharmaceutical companies have gained BILLIONS from pushing these experimental vaccines onto the population.

Thank you again to all of the sincere doctors/scientists/healthcare workers/researchers who are bringing all of this information to light.

CDC, FDA Prepare Mass Distribution of a Merck/Sanofi Six-in-One Vaccine for Kids, Turning Blind Eye to Safety Signals

Egregious oversteps endangering children’s lives.

All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).

Visit and follow us on Instagram at @crg_globalresearch.

***

The FDA approved Vaxelis in late 2018, but only now is the shot being readied for widespread distribution — in Europe, where infants have been given six-in-one vaccines for years (including Vaxelis since 2016), the vaccines have been associated with reports of sudden infant death.

Since the mid-1980s, the number of childhood shots on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) vaccine schedule has more than quadrupled. When parents express reluctance about turning their little ones into perpetual pin cushions, drug makers and doctors have a ready answer — combination vaccines that “simplify” the schedule by decreasing the number of injections administered.

This month marks the U.S. launch of the Merck/Sanofi joint-venture vaccine, Vaxelis, a six-in-one (hexavalent) combination vaccine that contains diphtheria, tetanus and acellular pertussis (DTaP) components as well as components said to protect against polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and hepatitis B.

Public health officials optimistically believe that bundling all of these components into one shot will help close noncompliance loopholes and increase the likelihood that children will complete “all recommended vaccinations.”

Though Vaxelis is the nation’s first hexavalent injection, it joins other four- or five-in-one vaccines already on the CDC schedule. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Vaxelis in late 2018 — as a three-dose series for 2-, 4- and 6-month-old infants — but it is only now, two-and-a-half years later, that the shot is being readied for widespread distribution.

Warning signs were ignored

There are numerous warning signs that potent all-in-one vaccines are too much for immature immune systems to handle. Concerning safety signals have emerged not just for hexavalent but also pentavalent (five-in-one) vaccines.

In Europe, where infants have been given hexavalent vaccines for some years (including Vaxelis since 2016), the formulations have produced many troubling reports of sudden infant death.

Absurdly, none of the clinical studies assessing Vaxelis safety and efficacy conducted fair comparisons against an inert placebo. Instead, in the two U.S. clinical trials for Vaxelis, not only did investigators compare infants receiving Vaxelis to babies who received Sanofi’s five-in-one Pentacel — but babies in both groups also received rotavirus and pneumococcal vaccines at the same time!

In this context, the CDC’s sales pitch to the public — and its claims that side effects are “usually mild” — cannot be considered credible.

Here are some of the other facts missing from the CDC’s communications:

  • In the two U.S. trials six infants died (slide #27) in the Vaxelis group (some after receiving just one dose); one infant also died in the “control” group that received five-in-one vaccines.
  • All six Vaxelis recipients died within six weeks of vaccination. This timing matches other published accounts of infant deaths “clustering” following hexavalent vaccination.
  • The reported causes of death for the infants who received Vaxelis included asphyxia, sepsis, fluid in the brain and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). These outcomes correspond to the types of adverse events reported following hexavalent vaccination in Europe.
  • Package inserts for other vaccines on the CDC schedule list similar causes of death, suggesting these fatal Vaxelis outcomes are plausibly associated with vaccination.
  • In the clinical trials, the rate of fever was notably higher in Vaxelis recipients even when compared to children receiving five-in-one vaccines (47% vs. 34%).

Juicing vaccine sales

In the no-liability context enjoyed by vaccine makers in the U.S., combination vaccines are already quite popular. In fact, market watchers and health economists praise the jumbo shots as being a catalyst for positive industry trends and a “key to commercial success.”

 

Thus, financial analysts expect Vaxelis to “garner significant patient share following its [U.S.] launch” — predicting that it will account for almost a third of U.S. DTaP vaccinations by 2028 — or $841 million in annual sales.

These predictions represent good news for Merck and Sanofi, two of the “big four” pharma giants that dominate the childhood vaccine market in the United States. Merck is already doing a booming vaccine business, recently reporting annual sales growth of 14.8% for its pneumococcal vaccine (Pneumovax 23) and 5.4% for its human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine Gardasil-9.

However, Merck also faces proliferating Gardasil-related lawsuits — including legal actions alleging that the company knew about and ignored life-changing adverse events from the get-go, many of which (when not fatal) have involved autoimmunity and chronic pain. In fact, before the advent of emergency use COVID vaccines (responsible for an alarming escalation of vaccine-related adverse events), Gardasil had had “more side effects reported than all other vaccines combined.”

Sanofi, too, is embroiled in thousands of lawsuits worldwide — notably for its disastrous and sometimes fatal dengue vaccine. As with Merck, this has not dampened overall vaccine sales growth, which continues its strong upward trajectory, likely to be further strengthened by the U.S. Vaxelis rollout.

Although Sanofi has not been a front-runner in the COVID vaccine race, the company is currently running clinical trials for messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines for both COVID and seasonal influenza.

Aluminum secrecy and grandfathered ingredients

Merck’s proprietary, “super-powered” aluminum adjuvant — amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS) — which is believed to play a significant role in Gardasil’s risk profile, is also present in Vaxelis.

After Merck developed AAHS, it began to “preferentially” feature AAHS in its vaccines even though, as Danish scientists outlined last year, the company appears to have disregarded procedures ordinarily required for approval of new adjuvants.

According to the Danes, at the time AAHS appeared, it represented a “new type of aluminium adjuvant with excipients that [had] not been used earlier in [European Medicines Agency] authorised vaccines.” It should have been — but apparently was not — tested against an inert placebo. For this and other reasons, the Danish scientists question the ethical underpinnings of the Gardasil clinical trials.

In noting that Merck also “seems to have prevented independent studies of AAHS,” the Danes repeated a critique aired by world-famous aluminum expert Christopher Exley in 2018. In an extensive discussion of different aluminum-based adjuvants and their immunological mechanisms of action, Exley and co-authors emphasized the importance of studying aluminum adjuvants one by one, as each is “chemically and biologically dissimilar with concomitantly potentially distinct roles in vaccine-related adverse events.”

Concerningly, the Vaxelis liquid suspension is adjuvanted onto not just AAHS, but also another aluminum adjuvant — aluminum phosphate). The package insert disingenuously shorthands the combination of adjuvants as “aluminum salts.”

How this double whammy of aluminum (319 micrograms per vaccine dose) interacts with the vaccine’s six antigens, or Vaxelis’s numerous other ingredients, or the heavy aluminum load in other childhood vaccines is largely unknown.

According to the Vaxelis package insert, the vaccine also includes: polysorbate 80 (an ingredient flagged for its propensity to induce hypersensitivity reactions); glutaraldehyde and formaldehyde (problematic chemicals deemed necessary to inactivate pertussis toxin); bovine serum albumin (often harvested from bovine fetuses when female cows are found to be pregnant at slaughter); three different antibiotics (neomycin, streptomycin and polymyxin B); ammonium thiocyanate (also a rust inhibitor, weedkiller and defoliant); and yeast protein (associated, notably in hepatitis B vaccines, with autoimmune reactions).

Regulatory loopholes allow manufacturers to “grandfather” ingredients into new vaccines if the components are already present in other licensed vaccines — regardless of how inadequate the original safety testing may have been.

Thus, Merck and Sanofi perceived no need to test Vaxelis for DNA-damaging or cancer-causing effects, and conducted no studies of the ingredients’ pharmokinetics (i.e., how the substances move “into, through, and out of the body”).

The main cautionary note sounded in the meager Vaxelis patient information sheet is to not give Vaxelis to children if they are “allergic to any of the ingredients.”

For thee and thee … but not for me?

The CDC seems to be particularly interested in ensuring that poor and non-white children get Vaxelis. The agency began laying the groundwork to offer Vaxelis through the Vaccines for Children (VFC) Program — the agency’s vaccine program for the poor — over two years ago, in March 2019.

In September of that year, the CDC followed up with an affirmative vote. Public health departments have been promoting Vaxelis to participating VFC providers since early June 2021.

At its September 2019 meeting, CDC outlined another topic deemed important for discussion in the near future — raising the issue of whether Vaxelis should be “preferentially recommended” for the American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) pediatric population.

The tenuous rationale, according to the meeting notes, was because, “in the pre-vaccine era” (more than 35 years ago), “Hib disease occurred at a younger age among the AI/AN population compared to the general population.”

Wave of the future?

Judging from its website, the CDC perceives combination vaccines to be the wave of the future, and has signaled its strong endorsement of Vaxelis by incorporating the new vaccine into its 2021 vaccine schedule.

As if exposure to six antigens were not enough, FDA and CDC also say it is okay for healthcare providers to administer the six-in-one shot at the same time as other vaccines.

These agencies’ characterization of the Vaxelis safety profile as “acceptable” indicates they have either not done their due diligence, or are willing to accept a high level of collateral damage in exchange for the “convenience” of six-in-one shots.

However, as the “overwhelmed by guilt” parents of COVID-vaccine-injured teens are increasingly finding out, convenience is poor consolation for life-changing or life-threatening adverse outcomes.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, @crg_globalresearch. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Featured image is from CHD

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Get an Earful

DARPA BRAIN Initiative – Inhumane Experimentations Using Fusion Centers and Electromagnetic Fields to Control & Torture People - "If they want to experiment on you, by the thousands, they will. And you can be driven to insanity and death"
The “FEW” Involved in the “WEF” | Davos and the Purloined Letter Conspiracy. Klaus Schwab’s “Global Leaders of Tomorrow” - "A conspiracy like this could never happen because 'too many people would be involved'." ...
Senator Ron Johnson’s “A Second Opinion” Panel: Renowned Doctors and Medical Experts Discuss Medical Tyranny and Vaccine Injuries/Deaths (Highlight Video – FULL TRANSCRIPT) - Dr. Pierre Kory: "And that’s what I wanted us to be clear that we’re calling attention to today. This is corruption! Plain and simple, it’s corruption!”