I was so staggered by the cost and implications of the UK governments Operation Moonshot plan to carry out mass testing that I decided to make a video.
Topics covered in the video:
Cost involved with the project
Companies partnering
Number of tests by 2021
Sanctioning of people not complying
Comparisons with the state of Victoria, Australia

I examine the connection between GMO products and vaccines also the British Government response and reaction of the medical professionals to that response.

Links to articles mentioned in the video are here:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3558185/
https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/eu.php
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLxbgkUp6YY
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/news/components-of-mrna-technology-could-lead-to-significant-adverse-events-in-one-or-more-of-our-clinical-trials-says-moderna/
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4425
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELP2EFVOOYc
https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/uk/boris-johnson-meets-bill-gates-to-discuss-plans-to-prevent-future-pandemics/
https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:506291-2020:TEXT:EN:HTML&src=0

Dr Mike Yeadon, ex-head of Pfizer and whistle-blower.

Response to the UK GOV vaccine consultation:

Dear Mr Hancock,

I have a degree in biochemistry and toxicology and a research based PhD in pharmacology. I have spent 32 years working in pharmaceutical research and development, mostly in new medicines for disorders of the lungs and skin. I was a vice president at Pfizer and CEO of a biotechnology company I founded (Ziarco - acquired by Novartis). I’m knowledgeable about new medicine research and development.

I have read the consultation document. I’ve rarely been as shocked and upset.

All vaccines against the SARS-COV-2 virus are by definition novel. No candidate vaccine has been in development for more than a few months.

If any such vaccine is approved for use under any circumstances that are not EXPLICITLY experimental, I believe that recipients are being misled to a criminal extent.

This is because there are precisely zero human volunteers for whom there could possibly be more than a few months past-dose safety information.

My concern does not arise because I have negative views about vaccines (I don’t).

Instead, it’s the very principle that politicians seem ready to waive that new medical interventions at this, incomplete state of development should not be made available to subjects on anything other than an explicitly experimental basis. That’s my concern.

And the reason for that concern is that it is not known what the safety profile will be, six months or a year or longer after dosing.

You have literally no data on this and neither does anyone else.

It isn’t that I’m saying that unacceptable adverse effects will emerge after longer intervals after dosing. No: it is that you have no idea what will happen yet, despite this, you’ll be creating the impression that you do.

Several of the vaccine candidates utilise novel technology which have not previously been used to create vaccines. There is therefore no long term safety data which can be pointed to in support of the notion that it’s reasonable to expedite development and to waive absent safety information on this occasion.

I am suspicious of the motives of those proposing expedited use in the wider human population. We now understand who is at particularly elevated risk of morbidity and mortality from acquiring this virus. Volunteers from these groups only should be provided detailed information about risk / benefit, including the sole point I make here. Only if informed consent is given should any EXPERIMENTAL vaccine be used.

I don’t trust you. You’ve not been straightforward and have behaved appallingly throughout this crisis. You’re still doing it now, misleading about infection risk from young children. Why should I believe you in relation to experimental vaccines?

Dr Michael Yeadon