Former chief scientist at Pfizer Dr. Mike Yeadon made some remarkable claims during an interview that echo what many of us have been saying all along.
We have seen evidence for some time that the tests being used to determine cases for COVID-19 have been less than accurate to say the least. Business Insider reported that early tests could not distinguish the difference between the virus and water.
CNS reported on various animals being tested positive for COVID-19 in Tanzania causing officials to become suspicious of all testing. And now, Dr. Yeadon has expresed his own concerns regarding pillar 2 testing.
Dr. Yeadon confirmed that there is a significant issue with pillar 2 testing. Returning a rate of about 90% false positives, he even went so far as to urge the practice of pillar 2 testing to be stopped.
Pillar 2 testing is the practice of testing the general public who may be concerned that they might have come in contact with the virus. These are largely people who are not sick, not exhibiting symptoms, but may be concerned about exposure. These tests are coming back with a high positivity rate, however the likelihood is 9 out of 10 being a false positive, where the individual is neither sick nor contagious.
Pillar 1 testing on the other hand occurs in the hospital setting. These are administered to people who are sick and exhibiting symptoms, and are conducted by trained medical professionals.
Dr. Yeadon went on to express his concerns about the lockdown and restrictions to hospital access. We’ve discussed before how the lockdown is causing more damage than the virus itself, and the sentiments seem to be echoed by the former chief scientist of Pfizer.
“I’m not a lockdown skeptic,” he said. “I think it’s a dangerous, damaging intervention that cuts across people’s lives, and worse it doesn’t actually stop people catching the virus. They just catch it later, so I don’t think it saves a single life, but it deprives us of access to the NHS.” He went on to assert that they’re trying to keep the loading of the NHS light because they’re planning for a second wave.
“If you believe there’s going to be a second wave,” he insists, “then you must have evidence for that. What is the underlying evidence that you are resting your case on?”
“I’ve looked and there’s no evidence in the literature what ever … at most we’re in a second ripple.”