Playback speed
Share post
Share post at current time

Yeadon's Wager: Why Betting on the Government's Narrative Is the Dumbest Decision You Can Make

"If you stick with the narrative, and that turns out to be a bad call, there's no one going to rescue you."

During an interview with CHD, Dr. Mike Yeadon breaks down the lopsided perilousness one takes by believing what your lying government tells you versus casting doubt on the narrative. I call this philosophical argument "Yeadon's Wager."

"So I'm not doing it [speaking out] for fame, I'm not making any money, and I'm not attacking anybody. I'm telling you that you are being lied to in a way that I think is going to cost you your freedom, at minimum, and could cost you your life.

I'm not slightly worried about myself because if I'm right, and I think I am, we're all at risk. And if I'm wrong, I don't think that's likely. But the percent chance isn't there. The worst that will happen is everyone can laugh at me. And I'll join in.

So I say to people who are sticking with the government's narrative, the risk of you being wrong in that judgment, as compared with the risks I'm running, if I'm wrong, are not symmetrical. So if I'm wrong, you can laugh at me, and I'll join in.

If you're wrong, and you stick with that bunch of liars in each country: Trudeau, Johnson, Macron, Biden. These are awful people! You stick with these people and their advisors, and they're lying, lying, lying! If you stick with them, and I'm right, and you're wrong, there's no coming back from it!

So it doesn't matter what you think about me; I'm asking you to think about yourself and your family and your community. If you stick with the narrative, and that turns out to be a bad call, there's no one going to rescue you. I can't rescue you."

Now, let's apply this principle to the COVID injection. What is the risk/benefit analysis between taking the initial series or boosters versus saying "no more" or "no thanks"?

First, let's take a look at the overall risk of contracting and dying from COVID-19. This infection mortality rate, even on a 'fact-checked' website, turns out to be 2 in 1000 (0.2%).

Now, the survival rate was inconveniently high for them to peddle fear, so they say, "this was reported after those most vulnerable to Covid-19 had been vaccinated and doesn't tell us what the survival rate in an unvaccinated population is."

It turns out they're right! The threat level to the unvaccinated is actually far less, because in the UK, "94% of all COVID-19 deaths since April" 2022 have been among the "vaccinated."

Let's break it down by age. This is an old chart, but you can see the risk that COVID poses to an individual under the age of 65 is minimal at best. Among people 0-19, there is an overall infection survival rate of 99.998% (1 death per 50,000). Among healthy children, virtually non-existent.

But what about the elderly? They would benefit, right? Well, as Dr. Mike Yeadon discusses in this piece, there's something called immunosenescence.

The Vigilant Fox
"It Could Have Never Worked!" - Why COVID Shots for the Elderly Were Bound to Fail
Watch now (2 min) | In an interview with Dr. Paul Elias Alexander, Dr. Mike Yeadon explains the phenomenon known as immunosenescence, the gradual deterioration of the immune system with age, and why it relates to higher COVID mortality in the old. "Now why is it that the eldest people get ill and die? And the answer is, we think something called immunosenescence. Their immu…
Read more

“Because their immune systems are old and tired and don’t respond well to new threats, why in the world would anyone expect a vaccine, which merely presents a training set, a piece of the alleged pathogen — why would we expect their immune systems to perk up and get a great memory? And the answer is, they don’t.

Now people are, ‘So Mike. You must be wrong because we’ve been using flu vaccines annually for decades.’ And you know what? You can go look it up yourself.

The Cochrane Foundation, once the world’s premier group that would do what are called meta-analysis to combine all the data that’s worth looking at, and they [analyzed] the first ten years of flu vaccines in the UK. Flu vaccines make no difference whatsoever to hospitalization rates of the elderly or their deaths from flu. That fits with what I just told you: their immune systems are old and tired.”


Okay. So the people who are young are not at risk and don't need protection, and the people who do need protection get little if any benefit from the shot. But it's at least safe, right? Well — no. Just look at the VAERS numbers.

You could be one of the 29,273 who have succumbed to death, one of the 49,929 to contract myocarditis/pericarditis, or one of the 54,692 permanently disabled. Even worse, these numbers are highly underreported.

The actual numbers could be as much as 100 times higher, but more likely somewhere in the ballpark between 5 and 20. If you assume it's 10, that's nearly 300,000 deaths from the COVID jabs. So, why are they still on the market?

It's simple — because your government is a bunch of lying scum. Consider Yeadon's Wager; cast doubt on the narrative. The worst thing that can happen is that people will laugh at you. That's a much more desirable fate than being dead.

Enjoyed this article and want to support my work? Consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Get 7 day free trial

Vigilant News
Vigilant News
The Vigilant Fox