Genetics and Transhumanism... What is Planned.... Watch out [Archive]

View Full Version : Genetics and Transhumanism... What is Planned.... Watch out

grannyfranny100

29th March 2015, 03:10

Tesla_WTC_Solution

29th March 2015, 16:31

Good thread Grannyfranny, we need more people who are aware and willing to fight for humanity.
Far too many out there are actually working to destroy humanity and they are running out of ways to talk themselves out of it.

Even CNN is waking up to some of the eugenics (indirectly) -- in a couple more years, it might be a more public issue.

I'm grateful for any of the older, more knowledgeable people, who are engaged in this debate.
When it's just kids it makes us look like geeky Conspiracy Theorists instead of researchers with an interest :(

There were some extremely knowledgeable women your age at the autism seminar I attended a year back,
and they were talking about GMOs (between each other).

I would love to see more of it become mainstream information.

Selkie

29th March 2015, 16:37

Thanks, Grannyfranny. I haven't watched the video yet, but the United States, too, was heavily into eugenics even before WWI

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

johnh

30th March 2015, 01:05

Just love Jon Rappoport's work. Really don't know how he has managed to stay alive, but there is protection from the STO's - up to a point.

panopticon

30th March 2015, 13:22

I've not had a chance to watch the video and this is more of a place holder post so I can find it again.

Tesla pointed that there might be a link between GMO & ASD.

There were some extremely knowledgeable women your age at the autism seminar I attended a year back, and they were talking about GMOs (between each other).

I would love to see more of it become mainstream information.

I had a bit if a think about that Tesla and thought maybe I might be able to give a bit of input.

I live in Tasmania, Australia. It's a large island off the south of Australia and is fairly "green".

A "Liberal" government (similar to the US Republicans) where elected a year ago.

They just re-extended the moratorium on both GMO's & Fracking for another 5 years (out to 2020).

If there was an impact on autism from GMO's I'd expect to see lower rates of autism in Tasmania then the Mainland.

When I reviewed the Bureau of Statistics for ASD based on 2012 statistics I found this was not the case.

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/attachment.php?attachmentid=29367&d=1427720514

While there are lots of variables and the figures may reflect better testing or more flexibility in spectrum recognition/defining in Tasmania, it seems strange that the proportional numbers are toward the higher end.

Most of the cooking oil used here is shipped in from the mainland so there's probably GM canola in some of the refined oil and that's just one example, so I'm definitely not saying this is definitive...

Just something I thought might be of interest to others.

-- Pan

Flash

30th March 2015, 16:29

GMO would have an impact in autism because it kills the guts bacteria (as it kills insects) that are used to have a sane digestion, well absorbed micro nutrients and minerals, and a sane gut altogether, not a leaky guts - a sane gut does not allow undigested food in the bloodstream, a leaky gut does. Undigested food molecule put the immune system in overdrive, taking the food molécules for parasites and trying to kill it. Which in turn leads to inflammation of the gut and the whole body, including the brain, which could be a factor in autism, as vaccins are due to inflammation and immune system overdrive. This is but only one possibility.

HOwever, this would explain autism in Tansmania, if GMO oïl is consume and gut bacteria destroyed.

Sunny

12th April 2015, 01:33

Here is an article from Scientific American about using thoughts (via computer) to control our genes:

Thought-Controlled Genes Could Someday Help Us Heal

Scientists combined a brain–computer interface with an optogenetic switch to create the first-ever brain–gene interface
Feb 12, 2015 |By Simon Makin

People can control prosthetic limbs, computer programs and even remote-controlled helicopters with their mind, all by using brain-computer interfaces. What if we could harness this technology to control things happening inside our own body? A team of bioengineers in Switzerland has taken the first step toward this cyborglike setup by combining a brain-computer interface with a synthetic biological implant, allowing a genetic switch to be operated by brain activity. It is the world's first brain-gene interface.

The group started with a typical brain-computer interface, an electrode cap that can register subjects' brain activity and transmit signals to another electronic device. In this case, the device is an electromagnetic field generator; different types of brain activity cause the field to vary in strength. The next step, however, is totally new—the experimenters used the electromagnetic field to trigger protein production within human cells in an implant in mice.

The implant uses a cutting-edge technology known as optogenetics. The researchers inserted bacterial genes into human kidney cells, causing them to produce light-sensitive proteins. Then they bioengineered the cells so that stimulating them with light triggers a string of molecular reactions that ultimately produces a protein called secreted alkaline phosphatase (SEAP), which is easily detectable. They then placed the human cells plus an LED light into small plastic pouches and inserted them under the skin of several mice.

Human volunteers wearing electrode caps either played Minecraft or meditated, generating moderate or large electromagnetic fields, respectively, from a platform on which the mice stood. The field activates the implant's infrared LED, which triggers the production of SEAP. The protein then diffuses across membranes in the implant into the mice's bloodstream.

Playing Minecraft produced moderate levels of SEAP in the mice's bloodstream, and meditating produced high levels. A third type of mental control, known as biofeedback, involved the volunteers watching the light, which could be seen through the mice's skin, and learning to consciously turn the LED on or off—thereby turning SEAP production on or off.

“Combining a brain-computer interface with an optogenetic switch is a deceptively simple idea,” says senior author Martin Fussenegger of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, “but controlling genes in this way is completely new.” By using an implant, the setup harnesses the power of optogenetics without requiring the user to have his or her own cells genetically altered. Fussenegger and his co-authors envision therapeutic implants one day producing chemicals to correct a wide variety of dysfunctions: neurotransmitters to regulate mood or anxiety, natural painkillers for chronic or acute pain, blood-clotting factors for hemophiliacs, and so on. Some patients would benefit greatly from having conscious control over intravenous dosage rather than relying on sensors—especially in cases such as pain, which is hard for anyone but the sufferer to measure, or locked-in patients or others who are conscious but cannot communicate.

Curiosity

14th January 2016, 01:55

Don't get sucked into transhumanism for your children.

Investigative reporter Jon Rappoport warned of alarming future trends in the genetic engineering of human beings. Based on his contacts with several scientists over a period of 20 years, he's concluded that human genetics research is basically a continuation of the Nazi eugenics program, and that medical research into genes as causes of human illness is simply a cover story.

uW-blCkQ2gw

Part of this secret agenda, he detailed, is to demonstrate that people have genetic predispositions to certain diseases like cancer, so in the case of lawsuits, this argument can be made rather than placing blame for illness on environmental factors like pollution. In citing the book Remaking Eden, Rappoport noted that author Lee Silver foresees a time when the "gen-rich" (genetically enhanced class) will account for 10% of the population, while "naturals" will work as low paid service providers/laborers.

Eventually, the gen-rich class and the naturals will become entirely separate species, with no ability to crossbreed, Silver continued, adding that the trend for genetic enhancement was inevitable. Rappoport had no doubt that some of this research was already underway, possibly under compartmentalized lab studies, so that scientists don't even realize the significance of what they're working on. "The best thing that could happen," he stated, "is that recognized doctors and researchers stand up together, and say, this has to stop."

Not very many people will get involved conversing in this subject.
It's scary, it's hard to believe and turns your stomach.
But this is a serious research area and it's made great strides in the last decade. There is a lot of doctors and scientist that see this as the way of the future. The scary part is so does the military complex.

It draws serious questions like, what percent human do we apply human rights to .
When you step down the rabbit hole into the World of Hybrid Humans, Transgenics, Chimeras, Transhumanism, you will be fascinated, confused, shocked and even frighted.

Hybrid World: The Plan to Modify and Control the Human Race (2015)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8BE55vKLKE

Flash

26th January 2016, 14:38

Genes altering technologies approved in US, banned in many other countries, and its potential harmful effect for human's future

A Dr Mercola's article coupled with many videos

New Gene Editing Technology Promises Most Monumental Advance of Humankind Into the Future
January 26, 2016 | 66,964 views
Spread the Word to
Friends And Family
By Sharing this Article.
9
inShare
43
0
Email to a friend Email
Print

Visit the Mercola Video Library
By Dr. Mercola

In his 1932 sci-fi novel "Brave New World," Aldous Huxley explored what life might be like in AD 2540 — a world in which children are born in government owned baby hatcheries.

In his world, human freedom is virtually non-existent, as each individual is genetically engineered and psychologically conditioned to fulfill a specific role within one of the five societal classes.

Over 500 years before his prediction, we're already seeing the germination of some of his projections.

The technical development that is taking medicine by storm is CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat) — a gene editing tool that has the most profound potential to change the health world as we know it that I have ever encountered.

A layman's explanation of the technology and its potential ramifications is presented in the video above. In the past, talk about altering the human genome was relegated to philosophical discussions; now it's becoming a reality. A "Brave New World" indeed!

Drug Companies Race to Develop Gene Editing Drugs

According to MIT Technical Review,1 the pharmaceutical industry is "doubling down" on CRISPR for novel drug development. CRISPR Therapeutics has entered a joint venture with Bayer to create drugs for blood disorders and blindness using this gene editing technology.

Two other startups aiming to put CRISPR technology to use in drug development are Editas Medicine and Intellia Therapeutics. According to the featured article, "dealings over the past year have revealed broad disease areas where drugmakers see opportunities for applying the new tool."

At present, any therapy based on CRISPR technology would have to involve three steps: Remove cells from your body; alter the DNA, and then reintroduce the cells into your body.

CRISPR hold the promise to transform the human species in ways yet unknown and it has quickly gone from being written about only in scientific journals to receiving global media attention. It is sometimes called the Microsoft Word of gene editing for its low cost and ease of use for researchers.

Specificity — The Ultimate Challenge of Genetic Modification

All three CRISPR startups are also working on technologies for editing the genome right inside your body, without having to take out and reinsert the cells.

This presents a far greater challenge, and while it would broaden the range of diseases that could be addressed, it may also be far more dangerous, with any number of potential side effects.

As noted in the featured article:

"'The ultimate need' of any of the players trying to make CRISPR drugs is for technologies that can increase CRISPR's specificity, so that it edits only the target DNA sequence ...

The basis of CRISPR technology is a biological system some bacteria use to remove unwanted viral DNA sequences ... One of the molecules that locates and cuts the DNA has evolved to be somewhat nonspecific so it can be flexible enough to address a range of different viruses...

Once the system is specific enough, there could be several ways to get it into the right cells, such as by using viral vectors or nanoparticles. Delivering it to the right tissue might be as simple as licensing a syringe for injecting into the eyeball, or a stent for delivering the drug to the heart ...

But none of the players trying to make CRISPR drugs have yet been able tackle all three challenges — delivering the drug to the tissue, the cells, and ultimately to the target sequence with the necessary specificity ..."

One Step Closer to 'Designer Babies'

On January 6, researchers announced the discovery of a technique that renders CRISPR more precise — an important step for those who seek to employ the technique in human embryos to "weed out" inherited diseases and the like.

By modifying an enzyme called Cas9, the gene-editing capabilities are significantly improved; in some cases reducing the error rate to "undetectable levels." As reported by Nature:2

"Researchers use CRISPR — Cas9 to make precise changes to genomes that remove or edit a faulty gene. It has worked on nearly every creature on which they have tested it, including human embryos.

The technique relies on an enzyme called Cas9 that uses a 'guide RNA' molecule to home in on its target DNA.

Cas9 cuts the DNA at that site, and the cell's natural DNA repair machinery then takes over to mend the cut — deleting a short fragment of DNA or stitching in a new sequence in the process.

But the technology is not infallible: sometimes the Cas9 enzyme creates unwanted mutations.

As CRISPR inches out of the laboratory and towards the clinic — with debates raging over whether it should be deployed in embryos — researchers have pushed to reduce the error rate. The latest study moves the field closer to that goal ..."

CRISPR May Be Used to Alter Future Generations

According to an earlier article in MIT Technical Review,3 the notion of genetically modifying humans is no longer a science fiction fantasy, and while many will probably shudder at the idea, "to people facing a devastating inherited disease, engineering humanity sounds like a good thing."

In December last year, hundreds of scientists and ethicists met in Washington, D.C. at the National Academy of Sciences to discuss the sanctioning of "germ-line engineering," meaning the altering of DNA in sperm, eggs, or embryos, in order to remove or correct genetic defects.

CRISPR now provides the means to do so, but just because we can, should we tinker with the human genome? After all, there are just as many hazards as there are opportunities with this technology.

Genetic diseases and defects could be eradicated, and any number of diseases might be cured once they strike; on the other hand, introduced errors might leave a child worse off, or cause unintended generational effects, and then there are potential societal ramifications such as those presented in Huxley's book.

Three Categories of Genetic Manipulation of the Human Race

With CRISPR gene editing capabilities, three categories of DNA alterations become possible.4 Science and society will ultimately have to face and address the need and ethical requirements for all of them:

Embryonic DNA is corrected to eliminate genetic defects associated with inheritable disease. (While this use has the greatest support, some scientists argue that using germ-line gene editing to eliminate genetic disease is unnecessary,5 since the technology to test and choose embryos free of genetic disease already exists, and is regularly used in IVF clinics.)
The alteration of genes to protect a person against future disease or diseases.
Genetic enhancement, in which genes are installed or modified to change a person's appearance, or physical or mental potential.
At present, about 40 countries around the world have banned the genetic engineering of human embryos; 15 of 22 European countries prohibit germ line modification.6 According to MIT:

"Many experts at the [National Academy of Sciences] meeting seem to be leaning toward endorsing an indefinite moratorium on any effort to create gene-modified babies, calling the technology too new, too unsafe, and too limited in medical use, a position that has been endorsed by the Obama administration.

But when MIT Technology Review reached out to several families who've dealt with devastating genetic illnesses, all said they approved of using the technology as quickly as possible.

That could create a potential clash between desperate families and cautious scientists and politicians...Others warn of a slippery slope toward 'consumer eugenics' and out-of-control changes to the gene pool. 'Although gene editing is in its infancy, it is likely that the pressure to use it will increase,' says David Baltimore, a Nobel Prize-winning professor at the California Institute of Technology who is leading the deliberations in Washington."

The Danger of Unintended Effects

In "Understanding the Unintended Effects of Genetic Manipulation,"7 the Nature Institute brings forth a number of thought-worthy issues. Genetic engineering or genetic modification of an organism is of course done with a specific objective or effect in mind.

However, the sheer complexity of the genome, be it plant, animal or human, is such that unintended or "non-target" effects frequently occur. There's also the issue of "pleiotropic effects" which refers to effects due to a gene affecting more than one characteristic.

The fact that we have identified the effects of many genes does not mean we've teased out ALL effects of each and every gene. Such ignorance could do a great deal of harm when tinkering with the human genome.

Another factor that may prove to be exceptionally dangerous when we're talking about experimenting with the human genome is the current lack of scientific integrity. As science has gotten more complex, it has also decreased in quality and transparency.

As noted by the Nature Institute:

"[N]ontarget effects are not always reported in research reports. As Dougherty and Parks (1995) write, 'Organisms that do not perform as expected are discounted as defective or atypical in some way, are not the subject of study, and frequently are not reported in the literature. It is important, therefore, to recognize that most published works represent a selected subset of transgenic organisms that have been produced.

These built-in biases have hindered our understanding of how transgene expression impacts the endogenous [host] gene' and, I would add, how the organism as a whole can be affected by the genetic manipulation."

Clearly, once we start talking about human subjects, the ramifications to humanity of discounting those with unintended anomalies as "defective" and tossing them out of the study could be severe. Far more severe than giving the go-ahead to transgenic plants that may be harmful if you eat them in significant amounts over a lifetime.

The Nature Institute only discusses the genetic engineering of plants, not animals or humans, but once you know what can go wrong in a plant, it becomes easier to evaluate the potential risks of tinkering with the genetic code of a human being, which is infinitely more complex than a plant.

Take for example the transgenic potato. A study designed to screen for potential non-target effects in a GE potato, in which the pathway for sugar breakdown was altered, found the potato had altered levels of nearly all metabolites (substances) they tested using metabolic profiling — in this case, 88.

This was a complete surprise, because many of these substances, such as amino acids, were "not known to be related to the sugar breakdown pathway targeted by the genetic manipulation."

This is a classic case of not knowing what we don't know. In addition to that, they found 9 substances in the transgenic potato that didn't exist in the non-GE potatoes — another surprise, since the creation of these substances had not been part of the intended, target effect.

CRISPR Technology Completely Ignores Epigenetics

It's worth noting that CRISPR technology also ignores epigenetic effects, for which there is a solid scientific foundation. "The Central Dogma" of molecular biology states that biological information is transferred sequentially and only in one direction (from DNA to RNA to proteins).

The ramification of buying into the central dogma is that it leads to belief in absolute determinism, which leaves you utterly powerless to do anything about the health of your body; it's all driven by your genetic code, which you were born with. However, scientists have shattered this dogma and proven it false. You actually have a tremendous amount of control over how your genetic traits are expressed — from how you think to what you eat and the environment you live in.

You may recall the Human Genome Project, launched in 1990 and completed in 2003, the mission of which was to map out all human genes and their interactions. The idea was that this would then serve as the basis for curing virtually any disease. Alas, not only did they realize the human body consists of far fewer genes than previously believed, they also discovered that these genes do not operate as previously predicted.

In 1988, experiments by John Cairns, a British molecular biologist, produced compelling evidence that our responses to our environment determine the expression of our genes. A radical thought, for sure, but one that has been proven correct on multiple occasions since then.

CRISPR Also Being Used in Creation of Transgenic Insects

Another application for CRISPR is for so-called "gene drive" in transgenic insect disease vectors. In a recent report,8 the Institute of Science in Society (ISIS) discusses the creation of transgenic mosquitoes, carrying genes against a malarial pathogen.

Using CRISPR/Cas9, a gene drive was created that makes virtually all progeny of the male transgenic mosquitoes carriers of this anti-malaria gene. However, the transgene was found to be unstable in female mosquitoes, and key safety issues were also raised, including the following:

"'To what extent and over what period of time might crossbreeding or lateral [i.e., horizontal] gene transfer allow a drive to move beyond target populations? Might it subsequently evolve to regain drive capabilities in populations not originally targeted?' This is crucial in the light of the instability of the gene drive in transgenic female mosquitoes reported.

When these females bite animals including humans, there is indeed the possibility of horizontal gene transfer of parts, or the entire gene-drive construct, with potentially serious effects on animal and human health. Cas9 nuclease could insert randomly or otherwise into the host genome, causing insertion mutagenesis that could trigger cancer or activate dominant viruses ...

Finally, the ecological risks of gene drives are enormous, so warns conservation scientists from Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization ... As the gene drive can in principle lead to the extinction of a species, this could involve the species in its native habitat as well as where it is considered invasive. As distinct from conventional biological control, which can be applied locally, there is no way to control gene flow.

They point out that because the CRISPR/Cas gene drive remains fully functional in the mutated strain after it is created, the chance of off-target mutations also remain and the likelihood increases with every generation.

'If there is any risk of gene flow between the target species and other species, then there is also a risk that the modified sequence could be transferred and the adverse trait manifested in nontarget organisms.' (This commentary has not even begun to consider horizontal gene flow, which would multiply the risks many-fold.)"

Too Much, Too Fast

The ISIS report makes it clear that CRISPR technology raises "unprecedented concern over safety and ethics." According to the report, the issue "came to a head" after a team of Chinese researchers used the technology to create the first genetically modified human embryos.

While CRISPR/Cas9 effectively cut the intended gene target, it also affected other non-target sites, and in the end, "untoward mutations" were created. According to the researchers:

"Taken together, our work highlights the pressing need to further improve the fidelity and specificity of the CRISPR/Cas9 platform, a prerequisite for any clinical applications of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated editing."

There's no doubt that gene editing technology is here to stay (unless something truly devastating cuts its popularity short). It certainly has the potential to do good, but it also has the potential to be misused and abused — especially since it's far cheaper than any previous methods.

For better or worse, medicine and reproductive technology is about to take a massive leap; we're quickly entering an era where the human genome can be tinkered with for any number of reasons. Unfortunately, if genetically engineered foods are any indication, such a leap may turn out to be just another factor in our own undoing.

If this topic interests you, you can learn more about the history of this revolutionary technology in a paper9 published in the journal Cell earlier this month. A commentary10 on the paper can also be found on the science blog Genotopia.http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/01/26/crispr-gene-editing-technology.aspx?e_cid=20160126Z1_DNL_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20160126Z1&et_cid=DM95982&et_rid=1331004643

Curiosity

26th January 2016, 18:17

Hey Flash, what a great write up.

What should be alarming to all is the fact that we,(Scientists), really do not have a clue what they are doing. They can't even successfully genetically modify a plant without inherent non-targeted effects as this quote points out.

"Take for example the transgenic potato. A study designed to screen for potential non-target effects in a GE potato, in which the pathway for sugar breakdown was altered, found the potato had altered levels of nearly all metabolites (substances) they tested using metabolic profiling — in this case, 88.

This was a complete surprise, because many of these substances, such as amino acids, were "not known to be related to the sugar breakdown pathway targeted by the genetic manipulation."

This is a classic case of not knowing what we don't know. In addition to that, they found 9 substances in the transgenic potato that didn't exist in the non-GE potatoes — another surprise, since the creation of these substances had not been part of the intended, target effect."

Altering one human genome could have a crashing domino effect. A very scary reality.

TargeT

26th January 2016, 18:27

Genes altering technologies approved in US, banned in many other countries, and its potential harmful effect for human's future

nothing is inherently "good" or "bad"... we place these labels on things ourselves.

I'd say CRISPR tech is a F'n GREAT thing... look what it's started already (and we JUST got it!)

First Monkeys with Autism Created in China

They spin in their cages and don’t interact. The scientists who created autistic monkeys say they’ll now try to cure them.
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/546036/first-monkeys-with-autism-created-in-china/

There are more than 3,500 species of mosquitoes (http://www.megacatch.com/mosquitofacts.html), and only a FEW carry human vector diseases...

Genetic engineering could thwart the Zika virus, among other mosquito-borne diseases
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/221814-genetic-engineering-could-thwart-the-zika-virus-among-other-mosquito-borne-diseases

petra

4th August 2016, 13:44

What should be alarming to all is the fact that we,(Scientists), really do not have a clue what they are doing. They can't even successfully genetically modify a plant without inherent non-targeted effects as this quote points out.

I actually laughed out loud! It IS alarming, and how you're poking fun at science is funny too :)

Altering one human genome could have a crashing domino effect. A very scary reality.

Exactly, I think about downs syndrome - genetically not all that different from normal people, but physically and mentally, extremely different.

I think there's two kinds of people. Ones who screw with things they don't understand, and ones who don't mess with things they don't understand (this one is me)

Thing is, how are you ever going to understand, if you don't screw with it? Playing with fire.... :)

TargeT

4th August 2016, 18:21

[
I think there's two kinds of people. Ones who screw with things they don't understand, and ones who don't mess with things they don't understand (this one is me)

Thing is, how are you ever going to understand, if you don't screw with it? Playing with fire.... :)

Or alternately:

Those who live in fear, and those who do not.

petra

4th August 2016, 18:36

Or alternately:

Those who live in fear, and those who do not.

I don't think so, not in this case. If someone were to decide not to genetically modify something, I'd like to think that choice would be made more out of respect than fear.

TargeT

4th August 2016, 18:46

I don't think so, not in this case. If someone were to decide not to genetically modify something, I'd like to think that choice would be made more out of respect than fear.

Respect for chaos?

I agree, the entropic nature of humanity is a very corrupting influence; however it's also very very ingrained in our behavior; we always impose order over chaos & then freak out when it changes...

However, imposing a bit of order in genetics isn't a bad thing & I don't really see how respect plays into it; sans religion.

petra

4th August 2016, 19:26

Respect for chaos?

I agree, the entropic nature of humanity is a very corrupting influence; however it's also very very ingrained in our behavior; we always impose order over chaos & then freak out when it changes...

However, imposing a bit of order in genetics isn't a bad thing & I don't really see how respect plays into it; sans religion.

I see, yes I am thinking of towards a Creator, but respect for nature could apply too, religion doesn't have to be factored in. When we equate fear into it, I just imagine scientists going "I dare you!" to each other, and THAT is a scary thought!

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see science make some progress, I just think it'd end up more like the Island of Dr. Moreau than like Gattaca :)

TargeT

4th August 2016, 19:55

I see, yes I am thinking of towards a Creator, but respect for nature could apply too, religion doesn't have to be factored in. When we equate fear into it, I just imagine scientists going "I dare you!" to each other, and THAT is a scary thought!

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see science make some progress, I just think it'd end up more like the Island of Dr. Moreau than like Gattaca :)

Honestly, both of those examples would be terrible... haha

I respect the sun's power to deliver vitamin D, but understand that too much of it can be damaging, so I alter how it effects me.

I respect the cold & dress accordingly to mitigate it's effects.

I respect a bear for it's role in nature and the danger it poses to me should I provoke it; but I'll kill it in an instant if it tries to eat me.

I respect my body & it's functions, but don't like it when my hair is long so I cut it & I don't like it when I have excess fat, so I exercise and eat differently than my hunger tells me to.

we modify everything... we are modifying our DNA (in a very sloppy way) simply by the environments we choose to live in & the products we choose to consume / be exposed to.

I really don't see how respect comes into it.

maybe reverence, but I hold nothing but the "whole" in reverence; the individual pieces are mine to play with; else I wouldn't have the ability to modify them... I respect my position in this reality.

petra

4th August 2016, 20:43

Honestly, both of those examples would be terrible... haha

Haha I totally agree!! Gattaca IS awful!

I really don't see how respect comes into it.

maybe reverence, but I hold nothing but the "whole" in reverence; the individual pieces are mine to play with; else I wouldn't have the ability to modify them... I respect my position in this reality.

Reverence is by far a better word when you're looking at things as a whole. I respect your ability to help me learn to communicate better :)

onawah

10th October 2016, 20:31

Wasn't sure where to post this, but nanotechnology seems to be related to transhumanism, so hopefully this thread is a good place.

.Dr. Nick Delgado is a researcher of
biochemistry and endocrinology,
with a special focus on anti-aging
medicine. In this clip, Dr. Delgado
speaks to me about a disturbing
new phenomenon that he's been
observing for about a year and a
half.

When he examines patients,
Dr. Delgado puts a drop of their
blood beneath a microscope. After
40 years of studying blood
morphology, he has never
previously seen or heard of the
1-micron-sized* tiny "tadpoles",
which he's been seeing lately,
which school like fish in large
groups around the blood cells,
moving in unison and changing
rapidly in direction. The people
carrying these "tadpoles" all
describe having a persistent
cough.

These "tadpoles" somewhat
resemble a class of microbe called
flagella. A common example of a
flagellate bacterium is the ulcer-
causing Helicobacter pylori -
however, these "tadpoles"
behave differently from
anything he's ever seen.

Dr. Delgado isn't sure whether
these are a "super" bacteria or
exactly what they are but he's
encountered cases in Northern-
and Southern California, as well
as in Florida. After I suggested
that, if they were not readily
identifiable as microbes, that
these might be some sort of
bioweapon, he remarked that
he was open to this possibility.

Earlier this week, a colleague of
his had confirmed that he'd
observed the exact same thing -
so it truly appears that we may
be looking at an emerging and
pervasive phenomenon.

As Dr. Delgado described their
movement to me, I was reminded
of the way swarms of tiny drones
called Micro Air Vehicles (MAVs)
http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/Micro-Air-Vehicles-MAVs-Bug-like-Drones/
can maneuver, as they are radio
controlled using "swarming"
software, which keeps the
movements of dozens of MAVs in
perfect unison.

These "tadpoles" are of course
much, much smaller than MAVs.
The idea of nanorobots or "nanites"
also popped into my mind. At 1
micron in size, these "tadpoles"
are at the large end of the nanoscale,
the size of a complex nanorobot, per
Robert Freitas, in his book,
'Nanomedicine'.
http://techin.oureverydaylife.com/nanobot-technology-12010.html
As Dr. Delgado described the
distribution of cases in California, it
reminded me of Morgellon's disease,
a controversial condition described
by officialdom (the crooked CDC)
as "delusional parasitosis."

Morgellon's is nonetheless addressed
with sincerity by the Mayo Clinic and
certainly by its sufferers, many of
whom believe that there might be a
connection between chemtrails and
Morgellon's.

Dr. Delgado will be showing images
of these strange new blood "tadpoles"
in his upcoming October 16th
Immortality Webclass, a free webinar
he's conducting with fellow leading
anti-aging experts, that's all about
revolutionizing the way participants
think about and experience aging,
with critical scientific insights into the
findings of recent research and how
to safely use biochemistry to improve
all areas of human performance in
advanced ages.

This FREE webinar will be held on October 16th, between 3PM to 6PM
Pacific Time https://app.webinarjam.net/register/18222/f739cd7c56
* (Not 4 microns, as discussed in the video interview).

Video: (13 mins):
TX5NnqzOxyE
Mysterious New Blood Bacteria Seems Like Nanobot Bioweapon

http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/mysterious-new-blood-bacteria-seems-like-nanobot-bioweapon/

onawah

10th May 2018, 17:19

WHY DOES GOOGLE WANT YOUR DNA?
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/why-does-google-want-your-dna/
5/10/18
VoJpDTHgFqg

You may have heard that 72-year-old Joseph James DeAngelo, aka the Golden State Killer, who raped, murdered and burgled hundreds of people the 1970s in an investigation that had long since gone cold was recently tracked down and arrested due to his DNA being linked to that of a distant relative using an open-source genealogy website called GEDmtach.

In other words, even if you have never volunteered your genetics for such services, your DNA is accessible to law enforcement if a relative has done a genetic test – even a very distant relative. Despite these companies’ guarantees of privacy, they are obliged to surrender genetic data when presented with a search warrant or a court order.

Remember, Kids – in the era of Big Data, YOU are the product!

YouTuber, reallygraceful has been making great videos for a few years and this is one of her best so far. This very well-researched and visually-sophisticated piece explores the intersection between 23andMe, the Mountain View, California privately-held personal genomics and biotechnology company that was founded in 2006 by CEO Anne Wojcicki (sister of YouTube CEO, Susan Wojcicki) with seed money from Google Ventures when Anne was still married to Google co-founder Sergey Brin.

Meanwhile, Google Ventures CEO Bill Maris is also the founder of the Google-backed biotechnology company, Calico, which is chiefly concerned with combating aging. Maris is firm in his view that Calico’s research could extend the human lifespan to five hundred years and possibly extinguish death itself.

Immortality is an obsession of many of the same Silicon Valley Tech Overlords who promote the idea that human overpopulation is the world’s leading problem and that the Earth’s resources will be exhausted without population control. This is, of course at odds with the idea of life extension and immortality. If the lifespan of everybody on Earth were extended to 500 years and beyond, the received wisdom tells us that we would eat ourselves out of our planetary house and home.

This is where transhumanism and an emerging world of high tech eugenics collide and reallygraceful does a fantastic job of exploring the legal and existential implications of reproductive rights based the “brainscores” currently being withheld from DNA test customers, the “Designer Baby” patent owned by 23andMe for use in fertility clinics and “ethno-bombs” made from genetically modified microorganisms to target genetic sequences that belong to specific ethnicities.

Back in 1998, Wired Magazine reported that one such weapon was being developed in Israel to target Arab genes and to leave the ethnically Jewish ones unharmed.

While the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 prohibits some types of genetic discrimination in obtaining health insurance and employment, she notes that last year, members of Congress moved to undo some genetic privacy protections that would enable employers to demand to see their employees’ genetic information.

On the 23andme website, the fine print currently reads: “If you are asked by an insurance company whether you have learned genetic information about health conditions and you do not disclose them…it may be considered fraud on your behalf.”

As current trends in DNA testing continue and tests taken by your relatives may reveal your own predispositions to disease, she wonders if your employer or insurer will drop you after having access to your family’s DNA reports? Will we see a rise in deaths associated with treatable conditions once insurance companies have access to these reports? Will our genetic profiles ever be used against us beyond law enforcement? The answer seems obvious.

The data-processing involved in genetic sequencing is legendary, so who would be better-equipped to crunch the data of billions of genomes than Google, who met with the White House 427 times during the Obama Administration? reallygraceful rightly asks, “How long until 23andme’s biobank is utilized by third parties like the US military to develop genetically-targeted biological weapons? Or is that already taking place?”

She warns that the potential for soft eugenics is beginning to form while designer babies will soon be within reach for average customers and that the responsibility for this is currently in the hands of legislators who receive large donations from the Corporatist lobbyists associated with these technologies.

It is our responsibility to stay on top of this matter to see that this doesn’t get out of hand, unless it’s already too late. For whatever it’s worth, Deborah Tavares of StoptheCrime.net has recently announced that the 5G wireless network currently being rolled out is in fact a sterilization and eugenics program. (To Be Continued…).
by Alexandra Bruce

Omni

10th May 2018, 18:09

TargeT

10th May 2018, 18:59

nothing is inherently "good" or "bad"... we place these labels on things ourselves.
I disagree. It is by the objective effects of an action that make it good or bad. There is a dynamic of good vs. evil in perspective, so bad is good to some perspective out there, however evil still knows it's negative for those they are victimizing. Perhaps it would be better to term it positive and negative, and a given context (like who it is positive or negative for).

"No good or bad we make it up" is basically a Satanist philosophy called moral relativism. A poisonous Satanist & new age ideology proliferated by occultist mind control programs to make people not able to identify good and bad (good and evil).

The joy of pulling things out of context...

In the context of technologies, there is no such thing as "good or bad".

non-sentient objects are generally just that; not morally aligned with out a sentient force behind them (which speaks to the topic of transhumanism, and how I'm trying to suggest not throwing the baby out with the bathwater).

Omni

10th May 2018, 19:45

Cara

20th September 2019, 11:22

This seems an appropriate thread in which to place this article on how scientists are now able to mass product human embryoids.

If humans can be "grown to order", how long until they can be specified with particular characteristics?

Scientists Create A Device That Can Mass-Produce Human Embryoids
September 11, 20191:01 PM ET
ROB STEIN

https://i0.wp.com/media.npr.org/assets/img/2019/09/05/embryoids-1_wide-973d1cf088247318f7df134a88a874cdf5405441-s1100-c15.jpg?zoom=1&w=640&ssl=1
These human embryo-like structures (top) were synthesized from human stem cells; they've been stained to illustrate different cell types. Images (bottom) of the "embryoids" in the new device that was invented to make them.
Yi Zheng/University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Scientists have invented a device that can quickly produce large numbers of living entities that resemble very primitive human embryos.

Researchers welcomed the development, described Wednesday in the journal (https://nature.com/articles/s41586-019-1535-2) Nature, as an important advance for studying the earliest days of human embryonic development. But it also raises questions about where to draw the line in manufacturing "synthetic" human life.

Other scientists have previously created synthetic embryos, which are also known as embryoids. These entities are made by coaxing human stem cells to form structures found in very early human embryos. The research has raised questions (https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/02/516280895/embryo-experiments-reveal-earliest-human-development-but-stir-ethical-debate) about how similar to complete embryos they could and should be allowed to become.

The new work takes such research further by creating a method that can rapidly generate relatively large numbers of embryoids.

"This new system allows us to achieve a superior efficiency to generate these human embryo-like structures," says Jianping Fu (https://me.engin.umich.edu/people/faculty/jianping-fu), an associate professor of biomedical engineering at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, who led the research.

Fu calls the step "an exciting new milestone for this emerging field" that should significantly improve the ability of scientists to study early human development.

"Such human embryo-like structures have a lot of potential to open what we call the so-called black box of human development," Fu says.

He's referring to the first few weeks after a sperm fertilizes an egg, when the embryo is inside a woman's body and hard to study. A long-standing guideline bars scientists from conducting research on embryos in their labs beyond 14 days of development for ethical reasons.

Fu says the ability to produce large numbers of embryoids, which are not subject to the 14-day guideline, will hopefully provide scientists with new insights into important health issues, including how to prevent birth defects and miscarriages. In addition, researchers could use the embryoids to screen drugs, to help determine whether the medications are safe for pregnant women to take.

"Such research can lead to a lot of good," Fu says.

Other scientists agree.

"It's a major advance in the knowledge of early human development," says Ali Brivanlou, an embryologist at the Rockefeller University in New York. "We're opening up windows to aspects of development that we have never seen before. This knowledge is really the Holy Grail of human embryology."

Other scientists and bioethicists agree. But they also caution that Fu's research raises sensitive issues.

"This team needs to be very careful not to model all aspects of the developing human embryo, so that they can avoid the concern that this embryo model could one day become a baby if you put it in the womb," says Insoo Hyun, a bioethicist at Case Western Reserve University and Harvard Medical School.

Because of such concerns, Fu says he purposefully made embryoids that are not complete models of full human embryos. They only "resemble a portion of the human embryo — the core of the early human embryo," Fu says. They are missing key structures, such as the early stages of the placenta and "yolk sac," which provide nourishment to embryos.

"I understand that there may be people sensitive when you see that you can massively produce organized embryonic structures. People will be concerned. I understand that. I guess we are pushing the boundary," Fu says.

Others praised Fu's approach, saying going further would be highly problematic.

"That would be sort of a very early sort of Frankenstein model, right? Taking different parts and stitching them together in order to try to create an organism," says Daniel Sulmasy (https://kennedyinstitute.georgetown.edu/people/daniel-sulmasy/), a bioethicist at Georgetown University.

"If somebody tried to do it and it were even at the earliest stages of embryonic development, and they tried to then let it develop further, that would be a problem," Sulmasy says.

The device Fu created is a thin silicone square. The plate contains four wells around a narrow channel. The scientists place stem cells — either human embryonic stem cells or induced pluripotent stem cells (https://stemcells.nih.gov/info/basics/3.htm), which can be made from adult cells — into the device. Next, the researchers add to adjoining wells chemicals that stimulate the cells to grow key structures of human embryos.

Each device can produce about a dozen embryoids in just a few days, Fu says, and that enables the scientists to produce hundreds of the structures by using many of the devices simultaneously.

The Embryoids Growing
Time-lapse video shows human stem cells forming "embryoids," which include key structures:
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/09/11/757072996/scientists-create-a-device-that-can-mass-produce-synthetic-human-embryos?jwsource=cl

The rapid advances in embryoid creation have prompted the International Society for Stem Cell Research (http://www.isscr.org/) to launch a review of its guidelines.

"If these embryo models end up being complete and are built to have all the components of natural embryos, they should be subject to the same 14-day rule that limits research with natural human embryos," Hyun says. "That's one more reason to avoid modeling the whole thing at once."
From: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2019/09/11/757072996/scientists-create-a-device-that-can-mass-produce-synthetic-human-embryos

Hervé

21st October 2019, 13:13

Underground Bases & Nephilim are Real - Insider (https://www.henrymakow.com/carolyn_hamlett.html)

henrymakow.com
May 25, 2012

http://whale.to/c/illumi2.jpg
(Carolyn Hamlett)

"If the world feels more evil today than it did 20 or 30 years ago, you are not imagining it....We now have among us evil representatives in physical forms that do indeed look human, but are not."

[Editor's Note: We reserve judgment and present this information for discussion.]

by Carolyn Hamlett
(henrymakow.com)

After reading "Subterranean Secrets" (https://www.henrymakow.com/subterranean_secrets_by_fritz.html)by Fritz Springmeier, I want to respond to some of the comments from your readers. I know the topic about hybrids and Nephilim is pretty far out, but not so far out when explained in terms that people are accustomed to:

From my lifetime as a former multigenerational server (https://www.henrymakow.com/the_making_of_an_illuminati_sl.html) in the organization that has been working to implement "The Plan" for the NWO, I can tell you that large underground bases do exist and that many bizarre projects such as genetic experimentation and hybridization have taken place there for many years.

In reference to "Jack's" comment, his questioning on how so many employees of such cities or underground facilities could remain quiet about them:

There are several answers to this.
1) First of all, in the military and in the organization responsible for implementing the plan for the NWO, no one is given such a responsibility unless he or she has been tested and found able to keep all activities and information secret.

2) Some military bases contract out certain projects to "civilian" companies who hire non-military personnel who are given secret clearance only after they have passed various tests, one of which is to be able to keep their work secret. My former husband worked on secret projects, yet he never divulged anything at all about the base or his work there.

3) There are people "employed" in the underground facilities who are there for life.

4) Something to keep in mind are the very real top-secret programs that existed during WWII that involved many people who were dedicated enough or fearful enough to keep it all secretive. My former father-in-law was a code breaker at a secret location known as "The Farm". The reality to all at "The Farm" was that if there was a breech of secrecy, the whole farm with all inhabitants would be blown sky high in an instant.
Another former friend of mine, a retired nuclear physicist, who also spent time at "The Farm", was also assigned to work on the "H" Bomb project at Los Alamos. He too has remained silent concerning his work.

To this very day, the details of the operations at those two places "The Farm" and Los Alamos, have remained obscure due to [enforcers who] make sure that the general public never receives the truth, and does not believe the truth if it is told.

SUPERNATURAL EVIL
Many people are talking about Nephilim, but are they ready to believe that the Nephilim are a reality? What if someone came forth to say that they know for a fact that the Nephilim are real, would this person be believed?

My bet is that people can talk all day long about Nephilim, but if someone came forward to say that they know from first-hand experience that the Nephilim do indeed exist today on earth, this person would not be believed.

Consider this: Just because you can't see it, just because you can't hear it, does not mean it does not exist.

Dogs are able to hear frequencies that are not audible to our human ears. The earth looks flat, but isn't. In this physical world, there are gases we do not see, but exist. There are radio waves, microwaves and other frequencies that we do not see or hear, but they do indeed exist.

Much of what we do not understand today is not because we are not intelligent enough as a species to understand, or that we are not spiritually "evolved" enough to grasp it.

The simple truth is, we lack the necessary information for proper analysis. The information does exist and can be proven and soon will be given to the world, but it will be given in a perverted form to support a particular agenda, the agenda that a physical hierarchy of power serves, an organization some call the "Illuminati".

Have you ever had this experience? You were traveling, and as you enter a large city, you can not help but sense an air of evil hanging like a blanket over that city.

You don't see it, but you can feel it. Actually, you may not have been imagining it. Just as we have mayors and government officials in the physical world, there are in the supernatural, principalities assigned to specific regions to serve the agenda of an organized governing power. Some know this power as the kingdom of darkness.

If you sense the world is not the same place it was 20 or 30 years ago, that there seems to be a heavier and more evil presence in general, you are not imagining it.

There is indeed a heavier presence here on earth. It is for the purpose of the very last stage of "The Plan". In this last stage, the supernatural is being combined with the physical which will culminate in a spiritual global world order.

Many people who don't believe in the supernatural or super humans or extraterrestrials, will soon believe. This agenda is part of "The Plan", a plan that was authored many centuries ago.

A plan that my family bloodline has served for many generations. While many purport to know God's end time plan, I have known and served the plan that is contrary to all that is of a Holy, Just and Righteous creator.

Everything I share is from my personal experience unless I state otherwise. What I will be sharing is probably different than anything you have heard. Many of you will not believe, at least at first.

NEPHILIM
The idea of "Nephilim" is the composite of hybridization, not only that of physical DNA, but that of a "spiritual" hybridization, the combining of human DNA and spirit with that of another "spirit" creation that does not appear to us to exist on this physical earth.

Just because our eyes do not see this other "spirit" creation does not mean that it does not exist, nor does it mean that it can not sometimes manifest or procreate. It is all a matter of one having the missing data for one to understand the possibility.

Someone recently asked me if I, in my lifetime have witnessed supernatural manifestations or ritual magic. My first thought was, yes, everyday from as long as I can remember, for the entire duration that I worked for the powers of darkness.

My next thought was, that I never thought the term "magic" applied to anything I ever did or experienced, that when one understands the supernatural, there is nothing magical or mysterious about it. Everything is self explanatory. So it is with the topic of what the "Nephilim" are, and whether this type of hybridization is even possible.

The topic of Nephilim is only a small part of my life experiences of serving in what I call "the organization". The project of creating physical bodies for a dark spiritual hierarchy is real. It was real enough and disturbing enough for me that I gave up my entire life, my identity, all that I and my family believed in and had worked for all of our lives.

The project of the creating of these composites is literally where the supernatural evil rubber meets the physical road.

So, if the world feels more evil today than it did 20 or 30 years ago, you are not imagining it.

The presence of evil on this earth has been stepped up for the last phase of "The Plan". This presence is greater than a supernatural evil presence one may sense, but not see. We now have among us evil representatives in physical forms that do indeed look human, but are not.

They are a combination of the human and "supernatural" that are able to operate in both realms. I know that at face value it sounds like fantasy, but in time you will be shown that it is not fantasy at all.

These evil forms are all in preparation for this last phase of "The Plan", which is much more than a physical plan for global dominance over humanity.

---

First Comment from Tony Blizzard

Let me add that I have an ex-step son (marriage ain't what it used to be) that his mother and I put through one year of college. He met a young man around his age at that college who had been living more or less naturally (off the land) and alone in the mountains for some time. Turns out this guy was the son of one of the really high powered money people in this country and the world.

He related to my step son that he basically ran away from all those riches and eventually told him why. Said his father was grooming him to enter the business and take it over. He was invited to a business meeting that took place in the huge room of the UN building in New York where that long table sits that is often seen in pictures of the UN.

The guy swore of the following: His father seated him in the "peanut gallery" to watch the proceedings of the meeting. Those attending were some of the top world shakers and movers. David Rockefeller was seated at one end of the long table, the high movers, including the fellow's father, on each side and the chair at the other end was empty. When all were ready, these people who rule our daily lives through economics, etc., began a chant which resulted in the devil materializing in the empty chair. After which was held an actual business meeting.

My step son, of reasonable intelligence, was convinced that this young man was neither nuts nor playing him, but totally sincere.

This puts everything that goes on in a totally different perspective. Who would better know how to "screw the world" economically than Satan? What type of person would go along with it? Those that do KNOW the supernatural exists, how is it they don't know then that God will not allow the evil to win out in the end?

Frankly, my reaction would be similar to the son's - get as far away from it as possible - but obviously there are plenty of people in the world who are willing to serve Satan for temporary worldly gain such as his father. I serviced the vending machines at a California prison for some time and met there an inmate who had been a devil worshiper and in prison because he and others were caught pulling people off the street into a van, killing them and doing things like eating their hearts while still beating as a way to serve the devil. When I asked him why the hell he would do such a thing he replied: "You wouldn't believe the money, the positions, the women, whatever you wanted." But, of course, it was all short lived because here he was in prison. He agreed and claimed to now be a Christian, which is often a con conning but not always.

According to the way most learned students of biblical prophecy see our times (not the ignorant Scofieldites), now is the time when the devil is unchained and loosed upon the earth to seduce as many souls as he can. Certainly seems true the things are unfolding. Kind of rules out fence straddling, doesn't it?

--
If you take the trouble to go to Carolyn Hamlett's website and do a little reading you will discover that the last phase of "the plan" to take over the world is really pretty simple and directly in line with Christian prophecy. The plan is to show Lucifer in all his great and overwhelming splendor to the world as Jesus Christ (or the god of any other religion for those particular believers).

Most will believe instantly that God has finally come to rule the planet personally and will cooperate more than fully. "Christian Zionist" non-thinkers will be ecstatic and never question the possibility of fraud for a second. That goes equally for almost all Protestants and V2 Catholics (also Protestants).

When you read Hamlett's statements carefully you realize that the so-called "reptilians" are, in reality, Lucifer's band of fallen angels, now better known as demons. Very many humans are actively working with these powerful but supremely evil entities, most fooled into believing they are hastening God's return, many of them people Americans practically worship and many others actively involved in media/religious/educational/government/financial control. Anything and everything that influences human thought processes.

It's a sick world getting sicker as the loosed devil is free to manipulate it. The thousand year reign of God on earth is long over (about 300AD to 1300AD. It is a form of insanity, refusal to observe prophecy and facts, to expect it).

One must be mentally tough as well as independently minded, able to willingly fall back on spiritual help and disconnected from the material world except for necessary subsistence in order to put up any opposition whatsoever against the evil permeating today's world.

How are you doing in that regard? Most all of us need to make a lot of life changes in a very short time.

Related:

Illuminati Abuse Children for Demonic Power (https://www.henrymakow.com/2019/10/jennifer-I-believe-fiona-because-I-have-been-there.html)
First-born Rights (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?74505-Interview-with-a-Female-Milab-and-Project-Avalon-Member-by-Eve-Lorgen&p=873305&viewfull=1#post873305)
Carolyn Hamlett- A Victim's Memoir (http://whale.to/c/illuminati_pedophilia.html)
Satanic Black Magic Rules the World - Fiona Barnett (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?27790-While-you-were-out---business-as-usual&p=1319720&viewfull=1#post1319720)
Hell almost destroyed Heaven (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pe6Bp0jeTkI)

onawah

22nd December 2019, 05:22

The New Global Threat from GMOs
Institute for Responsible Technology
12/21/19
From their email update today:

"We’ve seen the tipping point in our food system where even food industry giants provide non-GMO products due to consumer demand. With a bit of knowledge and persistence, we can now eat largely free from GMOs and pesticides. It’s tough but doable. That’s a huge change from 10 years ago.

But this is bigger. Now, nature itself faces a threat from an unregulated biotech industry creating and releasing gene-edited organisms with the potential to corrupt the gene pool and alter entire ecosystems - the new generation of GMOs.

We made this short film (3 minutes) to blow the whistle, accelerate awareness and ensure a future with nature as we know it."
okaQEAbviJk

onawah

7th February 2020, 19:32

Genetic baloney in thick slices
Feb 7 2020
by Jon Rappoport
“Fun and profit puffed up for fun and profit”
https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/02/07/genetic-baloney-in-thick-slices/

"Gene research companies tend to come and go. They start out banging and popping like fireworks in the sky, and then they fade out—perhaps having sold themselves to another, hopefully larger, outfit…

Once upon a time, it seemed easy. Start with a disease, find the gene responsible for the disease, and correct the problem.

Then, researchers wondered, was disease the result of one gene or a group of genes acting together?

Either way, the proof would be in devising cures for diseases using gene therapy. “Not yet, but soon…”

And regardless, the major need was: money. Lots and lots of money for research.

This need required good PR people. “We have to pump up the idea that we’re on the edge of tremendous breakthroughs. We’re always on that edge and, most certainly, the investors will see results and profits.”

This hype also needed to obscure the fact that there wasn’t (and isn’t), as yet, ANY gene therapy for ANY disease that cured it across the board. As time passed, lack of cure could be a problem. In fact, it could mean curing disease was far more complicated than pinning responsible genes. After all, what about environment? Toxicity? Malnutrition? Poverty? In order to raise money, those factors would have to be pushed back out of view.

Instead, the PR people would need to flood the news with positive glow around the subject of gene research. Also known as exaggeration.

You can spot the key terms in these articles. POSSIBLE, SHOULD, COULD, EXPECTED TO, SEEMS, ON THE HORIZON, MAY BE, COULD LEAD TO, EVENTUALLY, and of course, the ever-popular BREAKTHROUGH.

I dug back in my files and found a piece I wrote in 2011. As you’ll see, the “breakthroughs” touted then haven’t panned out so far. You don’t read about them in the press these days. The PR pros have moved on to other exaggerations.

The first 2011 article I cited was from Reuters, headlined: SCIENTISTS FIND “MASTER SWITCH” GENE FOR OBESITY. Here are a few choice tidbits. Note the key terms I just mentioned.

“…and say it should help the search for treatments…”

“…the regulating gene could be [a] target for drugs to treat…”

“…seems to act as a master switch…”

“We are working hard…to understand these processes and how we can use this information to improve treatment…”

Beautiful.

Next, a 2011 blockbuster piece in the Financial Times. The headline read: SCIENTISTS FIND GENETIC LINK TO DEPRESSION.

Standard trumpet blaring.

Here are the text nuggets. Again, note key terms.

“The discovery…is expected to lead to a better biological understanding of the condition and eventually to more effective antidepressants…”

“…as possibly for the first time we have found a genetic locus for depression.”

“…is likely to pin down the gene responsible…”

“…which may be the basis for designing more effective antidepressants, though [oops!] the pharmaceutical development process takes so long that new drugs could not be available in less than 10 years.”

Of course, people like to deal in certainties, so they help the PR puff masters by ignoring all the MAYBES and SEEMS as they read articles about science.

Anybody out there want to partner with me in launching a new company? This is a major winner. It covers a very broad area. Actually, there is no human endeavor it doesn’t cover. The name of the company? MAYBE COULD BE INC.

“We’re always on the edge and the frontier. We’re always breaking through. We’re always raising money. We’re always pumping our stock. We’re always ready to sell the company to an inattentive sucker with deep pockets.”

Let’s look at another type of gene research organization. This one happens to be the largest single medical research outfit in the world. It’s part of the US government: the National Institutes of Health (NIH). Their PR is different. They’re hedging their bets and covering their bases in every possible way. They’re saying YES, NO, AND MAYBE all at once. Of course, they can get away with it, because they run on taxpayer money. Their annual budget is a formidable $30 billion. Grit your teeth and read through their text that explains “genetic diseases”:

“A genetic disorder is a disease caused in whole or in part by a change in the DNA sequence away from the normal sequence. Genetic disorders can be caused by a mutation in one gene (monogenic disorder), by mutations in multiple genes (multifactorial inheritance disorder), by a combination of gene mutations and environmental factors, or by damage to chromosomes (changes in the number or structure of entire chromosomes, the structures that carry genes).”

“As we unlock the secrets of the human genome (the complete set of human genes), we are learning that nearly all diseases have a genetic component. Some diseases are caused by mutations that are inherited from the parents and are present in an individual at birth, like sickle cell disease. Other diseases are caused by acquired mutations in a gene or group of genes that occur during a person’s life. Such mutations are not inherited from a parent, but occur either randomly or due to some environmental exposure (such as cigarette smoke). These include many cancers, as well as some forms of neurofibromatosis.”

That is what I’d call a DON’T BLAME US statement. Don’t blame us if a disease we thought was genetic turns out to be something else. Don’t blame us if it’s 65.34 percent environmental, 4.52 percent genetic, and 30.14 percent who knows what. Don’t blame us if toxicity triggers genetic malfunctions and, in the absence of the toxicity, there would be zero cases of the disease. We’re ready to jump in any direction. We may not know much, but we’re sitting on a pile of cash. Don’t blame us if we don’t have any solid genetic cures for anything. We’re working hard. That’s all you can ask us to do.

If there is one disease the public tends to believe can be cured by gene therapy, it is sickle cell anemia. The PR pros have done a good job there. However, sicklecellanemianews.com states: “Gene therapy is an experimental technique that aims to treat genetic diseases by altering a disease-causing gene or introducing a healthy copy of a mutated gene to the body.”

Experimental. Aims to. Not an established cure. The confusion arises because, as with a number of diseases, the researchers and the PR flacks claim they’ve definitely traced the illness to a gene or two. They’ve struck gold. But, as you read further, you discover they’re just not ready to cure the patient. Clinical trials are underway. More work in the lab is necessary. The pudding is there, but the proof of it isn’t. They claim to know the cause; they just don’t know how to deploy it.

In science, that’s known as a hypothesis. Or more simply, a speculation. You say you’ve found an answer, but you can’t apply it. This means: your answer is not established. No matter how sure you sound, it’s in limbo.

“There is no doubt. We went down into the mine and we found extraordinary amounts of gold. It’s there. We’re a hundred percent positive. We just don’t know how to get it out. What’s that? You want to see the gold. No, I’m sorry. The public isn’t allowed down there. Only the professionals can enter. But don’t worry. We’re very close to a breakthrough. The gold will emerge soon. Trust us.”

Trust you? Sure. How much do you need to finish the job? Fifty million? Five hundred million? Let me call my broker and sell some stock. I’ll write you a check. Just put a plaque with my name on the wall of your headquarters. Let me know how I’ll profit on this venture. I’m in. I’ve always wanted to invest in MAYBE COULD BE INC."

onawah

6th April 2020, 19:11

DNA vaccines and Transhumanism
Scientific Articles Exposing Vaccine Myths and Pharma Foibles
POSTED BY: VAXXTERADMIN2 04/02/2020
https://vaxxter.com/dna_vaccines_transhumanism/

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, DO, AOBNMM, ABIHM
https://i0.wp.com/vaxxter.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Transhuman_Brain_dreamstime_xs_150055541.jpg?w=480&ssl=1
"Transhumanism is a futuristic concept where man and technology blend, resulting in soulless intelligent machines. It is a movement that favors the evolution of a new species of human through the use of integrative circuitry. Referred to as “human betterment for the post-human era,” transhumanists assume that humanity will only be enhanced by machines. No damage. No degradation. No possibility for coercion or domination. In a post-human world, humanity as we know it will be obsolete.

In 2012, artificial intelligence pioneer Ray Kurzweil became Director of Engineering and Chief Futurist at Google, hired to work on projects to teach machines to learn. Kurzweil predicts that by 2030 (there’s that date again) technological advances will allow tiny nano-bots to be injected into the bloodstream, pass through the blood-brain barrier and integrate into the brain. The human brains can then be connected to “the cloud,” achieving a level of brilliance never thought possible. So, essentially, biological beings will become “non-biological entities.” In his book, The Singularity is Near: When Humans Transcend Biology, Kurzweil states, “In the future, there will be no distinction between human and machine, or between physical and virtual reality.”

But if our brains can tap UP into the cloud, it only makes sense the what’s in the cloud could be pushed DOWN into our brain…So, the question becomes: Who controls the specific information we’re allowed to tap into? Who determines what is downloaded into us? The disturbing vision of thousands – or millions – of Manchurian Candidates comes to mind.

The Quest for Control of the Human Brain
In former-president Obama’s 2013 State of the Union Address, he announced his plan to invest in brain mapping technologies. In April of that year, a $100+ million initiative was launched called BRAIN, which stands for Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies. Multiple public-private partnerships were funded, including the Allen Institute for Brain Science, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Salk Institute for Biological Studies, and the Kavli Foundation and Institutes. Our tax dollars also funded this project; the government allocations included:

$20 million to the National Science Foundation to study how Big Data could be used to understand the ability of the brain to generate thoughts, emotions, and memories;
$40 million to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to develop training tools and resources to support the BRAIN initiative; and
$50 million was given to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) to develop tools to capture and process dynamic neural and synaptic activities.
Using those funds – and more – DARPA announced in 2016 it would develop the Neural Engineering System Design (NESD) program. Touted as the next-level brain-computer interface (BCI), the NESD system is designed to turn brain activity into a binary code, allowing humans to engage with machines wirelessly, by simply thinking.

While many amazing medical uses could come from this research, from treating PTSD and traumatic brain injuries (TBIs), to maneuvering brain-activated exoskeletons and prosthetic limbs, it takes very little imagination to see how this research could quickly turn dark.

What if the post-human world was dominated by strong, mechanical humanoids with enhancements designed to benefit institutions, at the expense of the individual?
Will the drivers to create bionic humans be economic efficiency, cultural modification, and military dominance?
Post-humans will live longer and be Global Citizens, a future where humankind is melded into a single, apolitical identity ruled by the UN and governed by the global Sustainability Agenda. Bionic humans will have no need to connect, even with creatures of their kind. Advances in animal cloning and embryonic stem cell technologies are bringing human cloning closer to reality, eliminating the need to procreate – satisfying the globalist’s concerns regarding planetary overpopulation. Need more worker bees? Create them at the factory – they need no benefits, no vacations and can work 24/7.

DNA Vaccines: Permanent manipulation of humans and animals
https://i2.wp.com/vaxxter.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/4930275692_0e90d42330_m_robot-e1487057979161.jpg?resize=174%2C260
DNA vaccines, a type of genetic engineering, were first tinkered with in the early 1990s. A small snip of DNA, say, from a herpes virus, is inserted into a bacterial “bubble” called a plasmid. When the plasmid-laden vaccine is injected, the cellular immune system gears up to eliminate the foreign protein (plasmid + viral DNA snip) and at the same time, the humoral immune system creates antibodies against the viral DNA. When a herpes virus enters the body, the memory T-cells and B-cells work together to attack the foreign virus, eliminating it and avoiding the infection.

This process is not without problems.

The DNA snip can be incorporated into the host’s DNA, leading to chromosome instability. The mutagenic affect can turn on oncogenes and turn off tumor suppressor genes, leading to cancer.
Genetic expression is the process where genes create proteins. Genetic over-expression is when the process “goes rogue” and produces massive amounts of foreign protein, destroying human tissues via both acute and chronic inflammation.
Often the plasmid used is resistant to antibiotics; the same antibiotic resistance can be transferred to the host.
The plasmid DNA can appear very similar to the vaccine recipient’s DNA. The anti-DNA antibodies can attack human organs with similar DNA sequences. The result is autoimmunity, clearly identified as the cause of nearly 100 different diseases and suspected to be the cause at least 40 more chronic and potentially life-threatening conditions.
A concern that sounds like science fiction is the use of DNA vaccines in food-producing animals. The foreign DNA can be incorporated into an animal’s DNA, getting into the human food supply. The plasmid DNA can disrupt the animal’s microflora, and even potentially transform the environmental microflora as the animals defecate.

This level of genetic manipulation makes DNA vaccines a dreamy tool of the transhumanists. With a host of companies working on biotic human body parts and DARPA working to build killer robots, designing DNA vaccines to enhance human DNA is only a step away. In fact, Editas Medicine, a US-based company, announced in November 2015 that the trials with the first humans to have their DNA genetically modified were well underway.

If robots could think, feel and have a conscience, would that make them human? Or, would the lack of genetic material always render it as non-human? Using the combination of artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and DNA vaccines to insert human genes and human characteristics into machines is no longer just for the movies. At what point are humans no longer humans?

As vaccine recommendations become mandates – and 30 states are now pushing for mandatory vaccines, will you retain your right to refuse?"

onawah

26th June 2020, 02:54

Gene Edited Human Embryos Were a Disaster, and Yet Governments Ignore the Obvious and Endanger Us All
Institute for Responsible Technology Jeffrey Smith
6/25/20
https://www.responsibletechnology.org/jeffreys-take-gene-edited-human-embryos-were-a-disaster-and-yet-governments-ignore-the-obvious-and-endanger-us-all/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=b532275e-0519-4c88-855b-3dd165c2c0f6

(AUDIO AT THE LINK)

"Transcription: Gene Edited Human Embryos Were a Disaster, and Yet Governments Ignore the Obvious and Endanger Us All

"On June 16th, a report came out about a completely botched attempt to genetically engineer human embryos scientists at the Francis Crick Institute in the UK used the CRISPR gene editing tool to edit human embryos and found that half of the edited embryos contained major unintended edits, deletions, or additions or scrambling of the DNA right next to the edited gene. CRISPR basically finds a sequence in the DNA that it’s looking for and cuts in that sequence to create a particular effect. There’s on target and off target mistakes on target mistakes is what they were looking for here. And it’s not even something that people are concerned about because they assume that if it cuts in the right area, it will perform correctly, but in this case, it didn’t. Off target means that it started to cut in other places. It misinterpreted the instructions. Weren’t found similar sequences in other parts of the DNA and continued to cut there as well.

(01:26):

But in this case, the problems were at the point of intended changes. And it was so significant that one professor at the UC Berkeley said, “There’s no sugar coating this. This is a restraining order for all genome editors to stay the living daylights away from embryo editing.” It’s very interesting how strong the condemnation was for using CRISPR at this point, even though, the Chinese scientist had used CRISPR to edit human embryos and then implant them into a woman and then actually gave birth to twins. I think it was triplets too, but the twins had gene altered DNA here. They’re saying we’re nowhere near where we need to be. One person said that, “There’s clear evidence of additional on target risks leads even more support to the countervailing views of many scientists. That genome editing is not safe for inheriting in human species.”

(02:39):

I love what the restraining order what Kiran Musunuru, a cardiologist from the university of Pennsylvania who actually uses CRISPR in his lab to research potential heart disease therapies. He said, “Nobody has any business using genome editing to try to make modifications in the germline.” Meaning it can be inherited, “We are nowhere close to having the scientific ability to do this in a safe way.” When this happens to human embryos, people are up in arms. But what about when it happens to plants? What happens if we use CRISPR or other gene editing techniques and change the sequence of a plant that we eat or that we grow, and that becomes inherited and a permanent part of nature’s gene pool?

(03:41):

Also this year, there was a recent study of rice plants, which we’ll go into in just a minute. It showed very similar changes that were completely unpredicted when they genetically engineered or gene edited the rise plant. Now what’s maddening is that the regulators are receiving the exact opposite information from a very well paid and well-organized lobbying effort by the biotech industry. This resulted in the Trump administration, creating a new policy for the USDA, (announced in mid-May) that most GMOs, including the gene edited ones will receive no oversight by the agency. They refused just to even require developers to tell the agency, if the companies were producing products that the producers believed did not need regulations, which means the government and the public, no idea what products will enter the market.

(04:53):

So gene edited foods and gene edited grass and trees, etc., can come into the marketplace now without us knowing, and it’s not just United States. Australia has already passed its laws regarding some gene edited products. The UK have been part of the EU regulation, but now there is an effort to try and push gene editing and redefine GMOs so it doesn’t include gene editing. It didn’t pass a discussion in parliament, so a group is trying to introduce it as an amendment to the agriculture bill without a full discussion of the parliament. This has raised a concern and letters by professors and the public, which may have given the government pause to do it, but they’re still lobbying one after the other. Lords in the upper parliament are coming to the rescue of the biotech industry saying things like this on gene editing.

(06:05):

“Again, the government agree that the EU approach is unscientific. We are committed to adopting a more scientific approach to regulation in the future.” This is like George Orwell’s 1984 Newspeak where the government simply lies blatantly. For those of us who know the truth, it’s maddening not only that, but it actually may be one of the most dangerous denials in history because we’re talking about altering the gene pool where the technology whose most common result is surprise side effects, and once incorporated into the gene pool, it’s irreversible. We have no technology to clean it up. Even a faction of the Green Party in Germany called for the deregulation of gene editing. Although the European Parliament Greens immediately came in and said no way, the European Commission asked the European Food Safety Authority, for an opinion on gene editing, it was actually a group that was pro-GMO that wanted to give a present to the biotech industry.

(07:19):

And so they asked the very pro GMO European food safety authority whose current opinion is that gene editing is safe and predictable. Now, how is it that they can think that it’s so safe and predictable and professors like Dr. Michael Antonio Professor Vivian Howard describe the efforts to deregulate gene editing as absolutely unacceptable and dangerous. Let’s just review the articles that came out this year, so that you’re armed with the truth and understand far more than the regulators or the Lords in parliament etc. On the 6th of January, there was an article that came out saying that a new tool that rapidly analyzes CRISPR edits reveals frequent unintended edits. So this tool in just 48 hours can identify multiple outcomes of the gene editing process called CRISPR.

(08:27):

A process that normally takes up to two months and is very expensive and complicated in order to see what actually happened in CRISPR. Most people never actually review what happens in their gene edited organism, they simply use an algorithm from a computer to predict what changes occur. We’ve known from other studies that those computer algorithms are false. So in this case, with this new fast assay, they found that they focused on the, on target changes and found that there was a lot of changes there that were completely unidentifiable using the standard reviews that were done by scientists. On January 11th, an article came out and researchers assumed CRISPR mediated disruption of genes was turning them off, but they were wrong. CRISPR is used to knock out genes. You cut a particular gene and you knock out its function and you assume that because that’s what everyone else is doing,

(09:42):

yours are doing the same thing. It turns out one-third of the gene knockouts that were done in this study, didn’t knock it out at all. And in some cases they change the structure of the sequence so that the protein that was produced was different than intended, which could be an allergen or a toxin. And what’s interesting is that the mushroom that was so-called approved by the USDA, meaning that the USDA turned away and said we don’t have to approve it. That was created with this CRISPR knockout technique and might be creating allergens or toxins. Fortunately, as far as we know, it was not yet introduced into the food supply, but it may be at any time. On February 22nd, another article, yet more problems with CRISPR, with consequences, for food safety. When they use the CRISPR CAS system in mice, they found that there were multiple copies of the DNA that they were trying to insert came into the mouse genome.

(10:58):

What’s interesting is because there were multiple copies. If you use the standard technique to see if the insertion was successful technique called PCR, you wouldn’t be able to tell you had to use a more sophisticated method. And by inserting multiple copies, again, it could result in misshapen proteins that could be allergenic or toxic or carcinogenic. There’s an April 2nd article, Scientists Surprised to Find that CRISPR Editing Tool is Not as Precise as Previously Claimed. They were checking a more advanced or so-called more advanced CRISPR, not the CRISPR CAS nine, which would most people do, but the CRISPR cast 12, eight or the CPF one doesn’t matter what the names are, but they were believed to be more precise and less prone to make off target cuts, meaning cuts that were outside the area that you wanted to. And it turns out when they checked it, it made single strand cuts or Nicks up and down the DNA, and also double stranded cuts.

(12:07):

It clearly mistook different locations for the target location. And again, the computer programs that are generally used to predict these would be unlikely to pick up the actual mutations, the actual changes. And now we’d come to the article that came out this month on CRISPR edited gene edited rice. On June 9th. It was reported that a wide range of undesirable and unintended off target and on target mutations occurred when they edited rice to increase the yield. Now, in this case, when you use gene editing, you typically put in the tools of the gene editing. So it remains in the plant and it actually can be inherited by the next generation. They put in a stable CRISPR editing tool that continued to work over four generations so they can examine the effect over time. So this is one aspect we’ve talked about in my interview with Jonathan Latham, where what you test for, let’s say in the results of gene editing right after you’ve done the editing.

(13:23):

And then let’s say you use that cell line a year later. By the time you use it, there may be a lot of other changes because it’s actively editing over time. So what they did is in this rice study is they tried to knock out a particular gene. However, what they found was there was large insertions, deletions and rearrangements of DNA, essentially a scrambling, and this could change the function of gene other then the one that they were targeting. This is very similar to the human embryo experiments that we talked about in the beginning. Dr. Michael Antonio said that the consequent of health risks of creating an allergen or a toxin is very real and the yield was not increased, in fact, it was reduced. The authors of the paper Warren, and contrast this to the UK government, the European in Food Safety Authority, the U S government, they said, “CRISPR may be not as precise as expected in rice and that early and accurate molecular characterization and screening must be carried out for generations before transitioning of CRISPR cast system from lab to field. Understanding of uncertainties and risks regarding editing is necessary and critical before a new global policy for the new biotechnology is established.”

(14:59):

So that’s exactly the opposite of what the governments are doing. And it’s interesting that sometimes in order to convince governments, the scientists will put blinders on and just talk about one aspect of gene editing, like its ability to be more precise in where it does the cuts than the old version, where you would simply blast genes in with a gene gun or use bacteria to smuggle the genes into the genome. But it turns out that there are many unintended effects that they’re not counting. And also the process of growing those cells into plants, tissue culture creates an enormous number of mutations. There was a study that was done in 2018, where they showed for rice that there were 200 mutations as a result of just tissue culture on average. Whereas the naturally bred rice had 30 to 50 spontaneous mutations. Now you can count mutations and say, yes, the genetic engineering process, whether it’s traditional or gene editing creates more mutations in that’s true, but simply counting them is not going to be sufficient.

(16:30):

You need to do a detailed molecular characterization to find out what they’re actually doing. What have you changed? Have you increase the production of a carcinogen? Have you increased the production of a toxin? Have you disabled something that was quite important? Have you done animal feeding studies to see the biological effects of consuming genetic plants over time? No, what they’ve done is they’ve assumed that it’s safe and convinced regulators to have a complete hands-off policy. Because gene editing is so inexpensive, we may see massive introduction of gene edited organisms into the environment over this generation. They can permanently corrupt the gene pool. So we’re talking about replacing nature. If you go to www.protectnaturenow.com, you’ll see a three minute video, which sounds the alarm about the possibility that in this generation, we may be replacing nature and we need to do something. And the Institute for Responsible Technology is stepping up.

(17:40):

And part of it is simply to share the science. If you’ve gotten this far, then you’re interested in the deep science and the understanding so that you have the ammo, so to speak, to say clearly that the government is wrong. Just say clearly that the lobbyists are either lying or that they’ve been lied to by the people that hired them. But it’s all based on the lies. And that puts us at an unprecedented risk, which we believe is an existential risk given the capacity of harm of genetic engineering. So please share this, talk to others about it, give them the truth. Let them know that the governments are using lobbying lies to create regulations. That could be a disaster for this and future generations. And also if you’re not yet already a subscriber to the Institute for Responsible Technology, you can go over to www.protectnaturenow.com and take a look at the three minute video and subscribe. We’ll be sharing some plans soon to help protect nature from this massive potential replacement.

Safe Eating,

Jeffrey Smith"

onawah

3rd February 2021, 22:45

Gene edited microbes and viruses carry unthinkable dangers
Institute for Responsible Technology
Live Healthy, Be Well newsletter@livehealthybewell.com
2/3/21

"David Avocado Wolfe and Jeffrey Smith share a trailer to a new film and solutions to an unprecedented existential threat posed by GMOs 2.0.

Podcast here: https://livehealthybewell.com/podcast/gene-edited-microbes-and-viruses-carry-unthinkable-dangers-episode-73/

https://projectavalon.net/Gene_edited_microbes_and_viruses_carry_unthinkable_dangers.mp3

Transcript copied below

Watch the trailer, "Don't Let the Gene out of the Bottle" :
f7Aapkcc3mI
IRT’s Founder Jeffrey Smith narrates our timely short film. This groundbreaking work exposes the shocking and world-altering effects of genetic engineering. The film features expert testimony and cameos from experts in the field such as Dr. Elaine Ingham, Dr. Jonathan Latham, Clair Robinson, and Jim Thomas.

To support Protect Nature Now visit: https://protectnaturenow.com/

The Institute for Responsible Technology is working to protect you & the World from GMOs (and while we’re at it, Roundup®...) To find out exactly how we do this and to subscribe to our newsletter visit https://www.responsibletechnology.org/"

From: https://protectnaturenow.com/
"Problem:
Unprecedented Threat to Nature’s Gene Pool
Genetic engineering techniques have become so inexpensive, we can easily and permanently reorder the code of life, irreversibly altering wild populations of any organism that contains DNA.
We face the unprecedented threat of the widespread corruption and replacement of nature’s gene pool. In the U.S., gene-edited organisms can be released into the environment without any assessments.
GENETICALLY MODIFIED ECOSYSTEMS
A farm will be able to order custom engineered insects, seeds, soil microbiomes, and pesticide sprays.

GENE DRIVE
A new gene is forced through future generations of an entire species, changing its DNA and even wiping it out.

INSECTS THAT DELIVER VIRUSES
The U.S. Department of Defense is developing insects with viruses that infect and alter plants.

AI MEETS BIOTECH
Biotech driven by artificial intelligence will create more and invasive changes on a massive scale.

All these efforts are prone to calamitous and uncontrollable side effects.Solution:
Our Protect Nature Now Campaign
With the pandemic, the world is now acutely aware of how a single virus – a microbe – can wreak havoc.

Unlike GMO crops, which are well established in many countries, GE (Genetically Engineered) microbes have not been widely deployed yet. Our Protect Nature Now campaign will initially focus on containing GE microbes—and we stand ready to address other emerging threats as they arise.

Governments and civil society are largely unaware and wholly unprepared to manage the threat of these and other next generation applications known as GMO 2.0.

To learn more about Protect Nature Now please click here:
https://protectnaturenow.com/aboutpnn/

GMO 2.0
GMO 2.0 refers to the new genetic modification techniques that allow corporations to create GMOs more cheaply, easily, and quickly than ever before. They can tamper with nature by editing genes, changing species and creating entirely new DNA sequences. The results of these risky and unregulated processes are wildly unpredictable.

Keeping the Gene in the Bottle
Our short film Don’t Let the Gene Out of the Bottle will serve as a focal point for coalition building, public education, and recruitment of advocates. This will launch our initial grassroots actions to pass laws and resolutions at the local and state levels and to use these campaigns to educate the public and media about this issue.Your PROTECT NATURE NOW Resources

Genetic Engineering
is Fraught with
Dangerous Side Effects
Genetically Engineered Microorganisms are Particularly Dangerous
Biotech Advocates Misrepresent Gene Editing as Safe
Lack of Adequate Regulations Endanger Our Health and Environment
Nature’s Gene Pool is At Risk
Gene Drives Can Alter or Wipe Out Entire Species
RNAi: RNA Interference Can Reprogram Gene Expression
Synthetic Biology Uses GMO Microorganisms as Factories, with Serious Risks
Media Coverage
Videos "

Podcast Transcript:
"ROUGH TRANSCRIPT:

Speaker 2: (00:07)
Greetings everybody. David avocado Wolfe here. I've got a distinguished guests on my favorite people, and I just love going over to his house and talking to him about science and where science is going and the dangers and not scientism, but actual science. And we're going to get into some of the more innovative things happening right now, and really what he's up to, which is the Institute for responsible technology. That's what we need more of that person is none other than Jeffrey Smith. How are you Jeffrey? Really good. David's so good to talk to you. Great to talk to you too. And I love your upbeat attitude and tell us what what's going on with the latest and let's check it out.

Speaker 3: (00:42)
Okay. I'm going to introduce a completely new, and this is not uplifting in the first part, but the solution is a completely new existential threat to the planet, which eight out of eight audiences that I've spoken with rated it as more serious than global climate change. And some of these were climate change conferences. So I'm going to get out preparing you now hearing it now because what I have, and this is not designed to bring you more fear. We have enough fear of the world as it is, but the information is real. It's urgent and we have a way to solve it. So I'm going to give it, I'm going to lay this down. I'm going to show you a trailer for a film. We're going to release it's two minutes. I think everyone's going to go, Oh my God. I can't believe it. So let me just prepare you in a moment about what this is about.

Speaker 3: (01:36)
We know that if you introduce a genetically engineered organism into the environment, it is permanently part of the gene pool. You cannot recall it that's 0.1 0.2, the most common result of genetic engineering, a surprise side effects, 0.3. So far, they've only introduced a little more than a, maybe a dozen commercialized GM food crops in 25 years with normal GMOs 0.4 with gene editing, it is so cheap and easy. You can create a new organism for the price of dinner. You can get a, do it yourself. Gene editing kit on Amazon for $169. And if you're a transnational, you can produce thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands in robots driven by artificial intelligence, especially microbes. Now put that together and it is possible that we may replace nature in this generation by putting out so many of these gene alter GMOs, that future generations do not inherit the products of the billions of years of evolution, but instead inherit the products of laboratory creations, prone to side effects, creating little genetic type bombs, like invasive species of an entire ecosystem being replaced.

Speaker 3: (02:54)
And then we can look at ecosystem collapse and other. So that's the background to what I'm about to share. And what I'm about to share is you probably you and I were like, Oh my God, they're genetically engineering humans in China. Remember that the conduct, the two twins, they were born. This guy went in there and did some gene editing, which by the way, didn't work, but it can create massive collateral damage in the DNA. Not a good thing to experiment on humans, but our ethical considerations were like up here. Maybe when we see pictures of I'm sure you've seen these horribly suffering, genetically engineered animals, the overt muscular ones, the other ones that couldn't stand, it moves our hearts. So from an ethical standpoint, higher organisms draw our attention from a health and environmental standpoint. It's the lower organisms, which are more dangerous. The microbes, the viruses, incomes, the pandemic.

Speaker 3: (03:53)
And so what are we going to share with you at the end of this trailer is how the pandemic has prepared human civilization to make some changes, hopefully that will protect against future cataclysms. Okay. All right. I first became aware of your insight here when we were last together and wow. It's just been one of those looming catastrophes that just sits over us, but we're more prepared now than ever to deal with it. And we're more aware now than ever. So let's check it out. Let's see what you got on your trailer. Okay. I'm going to do a screen share right now. And this is for a film called don't let the gene out of the bottle.

Speaker 4: (04:37)
You can buy a, do it yourself. Gene editing kit from Amazon for $169. So you can alter bacteria in the comfort of your own home. The most common and consistent results from genetic engineering from the beginning has been surprised. Side effects. When you genetically engineer bacteria, allergy, fungus viruses, they can't be traced and they can pull it freight easily around the planet.

Speaker 5: (05:13)
All of those, um, treatments where the genetically engineered bacteria had been present were dead.

Speaker 4: (05:21)
We're talking about a real world, potential nightmare.

Speaker 5: (05:25)
Just everything that exists in the terrestrial system would be slowly but surely destroyed as this bacteria moved out. So we were within two weeks of that, genetically engineered organism being released two weeks, looking at the ecological effect of a bacterium engineered this way. The logical consequence of releasing this to the real world would be that we would lose terrestrial plants.

Speaker 4: (05:54)
It could theoretically change weather. There is an excellent possibility. It will swap genetic information with the bacteria that reside in our gut COVID-19 is a glaring example of how microorganisms, whether they're genetically engineered or not can quickly and circle the globe. Once GMO bacteria are released, no policy can stop it. There are companies now with facilities full of robots, driven by artificial intelligence for massive release. What if a hundred thousand different strains are released in this generation? What if it's a million, all future generations are sentenced to inherit our mistakes. The time we have to control these things is before you release them. And that is the only time

Speaker 1: (06:48)
The whole world.

Speaker 3: (06:56)
So I apologize for the fear that I'm a have produced what we've got to know, right? We know this is the thing we can't be just, you know, I can't hear it. Ah, and we have to actually know what's going on and we have to know the capabilities of the technology. And if one, let me just rehash what you told me way back when. Okay. So let me rehash this back to when we first discussed this, when I was over at your house, if even one of these got out and was, and it was the wrong thing, we're talking about it, earth wide, catastrophe, it's possible. You see there's a range. And so we chose the ones that are obviously in the film, three examples that are obviously potentially catastrophic. The first one, Elaine Ingam, who was a professor at Oregon state, her, her graduate student was doing a research on some genetically modified bacteria organisms that were about to be released two weeks later when he discovered, well, let me explain how it works.

Speaker 3: (08:03)
Well-meaning scientists engineered Klebsiella plan, tickle up a type of genetic type of bacteria. That's found in every root system, all over the world, engineered it to turn plant matter into alcohol. And these well-meaning scientists wanted to distribute the bacteria to farmers so that instead of burning their fields, they can mix the crop stubble in large buckets and large drums with the bacteria. Two weeks later, pour out alcohol to run their tractors and then take the nutrient rich sludge from the bottom of the barrel, spread on their fields as fertilizer. So then it passed all the studies needed by the EPA and was ready to be tested, to see how far it would spread once released. And then it was going to be sent around to farmers two weeks before it was released, this young scientist who had taken that, which sludge and mixed it with dirt and added seeds found that the wheat seeds die.

Speaker 3: (09:03)
They altered the slime like bacteria was still active in the fertilizer, turn all the roots and then the plants into alcohol. Now that's scenario number one, scenario, number two, how far would it have spread? Would it have had an impact? So some employees from the EPA contacted Elaine Ingo and told her that super secret study had been done by the EPA, that they have never acknowledged where they took genetically engineered bacteria and released it in Louisiana and set up monitoring around it and found that it moved 11 miles in the first year, another 11 miles. And eventually after they had stopped funding the study, but independent EPA employees continue to monitor test and evaluate. They found it everywhere on the planet. Now, having, just having lived now through this current COVID-19 situation, that's okay, obvious that that's possible with these tiny organisms and viruses. It can travel around the world.

Speaker 3: (10:13)
And so the question is what would have happened if this genetically engineered bacteria had traveled around the world and moreover headed a survival advantage over its natural counterpart. Let's say it killed its natural counterpart with alcohol, but since it can survive alcohol, it just moves in like an invader killing all of the natural Klebsiella plant ticklers, which then in turn kills all of the roots. And that's where she said the natural consequence, if that were to happen would be the end of terrestrial planets life of the planet. That's a cataclysm one, single genetic feed your bacteria. Another one, this was almost released in the nineties. In the eighties, they wanted to release ice minus to turn suitable the serene guy into an impotent bacteria, normally suitable to some guy lines up water molecules. Refrigerates them turns them into, into rain, drops into snow, into slated ice.

Speaker 3: (11:12)
And it's part of our weather patterns. Now it also creates frost on strawberries and potatoes. So they wanted well-meaning scientists wanted to reduce the destruction of strawberries in potatoes, but if it had gotten out, it might've changed weather patterns possibly permanently because the point that takes the moisture in the air and turns it into raindrop would not be doing its job if it were the genetically engineered variety. So those are two outdoor releases we could go to the virus world. We don't have to think of COVID. We don't have to think of COVID-19 just think of H five N one avian flu 24 times up to 24 times more deadly than the COVID 19 virus, but it doesn't spread very easily. You have to be around the livestock or the animals a long time. However, two different sets of scientists genetically engineered it to be airborne and say, now if you think, Oh no, it's okay.

Speaker 3: (12:12)
It's secured a laboratory thing. Again. The other version of a five, five N-word was accidentally shipped from the laboratory, the same laboratory that exposed 75 virus, uh, 75 scientists to anthrax, probably the same one that, and then at the same time, they found live small pox virus in a cardboard box, in a laboratory in Maryland. What it's only supposed to be in two secure labs in the world, one in Siberia and one in Virginia. And these are just three examples of hundreds where supposedly secure facilities had accidental releases or near catastrophes. So when we look at what is the lesson learned, David, from the pandemic don't genetically engineer, potentially pandemic pathogens, you jerk don't release genetically engineered microbes, and any time you use them or make them a lock that facility down, because if it gets out, we don't know what might happen. And you can speak to this, the importance of the microbiome and how bacteria share genes between species. So if you create a soil microbe, you may end up with that DNA with the DNA of that genetically engineered insert in your own gut bacteria, you're doing who knows what that ecosystems and human beings and other organisms or larger organisms have our basis of health on a healthy, balanced microbiome.

Speaker 2: (13:45)
I keep thinking of the disaster stories that I read about on plum Island, long Island, which was a USDA facility, originally U S army facility of which Lyme's disease is believed to have escape from. And also West Nile virus and numerous catastrophes happened at that facility. And I just keep thinking, like, we can't keep playing around with this. That's why I love your Institute for responsible technology. We need to actually stop these things before they become chimeric research, or it gets funded or suddenly we got five labs around the world doing it. And so that's really the goal here. Isn't it is to just get a handle on this so that we stop it before it ever becomes a problem. It's kind of like nuclear weapons, proliferation treaties. And as we got to get active on this one, because this is much more insidious, it can spread much more quickly and God knows what the peripheral damage.

Speaker 2: (14:38)
I mean, this is a great point. You bring up the unsuspected side effects. We don't know. I mean, we've got three or 400 different types of bacteria in our gut right now, if we're healthy, what if one of those is disturbed by a genetically modified sequence of DNA and suddenly that affects the whole ratio of the microbiome. And where does that lead? And we know for, with the GMO foods, it's not good, right? It is affecting our microbiome genetic expression. And therefore it's disturbing part of our organism. It's disturbing, it's disturbing our natural protection mechanism, which is the shield of bacteria that lives on us and with us.

Speaker 3: (15:16)
And we know from the only human feeding study ever conducted on correct eating, um, commercialized genetically engineered foods. That part of the gene from genetically engineered soybeans actually did transfer into the DNA of gut bacteria and continued in a stable basis. So we are already maybe colonizing the gut bacteria of this generation unwittingly from putting bacterial genes into food, because it's the bacterial genes that more readily transfer to bacterial, to bacteria. And so we're putting bacterial genes and even viral genes into food, considering it safe, feeding it to people and end up changing the microbiome of our own gut. And also, we now have companies like joined bio and others that want to introduce genetically engineered probiotics to our soil, to the large swaths of soil engineered, who knows where that's going to be again, well-meaning scientists. We're not going to blame the scientists. This is they're doing what they, what they do they take, or they create.

Speaker 3: (16:18)
What we need to do is have the laws in place so that this craziness won't persist, but it goes beyond laws. I know I have gained a deep understanding of the instability of laws and government regimes. I was flown to Poland by the government and gave a press conference with their administer of environment, praising their non-GMO stance. Some years ago, a week later, it was a new government in place that was pro GMO. I worked, I lobbied the, the ministers and departments in Thailand and they chose not to allow any genetically engineered organisms released and field trials. 10 days later, a new government came to, came into place and allowed it. So in addition to implementing strong laws, domestically and international treaties, we need to embed the understanding in popular culture, in the curriculum that we have as a civilization come to an inevitable time.

Speaker 2: (17:25)
What do you do? Do you sense where the current politics in America that I, it just seems like it's like the demo publicans or the Republic. I mean, they're both in, on the GMO store, they're both in with the USDA and the USDA, uh, Alliance with Monsanto. And are we ever going to get past this seeming block? That is just the lobby of companies into the U S government. I mean, that's, it just, you know, it's a difficult experience for us because we're just, doesn't matter. Who's in power. We're constantly in this fight and we need to get almost, it seems like to me, Jeff, we need to get to almost like a Nuremberg code of ethics, right? This is like, this is not, this is something we just, we've got to have like a worldwide international, uh, framework, a Nuremberg code, a code of honor that just stops this stuff. What are your thoughts about that?

Speaker 3: (18:21)
You you've touched on some thoughts I've been thinking about for two years and, uh, we're, we're, we've moving up the food chain on that one. First of all, there is a desire among many members of the house and Senate to create cross aisle issues that can create, um, uh, moving together, especially now with a new administration, that's always the opportunity. And some, there may be some opportunities there in federal government today. Second, the pandemic is for all that it is. And all the disruptions that it's created, a silver lining of the pandemic has been to sound the alarm about this unseen, these unseen kingdoms and the, and the wrath that they can wreak. So the issue is I'm leading. If you watch the film, I read where I started the film actually before the pandemic, it's only like 14 or 15 minutes. It's not done yet, but I'm now leading with the pandemic lessons because it's perfect.

Speaker 3: (19:25)
It's as if it's, as if we have in hand something that everyone can rally around, just thinking about, no, of course we shouldn't enhance the infectious nature of deadly potentially pandemic pathogens. That's obvious, but while we're edit, let's also not decimate the environment, create catastrophes and cataclysms with other members of these unseen kingdoms. Let's not increase the risk of that. And so, because we're in it right now, people can't dismiss it as all. You're just a, fearmonger no I'm being practical. This, you know, if the H five N one airborne avian flu got out with a 52% fatality rate, do I need to say any more? It's like, Oh, and the most secure labs in the world have had accidents where they've accidentally shipped or leaked these products. Do I need to say more? And it's like, so what you said would have been a lot harder to answer a year ago, but because of the pandemic, there is an unmet need to prevent as far as possible future calamities.

Speaker 2: (20:48)
What can, what can people do? So people watching right now, they want to support the Institute for responsible technology. They want to support your work, get your work out there, get the film out there. Where can we send them?

Speaker 3: (20:59)
Okay, protect nature now. Dot com protect nature. now.com. You can watch the trailer. You can sign up. You'll be informed when the film comes out, which will be soon, but we have other things that we will want you to do. There'll be opportunities for you to contact your elected officials, to sign petitions, to, to do click and send to Evelyn revolutionary army kind of stuff, where you can send materials, press releases letters to the editor. And if you can, and I hope that you can at least some way support us financially. You see, we are starting a new global movement. Now we're familiar with that. Since we pioneered the global movement focused on the health dangers of GMOs, I've been doing this for a quarter of a century, and we created the behavior change messaging that ultimately took hold and convinced half of the world's population that GMO foods are not safe.

Speaker 3: (21:55)
Now we're pivoting now not focusing so much on the health of GMO foods and the lack of it, but, uh, because our personal choices in the supermarket, while they'll have very powerful effects on whether GMO foods are grown, they're not going to stop the introduction of genetically modified bacteria, viruses, grasses, insects, trees, et cetera. So we need a new type of movement, and we can't afford to wait 25 years. Because by that time, we will have replaced a big portion of nature and maybe already dealing with one or more of these genetic time bombs that go off with cataclysms or catastrophes or problems. So we want to create a worldwide movement, inviting all the other movements to introduce this protection of the integrity of the gene pool, as one of the planks on their platforms, whether you're in climate change or oceans or environmental preservation or animal rights or human health or religious and spiritual concerns, whatever it is, this is critical. Protecting nature is critical. It's only for those that breathe, eat, and live.

Speaker 2: (23:09)
So it only applies to every single thing that we know in the material realm.

Speaker 3: (23:15)
So I'd like to, I'd like to ask if people can not only make a donation and protect nature now, but make it recurring whatever, whether it's $1, $5, $10 or a thousand dollars or more, we actually will be raising millions. It's that we want to know that that money is coming on a regular basis so that we can hire that person so that we can create that film so that we can commit our resources, because we know that you're supporting us and our honor and our team. So I would like recommend that you go to protect nature. Now, sign up so that you stay informed, make a donation, and then share whatever you see and whatever you get.

Speaker 2: (23:53)
I would do want to mention to everybody out there that, um, I know Jeffrey Smith's worked for years and he's done extraordinary work on GMO's. I mean, we would never have the knowledge about GMOs and their dangers without Jeffrey Smith. So it to support him is it's like, you're putting a bet on the right guy, right? There's so many nonprofits and things out there where you don't know where that money went, or like the American lung association or the American heart association where it just gets caught up in bureaucracy. And it's paying salaries for fat cats up there. This is a totally different thing. You're a grassroots kind of guy, Jeffrey. That's what I love about you. And you'd never lose sight of that. And I do want to mention that to everybody out there is I'm a grassroots type of guy, by the way, in, in, uh, 19. And this year we put in 96,000 trees into the ground. This last year, 2020 during the pandemic, we were really, it was really an amazing and impressive year for my team. I was absolutely proud of them. That's the kind of non-profit work. We do this. We are not gonna even have any trees if we don't deal with this other issue. So protect nature now, dot com phenomenal. Really glad you're, you've stepped into this now. So this is a big loop.

Speaker 3: (25:03)
Oh yeah. In fact, what we are as the Institute, we're actually helping to coordinate a coalition. We actually are reaching out to hundreds and hundreds of other organizations and are creating just as we did with the other, as you creating assets that they can use, they can put their own labels on it. You know, we're just basically crafting the best messaging, creating forums, creating materials, creating a structure so that the world can step up to this level and we can protect all living beings and all future generations, because we finally have unfortunately, a technology that can damage all living beings and all future generations. That means we have a new responsibility as humanity. And the good news is that when we actually become stewards, when we see ourselves in that new natural relationship as protectors, it expands our hearts, it expands our minds. It connects us more deeply with nature, and we realize we have a job to do, and it's a job. We can consider it a burden, or we considered an opportunity. No one in human history in the past has had the ability to protect all living beings and all future generations. Now we have that as an opportunity. And so this is an invitation for humanity to stretch individually and collectively into a new role. So there's a huge positivity on the heels of this threat. And that is to take full sovereignty and support and collaboration with others. And with nature,

Speaker 2: (26:31)
That was beautiful. I, you know, I really feel that, uh, you know, obviously I'm an extremely oriented person towards the environment and it's one of those things that, you know, I just feel my heart and my soul that if we don't protect our, we have nothing left, but this is really even deeper because this is an unseen microbiological agent danger that could affect all life. It could, I mean, if something gets unleashed, you could affect a certain race of trees. It could wipe out certain crops and wipe about worldwide, but then a couple of years and so, or even worse. And we've only almost had a couple of incidents like that. No. When you brought up Elaine Ingham, I was thinking about, I know he laid income because of her work with the compost teas.

Speaker 3: (27:10)
Yes. Yes. So, Elaine, um, I've interviewed her like a few times and she's in the film as you saw. And she, she just happened to be the, the advisor of the graduate student. Once she saw that, what happened? She went and spoke in front of the UN that raised the alarm around the world and drove a lot of regulation and the convention on biological diversity and the Cartagena protocol on biosafety. When she got back to Oregon state, she was basically kicked out. They were basically saying, you know, if you're not pro GMO, you have no place here. So she was, he was bounced out of her position. And then they also went after her, you know, how the biotech industry and Monsanto does it, they lie about you. They misquote you. They claim that what you said is wrong. And they, you know, they've tried to do this with me all the time, but she, she tells me now that she's working with natural ways of enhancing soil, that she's actually costs the Monsanto and the biotech industry, billions of dollars by now. So she's, she's out of the payback and she's doing great. So she's seen the film, she loves how it's been presented. She thought we did an accurate job. What I do. I've been interviewing scientists for years and unlike normal journalist, I'll just send what I write to the scientist before I put it out and say, did I get it right? Am I missing anything? I want to be perfect on this. And so I sent her the information and she was impressed.

Speaker 2: (28:41)
Okay, good. All right. That's fantastic. So I feel like we've got a good framework now for a new venture, right. Which is essentially, it's a new environmental movement, which is protecting these microbiome microorganisms from, is it, can you tell me if I'm getting this right? Is it CRISPR technology? Is that the gene editing technology that we're talking

Speaker 3: (29:02)
CRISPR is the one that's the cheapest, it's the poster child. There are others as well, but exactly. We can just talk about CRISPR, just so you know, just so that everyone is equipped. And if you go to our site, this is there. We're going to be, do doing training. We're going to be doing activist, training knowledge and showing everyone what the details of this are so that they can pull the wool over our eyes. But they claim that GMO gene editing is natural, safe, predictable, and is basically doing what nature would be doing anyway, just more efficiently. These are the exact same words they used for GMOs 20,

Speaker 2: (29:40)
That word for word, right?

Speaker 3: (29:42)
And it turns out that we have documented all these different ways that gene editing, including CRISPR can damage create unpredicted side effects for this generation and future generations. In fact, a recent study, I think about mice. They did a CRISPR gene edit, found a change in gene expression that was epigenetic, not genetic epigenetic. And it continued for at least 10 generations. They tested all the mice. So that means doing a gene edit now can cause damage 10 generations later. And wow, they, they have found their supposed poster child of the hornless cattle that was gene edited and said, this shows that it was so perfect. We don't need any regulation. Years later, they found, Oh, guess what? There's bacterial DNA inside your cows with antibiotic resistant genes that could potentially create diseases. Anyway, it goes on and on. It's not natural. It's not safe. It's not predictable.

Speaker 3: (30:39)
And yet many governments of the world are convinced that it is and have a hands-off policy. So in Japan this week, they announced, or last week they announced that there's a gene edited tomato didn't require any review by the government. No safety studies. The U S has a gene edited, mushroom. Hasn't been commercialized yet, but the USDA and others said, we don't need to look at it. It's gene editing, it's safe. So with that attitude, the ability to replace nature, including our food supply is devastating. So part of our education process is to let everyone know the truth about the dangerous technologies.

Speaker 2: (31:15)
Fantastic. And I know there's going to be people listening who will become advocates. So it becomes supporters and may even become evangelists and scientists just involved in this. Cause we've got our whole audience, lots of new young people coming in. I was on the phone today with a guy think was maybe 18 or 19 years old doing an interview. And so we get this new generation to step in, right? Because at some point it'll be like 150. It might be past your, you might be past your prime. And at that point we need new people.

Speaker 3: (31:43)
Well, I'm not going to admit now that 150 would be past my prime, but

Speaker 2: (31:46)
We'll say, well, you're doing good so far in spite of not with your superfoods man. Thanks. You know, one of the things that's important here is, and this is what I love about you, Jeffrey Smith. And, and I think we'll leave it on this note because we've given people a lot and they're going to be able to take, do a lot with the information here and get to protect nature now.com. But one of the things that's really beautiful about your approach and it's an approach I aspire to emulate is just having the right attitude about it. All right? Because I think at some level in your personality, you, you know, that we're, as we're spiritual beings, we're having a human experience and material experience and our joy comes from that. It doesn't come from the material world. Is that, am I wrong about that? Or did I get that right?

Speaker 3: (32:26)
Something David? I, I, I, I think about this every time I'm with you, every time I talked to you, every time I hear you, there is a, a buoyancy, a optimism, a glorious celebration in every, in your whole attitude in life. And I'm, so you say you aspire to that. Well, I have to say you landed it. You model it, man. You are, you are awesome that way. And yes, I think that what, like, you're, you get to T talk to people about all these great ways of improving their health and super foods and all this stuff I'm talking about all these ways that they can have, they could be damaging their health and damaging the world, but both need the optimistic model. So that, so that, that actually becomes the energy we're sowing. We're sowing seeds, not just an action and not just physical seeds, but also a vibration and attitude and how we want the world to be.

Speaker 3: (33:25)
So thank you for bringing that up. Well, wonderful. That's so great. And if everyone listening, you know, take that active as in that idea that it's an abundance activism, it's a buoyancy. I love the way you described that and take that into your daily life. It's really a great teaching. And I have to thank my teachers who had part of that onto me. Um, all those years ago that, you know, you have to have them take the right attitude. And there's no sense in the doom and gloom report. It's, you know, it's right. It's just, it's, we're, we're having a human experience down here and it's, you know, a lot of fun and to be an activist, it's a lot of fun to be an environmentalist. And I love that you have that behavioral attitude and that just feeling about you. Okay? So again, everyone protect nature now. Dot com. I'm David avocado Wolfe joined by Jeffrey Smith. Also Institute of responsible technology done tremendous earth quaking work on GMOs and making, making people aware of the dangerous. Thanks so much. Thank you, David. Everyone safe eating.

Speaker 4: (34:28)
Thank you for listening to live healthy. Be well. Please subscribe to the podcast. Using whatever app you listen to podcasts with, or go to live healthy, be well.com to subscribe. This podcast will inform you about health, dangerous corporate and government corruption and ways we can protect ourselves, our families and our planet. I interview scientists, experts, authors, whistleblowers, and many people who have not shared their information with the world. Until now, please share the podcast with your friends. They will be enlightened and may even save lives. CPT [inaudible]. "

onawah

4th February 2021, 01:40

A Magnificent New Normal Speaker Series is online and FREE from March 8-14, 2021
More from Live Healthy, Be Well See:
https://magnificentnewnormal.byhealthmeans.com/?idev_id=29142

"The global shutdown shifted our world into a “phase transition.” These are magical windows of opportunity found throughout nature, where profound change is possible.

Learn how indigenous cultures predicted this special time, how the new science of consciousness redefines what is possible and how to take full advantage of this critical window to unlock your own transformation.

How do you want to respond to the calling of our collective future?

People who attended our initial event are glad they did. One person said, “This is the most uplifting summit I’ve ever come across.” Another wrote us to say, “This series marks a definite leap in the evolution of consciousness.”

What is your vision for a post-pandemic civilization? Let’s do it together!

This transformational event
will equip you with the tools you need to:

Step into your truth and bring it to the world Develop your intuition and knowing Choose techniques for higher states of consciousness Revitalize relationships Create new habits and replace old ones Shift your brain functioning Move past fear and gain ease and loving kindness And so much more!"

Peace in Oz

10th February 2021, 05:16

GA4GH Strategic Roadmap, programs for the mapping and management of the genetic code of the population:

https://www.ga4gh.org/wp-content/uploads/2018-Strategic-Roadmap.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2fWOIjD2LZElB-YVgOagA0ojWtOzhCI8es0mi95gdIhA1GvrtcklUIh2M

I tried to embed the PDF, but for some reason it disappeared.
Here is the link:
https://www.ga4gh.org/wp-content/uploads/2018-Strategic-Roadmap.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2fWOIjD2LZElB-YVgOagA0ojWtOzhCI8es0mi95gdIhA1GvrtcklUIh2M

onawah

27th February 2021, 19:53

CPAC 2021: Gordon Chang on China’s Super Soldiers and Biden’s Outdated China Policy
Crossroads with JOSHUA PHILIPP
19,686 views•Premiered Feb 25, 2021
614K subscribers
CvXoKvH1n9k
" 'You can't cooperate with a government like that!'
Author Gordon Chang talks about how the CCP has infiltrated American politics and society."

From Forbidden Knowledge
https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/chinas-super-soldiers-and-gene-weapons
"Gordon Chang joins Joshua Philipp for a quick discussion how the Chinese are genetically-engineering “supersoldiers” and creating gene-targeted weapons to kill specific ethnic groups and how they may be gathering this data as contractors who process data for companies like Ancestry.com. And by gene-targeted weapons, we would be talking about viruses."

Eva2

11th March 2021, 21:38

Moderna’s Top Scientist: ‘We Are Actually Hacking The Software Of Life’

POSTED BY: LEO HOHMANN MARCH 9, 2021
Please Share This Story!
image_pdfimage_print
Pure and simple, this is unvarnished, raw Transhumanism. Moderna CEO says mRNA shots are “rewriting the Genetic Code.” He calls it “information therapy”, and says “We are actually hacking the software of life.” This should be a red alert for every rational American.
Transhumanism is a twisted philosophy that believes in the use of high technology to transform humans into immortal beings. That is, escaping death and living forever. Furthermore, they seek to use genetic engineering to create a new master race of sorts, that will shed all of the “unseemly” characteristics of humans. In just a few short years, Transhumanism has smothered the world against its will and without its consent. Billions of people will be injected with mRNA gene therapy concoctions that will permanently change a persons genetic makeup. ⁃ TN Editor
Dr. Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer at Moderna Inc., explained in a 2017 TED talk how the company’s mRNA vaccine was designed to work.

Over the last 30 years, he said, “we’ve been living this phenomenal digital scientific revolution, and I’m here today to tell you, that we are actually hacking the software of life, and that it’s changing the way we think about prevention and treatment of disease.”

He went on to explain [see video below] that the human body is made up of organs and organs are made up of cells.

“In every cell there’s this thing called messenger RNA or mRNA for short, that transmits the critical information from the DNA in our genes to the protein, which is really the stuff we’re all made out of. This is the critical information that determines what the cell will do. So we think about it as an operating system.

“So if you could change that, if you could introduce a line of code, or change a line of code, it turns out, that has profound implications for everything, from the flu to cancer.”

I reported on Feb. 4 that Moderna describes its new vaccine as “a computer operating system” but I was not aware at that time that Zaks had spoken three years ago about this, totally debunking the establishment media’s lie that mRNA vaccines don’t alter your genetic code.

He could not be more clear when he said “We are actually hacking the software of life.”

Zaks stressed that in 2017 his company was working on a vaccine that would not act like any previous vaccine ever created.

“Imagine if instead of giving [the patient] the protein of a virus, we gave them the instructions on how to make the protein, how the body can make its own vaccine,” he said.

Zaks said it took decades to sequence the human genome, which was accomplished in 2003, “And now we can do it in a week.”

He proceeded to reveal, in 2017, his company’s plans to make individual cancer vaccines, tailored to the needs of individual cancer patients, “because every cancer is different.”

Interestingly, one of the most potentially catastrophic side effects of the mRNA vaccine is its interaction with cancer cells. According to a study at New York City-based Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, the mRNA has a tendency to inactivate tumor-suppressing proteins, meaning it can promote the growth of cancer cells.

Both the Moderna and Pfizer injections are experimental mRNA vaccines. The FDA has only granted these injections Emergency Use Authorization [EUA] and they will remain in trials through 2023, yet the government, media and corporations are all promoting them as though they are guaranteed safe.

This systemic deception will, in my opinion, end up being judged in the rear-view mirror of history as one of the most reckless acts of medical treachery ever committed against the human race.

If this so-called vaccine does cause more people to get cancer, think of the possibilities from a purely business point of view.

Based on the predictions of Dr. Zaks, who oversaw the creation of the vaccine now being given to millions of people worldwide, the same Big Pharma companies that could potentially give people cancer with one vaccine could step forward later with another vaccine offering the cure for cancer. If you are the CEO of a mega pharmaceutical who answers to profit-driven Wall Street shareholders, that’s a brilliant strategy!

But is it ethical from a medical point of view? That’s a question nobody is asking.

As I listen to Dr. Zaks lay out the achievements of his company in creating the mRNA vaccine, I cannot help but think of how incredibly arrogant it sounds. That scientists think they can rewrite the genetic code [his words not mine for all you out there who still don’t believe these mRNA vaccines change the genetic code just because some ‘fact checker’ says they don’t], believing they can improve on a person’s God-given genetic makeup is entering dangerous territory. Who’s to say they won’t correct one problem and create something far worse?

Zaks wrapped up his 2017 speech with the following words.

“If you think about what it is we’re trying to do. We’ve taken information and our understanding of that information and how that information is transmitted in a cell, and we’ve taken our understanding of medicine and how to make drugs, and we’re fusing the two. We think of it as information therapy.”

Information therapy. Just like a computer software code.

These scientists truly believe that the human body is nothing more than a machine that can be hacked into and reordered according to some programmer’s instructions.

The same ground-breaking nature of this research that excites some, is what horrifies others.

A person’s genetic makeup is, as Dr. Zak said, “the software of life.”

If this is true, then who should be the ultimate authority over each human being’s genetic software code? If we truly live in a free society, wouldn’t it stand to reason that we would want to have an energetic debate over how to answer that question? Shouldn’t it be the number-one issue being debated in Congress and the media? Instead, nobody is allowed to even ask these questions without being threatened, censored, rebuked, deplatformed. Members of the corporate media who dare broach the question get fired.

Contrary to what some scientists believe, we are not machines. We are human beings with bodies, souls and free wills. Anyone who tries to mandate the acceptance of an experimental gene-altering treatment is going against the international Nuremberg Codes, which require informed consent of any experimental treatment.

Dear readers: Please do not allow your employer, your government, your family, your friends or anyone else to intimidate you, or in any way try to persuade you, to accept this experimental treatment if you do not want it. You are your own health authority, period. If your employer threatens you with termination for rejecting this injection, please contact an attorney. The Rutherford Institute, headed up by civil rights attorney John Whitehead, is one good option. Others include Mat Staver’s Liberty Counsel.

Read full story here…

SHARE
https://leohohmann.com/2021/03/09/modernas-top-scientist-we-are-actually-hacking-the-software-of-life/

Hermoor

11th January 2022, 13:19

Moderna’s Top Scientist: ‘We Are Actually Hacking The Software Of Life’

That's it in a nutshell.

Natural, organic humans are being hybridised out of existence. Genocided, genetically overwritten, reprogrammed and repurposed. Call it what you will. It's just insane and abominably evil.

For those who don't quite get it yet, here's some more writing on the wall from a character who's in the thick of it.

https://twitter.com/Orwells_Ghost_/status/1480578303119482886

"Something is wrong with your DNA and you have a disease" he says. Could it be any more ironic?

'Don't worry about the third foot now growing out of the back of your head. Your 47th booster will rewrite your DNA back to normal. We got our sums right this time, trust us.'

On a positive note this lady (Christine Beadsworth) really gets it. Mostly spoken from a spiritual and Christian point of view. Beautifully expressed and very uplifting.

bhHSCemXToA5/

Matthew

4th February 2022, 12:30

Vaccine future. When I say vaccine what I mean is mRNA injection future.

This carries over from the Covid narrative, into a world where gene therapy is normalised, inheriting trust from old-school-vaccinations. Bait and switch by technocrats abusing terms. To me it points to a world where gene therapy will be pushed as the solution to more and more mundane problems not just genetic diseases and/or cancer.

Cancer vaccines to be at heart of 'national war' against deadly illness
Sajid Javid says jabs to potentially cure the disease over the next decade will make Britain a 'world leader' in treatment
By Laura Donnelly, HEALTH EDITOR, 4 February 2022
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/02/04/cancer-vaccines-heart-national-war-against-deadly-illness/

Vaccines to treat and potentially cure cancer will be at the heart of a “national war” on the disease over the next decade, Sajid Javid will say on Thursday.
...

source twitter (https://twitter.com/JamesMelville/status/1489570110721474562)

onawah

14th February 2022, 22:56

The Plan to Turn You Into a Genetically Edited Human Cyborg
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
February 14, 2022
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/02/14/human-augmentation.aspx?ui=8d3c7e22a03f5300d2e3338a0f080d2da3add85bca35e09236649153e4675f72&sd=20110604&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20220214_HL2&mid=DM1114080&rid=1407593604

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
The U.K. Ministry of Defense and the German Bundeswehr Office for Defense Planning Human stress that human augmentation needs to be a key area of focus to win future wars
Human augmentation will not be restricted to the military ranks. It’s really a way to further separate classes of humans, with the rich and powerful elite eventually using their augmented “super-human” status as justification to rule everyone else
The goal of The Fourth Industrial Revolution — introduced and pushed by the World Economic Forum — is transhumanism, the merging of man with machine
Human augmentation can directly affect behavior, either positively or to the detriment of that person
In the transhumanist view, the human body is a “platform” that can be augmented in myriad ways, physically, psychologically and socially

A May 2021 project report by the U.K. Ministry of Defense, created in partnership with the German Bundeswehr Office for Defense Planning, offers shocking highlights of the dystopian cybernetics future that global technocrats are pushing mankind toward.

The report, “Human Augmentation — The Dawn of a New Paradigm, a Strategic Implications Project,”1 reviews the scientific goals of the U.K. and German defense ministries, and they are precisely what the title suggests. Human augmentation is stressed as being a key area to focus on in order to win future wars.

But human augmentation will not be restricted to the military ranks. It’s really a way to further separate classes of humans, with the rich and powerful elite being augmented “super-humans.” It’s worth noting that anything released to the public is a decade or more behind current capabilities, so everything in this report can be considered dated news, even though it reads like pure science fiction.

“... the field of human augmentation has the potential to transform society, security and defense over the next 30 years,” the report states. “We must begin to understand the implications of these changes and shape them to our advantage now, before they are thrust upon us.

Technology in warfare has traditionally centered on increasingly sophisticated platforms that people move and fight from, or artefacts that they wear or wield to fight with. Advances in the life sciences and converging developments in related fields are, however, beginning to blur the line between technology and the human ...

Many technologies that have the potential to deliver strategic advantage out to 2050 already exist and further advances will undoubtedly occur ... Our potential adversaries will not be governed by the same ethical and legal considerations that we are, and they are already developing human augmentation capabilities.

Our key challenge will be establishing advantage in this field without compromising the values and freedoms that underpin our way of life ...

When we think of human augmentation it is easy to imagine science fiction inspired suits or wonder drugs that produce super soldiers, but we are on the cusp of realizing the benefits in a range of roles now. Human augmentation will help to understand, optimize and enhance performance leading to incremental, as well as radical, improvements.”

Changing What It Means To Be Human
As noted in the report, “Human augmentation has the potential to ... change the meaning of what it means to be a human.” This is precisely what Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), has stated is the goal of The Fourth Industrial Revolution.2

WEF has been at the center of global affairs for more than 40 years, and if you take the time to dive into WEF’s Fourth Industrial Revolution material, you realize that it’s all about transhumanism. It’s about the merger of man and machine. This is a dystopian future WEF and its global allies are actively trying to implement, whether humanity at large agrees with it or not.

Schwab dreams of a world in which humans are connected to the cloud, able to access the internet through their own brains. This, of course, also means that your brain would be accessible to people who might like to tinker with your thoughts, emotions, beliefs and behavior, be they the technocratic elite themselves or random hackers. As noted by history professor Yuval Noah Harari in late 2019, “humans are now hackable animals.”3 As noted in the featured report:4

“Human augmentation will become increasingly relevant, partly because it can directly enhance human capability and behavior and partly because it is the binding agent between people and machines.

Future wars will be won, not by those with the most advanced technology, but by those who can most effectively integrate the unique capabilities of both people and machines. The importance of human-machine teaming is widely acknowledged but it has been viewed from a techno-centric perspective.

Human augmentation is the missing part of this puzzle. Thinking of the person as a platform and understanding our people at an individual level is fundamental to successful human augmentation.”

Key words I’d like to draw your attention to is the affirmation that human augmentation can “directly enhance behavior.” Now, if you can enhance behavior, that means you can change someone’s behavior. And if you can change a person’s behavior in a positive way, you can also control it to the person’s own detriment.

Theoretically, absolutely anyone, any random civilian with a brain-to-cloud connection and the needed biological augmentation (such as strength or speed) could be given wireless instructions to carry out an assassination, for example, and pull it off flawlessly, even without prior training.

Alternatively, their physical body could temporarily be taken over by a remote operator with the prerequisite skills. Proof of concept already exists, and is reviewed by Dr. Charles Morgan, professor in the department of national security at the University of New Haven, in the lecture below. Using the internet and brain implants, thoughts can be transferred from one person to another. The sender can also directly influence the physical movements of the receiver.

Dr. Charles Morgan on Psycho-Neurobiology and War
300,872 viewsJun 14, 2018
5.3K
Modern War Institute
20K subscribers
Dr. Charles Morgan speaks to cadets and faculty at West Point about a range of topics, including psychology, neurobiology, and the science of humans at war. Dr. Morgan's neurobiological and forensic research has established him as an international expert in post-traumatic stress disorder, eyewitness memory, and human performance under conditions of high stress.
The event was organized and hosted by the Modern War Institute at West Point."
cTtIPBPSv0U

The Human Platform
On page 12 of the report, the concept of the human body as a platform is described, and how various parts of the human platform can be augmented. For example:

Physical performance such as strength, dexterity, speed and endurance can be enhanced, as well as physical senses. One example given is gene editing for enhanced sight
Psychological performance such as cognition, emotion and motivation can be influenced to activate and direct desired behavior. Examples of cognitive augmentation include improving memory, attention, alertness, creativity, understanding, decision-making, intelligence and vigilance
Social performance — “the ability to perceive oneself as part of a group and the readiness to act as part of the team” — can be influenced. Communication skills, collaboration and trust are also included here
They list several different ways to influence the physical, psychological and social performance of the “human platform,” including genetics (germ line and somatic modification), the gut microbiome, synthetic biology, invasive (internal) and noninvasive (external) brain interfaces, passive and powered exoskeletons, herbs, drugs and nano technology, neurostimulation, augmented reality technologies such as external holograms or glasses with built-in artificial intelligence, and sensory augmentation technologies such as external sensors or implants. As noted in the report:

“The senses can be extended by translating frequencies beyond the normal human range into frequencies that can been seen, heard or otherwise detected. This could allow the user to ‘see’ through walls, sense vibrations and detect airborne chemicals and changes to magnetic fields.

More invasive options to enhance existing senses have also been demonstrated, for example, coating retinal cells with nanoparticles to enable vision in the infrared spectrum.”

They also point out that, from a defense perspective, methods to de-augment an augmented opponent will be needed. Can you even imagine the battlefield of the future, where soldiers are barraged from both sides with conflicting inputs?

As for ethics, the paper stresses that “we cannot wait for the ethics of human augmentation to be decided for us.” There may even be “moral obligations” to augment people, they say, such as when it would “promote well-being” or protect a population from a “novel threat.”

Interestingly, the paper notes that “It could be argued that treatments involving novel vaccination processes and gene and cell therapies are examples of human augmentation already in the pipeline.” This appears to be a direct reference to mRNA and vector DNA COVID jabs. If so, it’s an open admission that they are a human augmentation strategy in progress.

The Challenge of Unintended Consequences
Of course, there can be any number of side effects and unintended outcomes when you start augmenting an aspect of the human body or mind. As explained in the featured report:

“The relationship between augmentation inputs and outputs is not as simple as it might appear. An augmentation might be used to enhance a person’s endurance but could unintentionally harm their ability to think clearly and decisively in a timely fashion.

In a warfighting context, an augmentation could make a commander more intelligent, but less able to lead due to their reduced ability to socially interact or because they increasingly make unethical decisions. Even a relatively uncontentious enhancement such as an exoskeleton may improve physical performance for specific tasks, but inadvertently result in a loss of balance or reduced coordination when not being worn.

The notion of enhancement is clouded further by the intricacies of the human nervous system where a modifier in one area could have an unintended effect elsewhere. Variation between people makes designing enhancements even more challenging.”

Still, none of that is cause to reconsider or slow down the march toward transhumanism, according to the authors. We just need to understand the human body better, and for that, we need to collect and analyze more data on human performance, behavior, genetics and epigenetics. As noted by the authors:

“Devices that track movement, heart rate, oxygenation levels and location are already commonplace and will become increasingly accurate and sophisticated, making it possible to gather an increasingly wide array of performance data in real time. We can also analyze data in ways that were impossible even five years ago.

Artificial intelligence can analyze massive sets of information almost instantaneously and turn it into products that can inform decision-making. This marriage of data collection and analytics is the foundation of future human augmentation.”

Lab-Grown Designer Babies
As mentioned, by the time a technological advancement is admitted publicly, the research is already a decade or more down the road. Consider, then, the February 1, 2022, article in Futurism,5 which announced that Chinese scientists have developed an artificial intelligence nanny robot to care for fetuses grown inside an artificial womb. According to Futurism:6

“The system could theoretically allow parents to grow a baby in a lab, thereby eliminating the need for a human to carry a child. The researchers go so far as to say that this system would be safer than traditional childbearing.”

As of now, the AI robot is only in charge of lab-raised animal embryos, as “experimentation on human embryos is still forbidden under international law.” However, that could change at any time. In May 2021, the International Society for Stem Cell Research went ahead and relaxed the rules7 on human embryonic experimentation.8

Up until then, the rule had been that no human embryo could be grown in a lab environment beyond 14 days. Human embryos may now be grown beyond 14 days if certain conditions are met. In some countries, laws would still need to be changed to go beyond 14 days, but regardless, there’s no doubt that as transhumanism gets underway in earnest, ethical considerations about growing babies in laboratories will be tossed out.

Combine the announcement of an AI robot nanny to care for lab-grown embryos with the 2018 announcement that Chinese scientists were creating CRISPR gene-edited babies. As reported by Technology Review, November 25, 2018,9 “A daring effort is underway to create the first children whose DNA has been tailored using gene editing.”

The embryos were genetically edited to disable a gene called CCR5, to make the babies “resistant to HIV, smallpox and cholera.” The embryos were then implanted into a human mother using in vitro fertilization. At the time, the lead scientist refused to answer whether the undertaking had resulted in a live birth, but shortly thereafter it was confirmed that one trial participant had indeed given birth to gene-edited twins in November 2018.10

In June 2019, Nature magazine published an article11 questioning whether the CRISPR babies might inadvertently have been given a shorter life span, as research had recently discovered that people with two disabled copies of the CCR5 gene were 21% more likely to die before the age of 76 than those with one functioning copy of that gene. The babies might also be more susceptible to influenza and autoimmune conditions, thanks to this genetic tinkering.

Should We Breed Chimeras to Satisfy Need for Organs?
Ethical considerations about animal-human hybrids (chimeras) will probably also fall by the wayside once transhumanism becomes normalized. Already, human-monkey hybrid embryos have been grown by a team of Chinese and American scientists.12

The hybrid embryos are part of an effort to find new ways to produce organs for transplant patients. The idea is to raise monkeys with human-compatible organs that can then be harvested as needed. Here, the embryos were grown in test tubes for as long as 20 days — and this was done before the ISSCR officially agreed to relaxing the 14-day rule.

The question is, if this kind of research ends up being successful, and the creation of animals with human organs is actually feasible, at what point does the chimera become a human?

How do we know that what looks like a monkey doesn’t have a human brain, with the intelligence that goes with it? Taking it a step further, even, what’s to prevent scientists from growing human organ donors? Human clones, even? It’s a slippery slope, for sure.

Privacy in the Age of Transhumanism
Perhaps one of the greatest concerns I (and many others) have is that not only are we moving toward a merger of man and machine, but at the same time we’re also increasingly outsourcing human morality to machines. I cannot imagine the end result being anything but devastating. How did that happen? Timandra Harkness, a BBC Radio presenter and author of “Big Data: Does Size Matter?” writes:13

“As the recent pandemic years have shown, the desire to be free from scrutiny unless there’s a good reason to be scrutinized is widely seen as, at best, eccentric and, at worst, automatic grounds for suspicion.

We simply can’t articulate why a private life is valuable. We have no sense of ourselves as autonomous beings, persons who need a space in which to reflect, to share thoughts with a few others, before venturing into public space with words and actions that we feel ready to defend ...

Part of the appeal of technologies like AI is the fantasy that a machine can take the role of wise parent, immune to the emotion and unpredictability of mere humans. But this tells us less about the real capabilities of AI, and more about our disillusionment with ourselves.

The urge to fix COVID, or other social problems, with technology springs from this lack of trust in other people. So does the cavalier disregard for privacy as an expression of moral autonomy.

Technology ethics can’t save us, any more than technology can. Even during a pandemic, how we regard one another is the fundamental question at the root of ethics. So we do need to treat technology as just a tool, after all. Otherwise we risk being made its instruments in a world without morals.”

Sources and References
1, 4 Human Augmentation — The Dawn of a New Paradigm, a Strategic Implications Project May 2021
2 WEF The Fourth Industrial Revolution
3 CNN November 26, 2019
5, 6 Futurism February 1, 2022
7 ISSCR Guidelines
8 STAT News May 26, 2021
9 Technology Review November 25, 2018
10 AP News November 26, 2018
11 Nature June 3, 2019
12 Newsweek April 16, 2021
13 Unherd January 2022

onawah

2nd May 2022, 20:43

The extinction of species, Bill Gates, and the US military
by Jon Rappoport
May 2, 2022

"There is a technology called gene drives.

It asks the question: what species should we make extinct today?

Why are Bill Gates and the US military involved in forwarding that technology?

A gene-drive scientist might say, “I have a plan. By manipulating genes, we can make invasive rodents extinct, on an island where humans are living.”

In the next fraction of a second, a flurry of questions pops up.

The overarching question is: Does this mean genetic manipulation can make ANY species extinct?

Here is a passage from Gene Drive Files, a site with a referenced information on the subject:

“Gene drives are a gene-editing application that allows genetic engineers to drive a single artificial trait through an entire population by ensuring that all of an organism’s offspring carry that trait. For example, recent experiments are fitting mice with ‘daughterless’ gene drives that will cascade through mouse populations so that only male pups are born, ensuring that the population becomes extinct after a few generations.”

“Proponents have framed gene drives as a breakthrough tool for eradicating pests or invasive species. However, the Gene Drive Files reveal that these ‘conservation’ efforts are primarily supported by military funds.”

Gene drive technology could be deployed to wipe out troublesome plant-parasites, weeds, crops, animal pests, animals, and…what about humans? Mull that over with your morning coffee.

Several years ago, UN member nations were considering a recommendation to call a moratorium on the use of gene drives. However, Bill Gates showed up to try to squash the moratorium.

The Gene Drive Files reports: “Documents received under Freedom of Information requests reveal that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation paid a private agriculture and biotechnology PR firm $1.6 million for activities on Gene Drives. This included running a covert ‘advocacy coalition’ which appears to have intended to skew the only UN expert process addressing gene drives…”

“Following global calls in December 2016 from Southern countries and over 170 organizations for a UN moratorium on gene drives, emails to gene drive advocates received under a Freedom of Information request by Prickly Research reveal that a private public affairs firm ‘Emerging Ag’ received funds from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to co-ordinate the ‘fight back against gene drive moratorium proponents’.”

There’s more from the Gene Drive Files. It involves the military:

“A trove of emails (The Gene Drive Files) from leading U.S. gene drive researchers reveals that the U.S. Military is taking the lead in driving forward gene drive development.”

“Emails obtained through a freedom of Information request by U.S.–based Prickly Research reveal that the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has given approximately $100 million for gene drive research, $35 million more than previously reported, making them likely the largest single funder of gene drive research on the planet. The emails also reveal that DARPA either funds or co-ordinates with almost all major players working on gene drive development as well as the key holders of patents on CRISPR gene editing technology.”

“These funds go beyond the US; DARPA is now also directly funding gene drive researchers in Australia (including monies given to an Australian government agency, CSIRO) and researchers in the UK. The files also reveal an extremely high level of interest and activity by other sections of the U.S. military and Intelligence community.”

For the moment, put aside the notion of intentional extinction of species. Consider unintended consequences.

As I’ve shown in past articles, the latest and greatest gene-editing tools (e.g., CRISPR), which are used for gene drives, are far from slam-dunk precise, despite official assurances.

For example, this study: Genome Biology, July14, 2017, titled, “CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing induces exon skipping by alternative splicing or exon deletion.” An exon is “a segment of a DNA or RNA molecule containing information coding for a protein or peptide sequence.” So you can see that exon skipping or deletion is a very bad outcome.

ANY gene editing done on ANY species opens the door wide to all sorts of errors and unforeseen consequences.

As for intentional destruction, we have this: MIT Technology Review, 2/8/16: “We have the technology to destroy all Zika mosquitoes.”

“A controversial genetic technology able to wipe out the mosquito carrying the Zika virus will be available within months, scientists say.”

“The technology, called a ‘gene drive,’ was demonstrated only last year in yeast cells, fruit flies, and a species of mosquito that transmits malaria. It uses the gene-snipping technology CRISPR to force a genetic change to spread through a population as it reproduces.”

“Three U.S. labs that handle mosquitoes, two in California and one in Virginia, say they are already working toward a gene drive for Aedes aegypti, the type of mosquito blamed for spreading Zika. If deployed, the technology could theoretically drive the species to extinction.”

“…a gene drive [gene editing] can…make mosquito populations disappear. The simplest way to do that is to spread a genetic payload that leads to only male offspring. As the ‘male-only’ instructions spread with each new generation, eventually there would be no females left, says Adelman. His lab discovered the Aedes aegypti gene that determines sex only last spring. The next step will be to link it to a gene drive.”

Bill Gates favors this technology. So shouldn’t we? After all, Bill is the number one humanitarian on the planet, right?

Right?

No?

Oops."

Delight

9th August 2022, 18:25

Notice this is from a year ago.

Interview 1650 - Whitney Webb Dissects the Wellcome Leap into Transhumanism
Corbett • 07/08/2021 (https://www.corbettreport.com/interview-1649-whitney-webb-dissects-the-wellcome-leap-into-transhumanism/)

Whitney Webb of UnlimitedHangout.com joins us once again, this time to discuss her latest article, “A “Leap” toward Humanity’s Destruction.” (https://unlimitedhangout.com/2021/06/investigative-reports/a-leap-toward-humanitys-destruction/) Even if you’re familiar with the transhumanist agenda, what the ex-DARPA, ex-Silicon Valley old hands at the newly created Wellcome Leap are planning to do in their quest to transform the human species in the coming decade will blow your mind.

d0XI05h8FmQ/

Eva2

1st September 2022, 05:27

https://scontent.fcxh3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/301397713_638687370955034_8195152124484791490_n.jpg?stp=dst-jpg_s1080x2048&_nc_cat=105&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=CUYQi6ib3yAAX8vPZo8&_nc_ht=scontent.fcxh3-1.fna&oh=00_AT_X17-E43m7LcHusO6qnTMCKVp3s1uCqIKBllc2w1hrvw&oe=63147D34

onawah

8th October 2022, 20:26

What to Expect When You're Gene Editing
Email update 10/8/22 from: IRT - Institute for Responsible Technology <info@responsibletechnology.org> via aweber.com

"Some governments (UK, USA, NG, JAP, CAN, AUS) are angling to deregulate Gene Edited GMO’s under the (mostly false) claim that they do not contain foreign DNA. Thus, the latest term to distract and confuse "transgene-free" has been born.

The process of CRISPR gene editing introduces molecules of DNA under the assumption that they will be present only long enough to carry out the intended gene edit. When the correct detection tools are used, however, we find that this foreign DNA is not, in fact, disappearing as expected, but remains in the now gene-edited organism.
Expect the unexpected" See:
7 Reasons Why Gene Editing is Dangerous and Unpredictable
https://www.responsibletechnology.org/gene-editing/

Au5HO7it9ng

"Gene editing is cheap, easy, prone to side effects, poorly regulated and can permanently alter nature’s gene pool-a recipe for disaster.

WHAT’S AT RISK…
OUR FOOD, OUR FUTURE, AND OUR PLANET.
A speaker at a 1999 biotech conference revealed that his consulting company was helping Monsanto executives achieve their ideal future, where the company would genetically engineer and patent 100% of all commercial seeds in the world. Another speaker went so far as to predict that 95% natural seeds would be replaced as early as 2004.

Although GMO proponents portrayed their technology as safe, predictable, and even natural, experts and the public saw through the lies. Now half the world’s population appropriately believe that GMO foods are not safe for human health. And there’s plenty of science to back that up.

Concerns about GMO dangers derailed Monsanto’s timeline. The number of commercialized GMO food crops capped at about a dozen.

Gene editing threatens all that.

The GMO industry has ushered in their new methods of creating GMOs—gene editing—using the same rhetoric from decades earlier. They misrepresent the technology as safe, predictable, and natural.

Unfortunately, many governments fell prey to these lies and have institutionalized this fraud. The United States, Japan, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, India and others “deregulated” gene editing. England, Canada, and possibly the EU are making moves to do the same.

This means that new GMOs can be deployed without safety assessments of any kind. Companies typically are not required to tell consumers or even governments if they’ve put gene edited GMOs into our food supply or environment.

Gene editing techniques such as CRISPR are cheap and easily accessible. The number of new GMOs released over the next 25 years could be vast. Even organic and non-GMO certified products could eventually be overrun by these stealth GMOs.

It’s a GMO free-for-all.

EXPOSING THE FRAUD
According to the world’s most prestigious journals, gene editing creates damage to the genome. Nature describes it as “Chromosomal Mayhem”. So how does the biotech industry get away with claiming the opposite?

We are witnessing a well-funded disinformation campaign, reminiscent of the tactics used by Monsanto for decades. They feed scripted talking points and ghostwritten materials to a coordinated chorus of promoters, front groups, paid scientists, captured regulatory agencies, and biotech friendly media. Government sanctioned pro-GMO committees are often comprised of industry-approved members with clear conflicts of interest. On the other hand, highly credentialed, independent experts are not invited to share their evidence of potential harm from gene editing.

A similar plan was crafted by Monsanto when they tried to counter the World Health Organization’s determination that the company’s herbicide Roundup contained a probable human carcinogen (glyphosate.) The secret strategy was spelled out in detail in a company document, made public by a lawsuit. (Monsanto’s dark tactics were no surprise, as IRT has been exposing these types of actions around the world for two decades.)

The “7 Reasons” Challenge

The short, animated film, Seven Reasons why Gene editing is Dangerous and Unpredictable, clearly illustrates what happens to the DNA during and after gene editing. Viewers quickly become antidoted to the industry’s baseless claims of safety.

The science is from prominent sources and is up to date.
At 6-minutes, the film is easy to watch and easy to share
Further, it creates a checklist, challenging the industry to prove that they address and prevent each of the seven dangers. But we know they can’t. They don’t have the science on their side.
For lawmakers and regulators, the film provides evidence that biotech lobbyists misrepresent the technology, which puts human health and the environment at risk.

For the public, the film generates appropriate outrage, and helps us build a powerful global movement to properly regulate gene editing.

The Stakes are Enormous

Certainly, our food—and therefore our health—is at risk. But the dangers go far beyond that.

When GMOs are released into the environment, they cannot be recalled. A corrupted gene pool is self-propagating, creating unknown impacts generation after generation.

Gene editing is already so inexpensive, it is in use by home hobbyists and high school biology classes. And with countless companies equipped with the technology, virtually everything with DNA will eventually be targeted.

If left unrestricted, future generations will no longer inherit the products of billions of years of evolution. Instead, they will be forced to grapple with the byproducts of a technology prone to dangerous and unpredictable side effects.

Let us not be THAT generation that screwed it up for all future generations. Let’s be the ones that safeguarded biological evolution on our planet.

Please add your voice to our growing movement, as if life depends on it."

Read more:https://www.responsibletechnology.org/scientific-references/

Flash

1st November 2022, 15:49

Billions of our money, our sweat, going into it, listen, this cannot be clearer - the main adviser of Schwartz of the World Economic Forum says it openly. We are certainly not consulted about humanity’s future, our future. The stupidest are leading us.

https://www.facebook.com/reel/552238023333367?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V

onawah

22nd November 2022, 10:59

Manufactured Dystopia—Globalists Won’t Stop Hacking Humans
by Dr. Joseph Mercola
November 21, 2022
https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2022/11/21/transhumanism-hacking-humans.aspx?ui=8d3c7e22a03f5300d2e3338a0f080d2da3add85bca35e09236649153e4675f72&sd=20110604&cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1ReadMore&cid=20221121_HL2&cid=DM1290995&bid=1650271497

AH08871q36A1/

"STORY AT-A-GLANCE
Digital identity, digital twins, programmable central bank digital currency, a social credit system, human augmentation and the Internet of Bodies (IoB). These are all part of the dystopian future being rolled out by the globalist cabal as the “solutions” to the world’s problems
According to transhumanist propaganda, everyone will benefit from human augmentation.
In reality, transhumanism is a eugenics program, differing in name only
The post-human society envisioned by transhumanists will have no use for billions of people.
Since a vast number of jobs will be eliminated and replaced by robots and artificial intelligence, the transhumanist plan requires depopulation
A global totalitarian regime will not accept the responsibility to feed, house and provide universal basic income and health care to billions of people who aren’t useful.
The logical solution is to exterminate the nonproductive and transform the rest into obedient cyborgs imprisoned within the IoB 5G ecosystem
The depopulation requirement of the transhumanist utopia may be why nations refuse to address the extraordinary lethality of the COVID jabs

Digital identity, digital twins, programmable central bank digital currency (CBDC), a social credit system, human augmentation and the Internet of Bodies (IoB). These are all part of the dystopian future being rolled out by the globalist cabal as the “solutions” to the world’s problems.

Transhumanism has long been sold as a way to make us healthier and, eventually, immortal. Today, it’s being promoted under The Great Reset banner of “equity.” The propaganda is that everyone will benefit from human augmentation, from the richest to the poorest. In reality, transhumanism is a eugenics program, differing in name only.

Transhumanism Requires Depopulation
Anyone who thinks the globalist cabal, the wealthiest people on the planet, intend to allow “useless eaters” who gobble up “their” resources to live even longer than we do already is sadly mistaken. They have no such intent. All that talk of “health equity” is a smoke screen, a carrot, to lure people into going along with their plan for what will ultimately be the extermination of billions.

Some within this cabal, World Economic Forum (WEF) adviser Yuval Noah Harari being a notable example,1 are openly talking about the elite’s plan for a post-human society, which is precisely what it sounds like.

A world without real humans. A world where everyone is augmented with (and in the case of the lower class, controlled by) technology. A world without belief in a higher power than the programmers and inventors themselves.2 A world where robots do most of the labor, artificial intelligence makes most of the decisions, and augmented humans run the programming.

A world like that has no use for billions of people. In one interview,3 Harari discussed the Fourth Industrial Revolution (another term for transhumanism), noting that we’re now learning to “produce bodies and minds” (meaning augmented bodies, and cloud- and artificial intelligence-connected minds) and that one of the greatest challenges we face will be what to do with all the people that will become obsolete in the process.

The answer, Harari proposed, may lie in “a combination of drugs and computer games.” I don’t believe him for a second. Drugs and computer games have certainly been tools to distract and control the younger generations, but the future they’re envisioning has no room for nonproductive members.

The depopulation requirement of the transhumanist utopia may be why nations refuse to address the extraordinary lethality of the COVID jabs.
I don’t see a global totalitarian regime accepting the responsibility to feed, house and provide universal basic income, health care and drugs to billions of people who aren’t useful to them in some way. No, the logical solution would be to exterminate the nonproductive and transform the rest into obedient cyborgs imprisoned within the Internet of Bodies 5G ecosystem.

COVID Jabs Serve a Greater Purpose
I believe the depopulation requirement of the transhumanist utopia is why just about every nation on the planet is refusing to address the extraordinary lethality of the COVID jabs.

Disability and life insurance claims have skyrocketed. Birth rates have plummeted and miscarriages and excess mortality are through the roof, yet everyone keeps pushing the COVID jabs. It appears these effects are intentional, and the only way to make sense of this chilling reality is to understand that depopulation is a necessary element of the transhumanist agenda.

There are to be two classes — the augmented “have it all’s” and the controlled subclass. Augmentation of the subclass will be for control measures only, and that will probably include the ability to terminate the life of anyone perceived as having outlived their usefulness within the system.

We’re Living in a Great Deception
Those who have looked into transhumanism and The Great Reset can clearly see how just about everything that happens is part of a plan to manipulate the masses to accept their envisioned control system. Those who refuse to look at these issues, however, cannot see it. Moreover, they cannot even imagine that something so diabolical could be true.

In the video above, Max Igan of “The Crowhouse” reviews the history of the Great Deception we’re in — the how and why people have been manipulated, for decades, into believing things that simply were not true — beliefs that shaped behavior and allowed the globalists to slowly and quietly move their long-term agenda for global domination along.

What Is the Internet of Bodies?
Just what is the IoB? The Rand corporation defines it as devices with computing capabilities that can communicate with internet-connected devices or networks that collect person-generated health and biometric data and/or can alter the function of the human body.4

The WEF has described it as an ecosystem of “an unprecedented number of sensors,” including emotional sensors, “attached to, implanted within, or ingested into human bodies to monitor, analyze and ... modify human bodies and behavior.”5

Key words in that sentence include the stated goal to “modify human behavior.” The WEF doesn’t tell us who will be in charge of those modifications, but we can safely assume that it will be those who have something to gain from controlling other people’s actions and behaviors.

FDA Poised to Approve Implantable Biosensor
While all of this sounds like pure sci-fi, the U.S. Pentagon and Profusa Inc. have already developed an implantable biosensor that tracks chemical reactions inside your body, ostensibly to detect disease.6 As explained by Defense One, the biosensor consists of two parts:7

“One is a 3 mm string of hydrogel ... Inserted under the skin with a syringe, the string includes a specially engineered molecule that sends a fluorescent signal outside of the body when the body begins to fight an infection.

The other part is an electronic component attached to the skin. It sends light through the skin, detects the fluorescent signal and generates another signal that the wearer can send to a doctor, website, etc. It’s like a blood lab on the skin that can pick up the body’s response to illness before the presence of other symptoms, like coughing.”

The sensor allows a person's biology to be examined at a distance via smartphone connectivity, and Profusa is backed by Google, the largest data mining company in the world. Knowing that, it’s hard to imagine that your biological data won’t be used to boost Google’s profits and further totalitarian control through biosecurity.

Profusa was expecting to receive approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2021, but it doesn’t appear to have been approved yet. That said, the wheels of the approval process are in motion, so it’s only a matter of time.

Artificial Intelligence and the Internet of Bodies

sZJa-yh-qhQ

In the video above, the Wilson Center NOW interviews Richard Solash, editor of The Wilson Quarterly, and Eleonore Pauwels, director of the Anticipatory Intelligence (AI) Lab with the Wilson Center’s Science and Technology Innovation Program, about the IoB and the role AI will play in the coming “algorithmic age.”

Pauwels makes it clear that one of the inescapable facets of the IoB is that we will be under constant assessment, “under measure of computation,” in every aspect of our lives, “from what you eat, whom you date, what you buy, how much energy you use” up to and including your vital signs and genetic data.

To explain the idea behind the IoB, she suggests you begin by thinking about how the Internet of Things work, all these smart devices that are connected not only to each other, but also to a wider network, where AI can analyze and optimize all those data.

Now, add to those networks health-monitoring devices, from wearables to implants, which will share your most private data. AI will then “analyze and optimize” those data as well, and while Pauwels doesn’t state that such optimization will be carried out automatically, without your knowledge, I see no reason to assume that that’s part of the plan.

Considering all of this, the biggest challenge, Pauwels says, will be to figure out how we can maintain control of our own futures and make sure AI is “shaped to our ideals.”

IoB Is Inseparable From the Eugenicist Transhumanist Agenda

Neil Oliver
@thecoastguy
It's a no from me.
Quote Tweet
Covid-1984
@Spiro_Ghost
Jul 31, 2021
The Ones That Want You To Take The mRNA Shots
What To Connect You To The (IoB) The Internet of Bodies
1421551677526749188
Part of the 4th Industrial Revolution... Coincidence?
5:43 AM · Nov 11, 2022
·Twitter for iPhone

While that warning sounds rational, just whose ideals are we talking about? To believe humanity in general will have any say in the matter is naïve. We cannot think about the IoB outside of, or separate from, the eugenicist transhumanist Great Reset.

The powers pushing the IoB forward are the same ones pushing for The Great Reset, and The Great Reset’s goal is to create a one world government using transhumanism as the platform for the control of the human mind and body.

There is no circumstance, that I can see in which the ideals of the AI will be any other ideal than that of the transhumanists, the eugenicists and The Great Resetters.

AI will make decisions based on its programming, and that programming is shaped and directed by the those who aim to rule everyone else. How can AI be shaped according to human-centric ideals when they’re being funded and developed by people looking forward to a post-human society?

Recognize the Bill of Goods
The only recourse, really, to maintain control of our futures, is to reject the IoB. Unfortunately, this will not be easy. Few are willing to forgo what they perceive as convenience, and fewer still really understand where it’s all leading to in the first place.

Perhaps the best we can do right now is educate ourselves and others about the end goals. A growing understanding that all this convenience will land us in a digital prison with no possibility of escape may be the only thing that can prevent it.

It’s worth remembering that if you give up your freedom, you also relinquish your ability to protect those you love. Your children can be taken from you if you disobey. Your spouse or parents can be injured or killed and you have no say in the matter.

Canada’s Euthanasia Laws Are Ripe for Abuse
Already, Canada offers euthanasia for a variety of conditions and situations, from long COVID8 and mental illness9 to hearing loss10 and poverty “that prevents living with dignity.”11

As noted by Exposing the Darkness,12 “After two years of genocidal COVID tyranny, based on the weaponization of the public health system, deployment of weaponized psychiatry to fight dissent and eliminate mentally ill ‘useless eaters’ was expected.”

Considering Psychology Today has suggested anti-vaxxers may have a mental health problem, it’s not out of the realm of possibility to imagine a day when refusing a COVID booster puts you on a euthanasia list. For now, it’s supposedly voluntary, but we all know what a slippery slope that can be, especially when doctors are compensated for every patient they put six feet under.

In at least one case, family members have stated they suspect the patient may have been coerced or tricked into signing the euthanasia form.13 In 2018, an Ontario man with an incurable neurological disease released audio recordings of hospital staff trying to get him to agree to euthanasia, when what he wanted was assisted home care.14

Learn to Recognize Soft Coercion
For decades, we’ve embraced technologies with our mind set on convenience and/or safety. That’s always how they rope us in. That’s how they’ll lure us into embracing the IoB as well, digital identity and CBDC’s as well. We have to get smarter about this and start thinking long term, because those who want to enslave us sure do. They’re planning decades into the future.

The march toward CBDCs in the U.S. started last week when the the Federal Reserve Bank of New York’s Innovation Center, or NYIC, announced that it would be launching a 12-week proof-of-concept pilot for a central bank digital currency, or CBDC.15

It’s important to realize that we will lose everything worth living for if we continue down this path without privacy safeguards and personal autonomy rights in place. Even then it’s a risk, as few laws are foolproof. Just look at how the U.S. Constitution is being trampled, even though it’s supposed to be inviolable.

As long as the corrupting influence of the globalists remain, we can be sure that they’ll continue their efforts to hack our bodies and brains, and to come up with ways to eliminate those who oppose them."

- Sources and References
1 The Atlantic February 20, 2017
2 Facebook Watch June 8, 2022
3 YouTube Yuval Noah Harari, “Drugs and Computer Games”
4 EDRM.net January 26, 2021
5 WEF, Shaping the Future of the Internet of Bodies, July 2020
6, 7 Defense One March 3, 2020
8 NZ Herald July 16, 2022
9 Daily Citizen November 14, 2022
10, 13 AP August 11, 2022
11 The Spectator April 30, 2022
12 Exposing the Darkness Substack April 6, 2022
14 CTV News August 2, 2018
15 NY Fed launches 12-week CBDC pilot program with major banks Nov 15, 2022

norman

19th December 2022, 11:49

Elana Freeland - May 18, 2022, “Transhumanism - presentation” at MUFON – OC

Lots of topic areas. The section about tweaking the schumann resonance of the planet by screwing around with the atmosphere to tweak our immune systems was a fist time for me.

VIMEO
https://vimeo.com/712132608/39a3015b49?fbclid=IwAR1uUj7-sWcLeGK4dMt1tBSLlACebsB3oz3sefna6bGFTCWuD_1nq_lq1Aw

gini

13th January 2023, 14:20

HARALD KAUTZ-VELLA ON THE POWER HOUR: COVID KILLSWITCH & AI ZOMBIES
Source... https://www.brighteon.com/9691fad4-1656-441a-815a-c06a9277b97b
German researcher Harald Kautz-Vella is one of those rare beings who can weave together both the spiritual-metaphysical and the scientific. He started to look at the topics of AI, chemtrails, Morgellons, Smart Dust, and nano-technologies while looking at environmental protection analysis and, “came across a number of substances that shouldn’t have been in nature because they are 100% artificial, and they are high-tech, and there is no other reason to have them in the environment apart from intent — and not the best one, let’s put it this way.”

Referring to this list of semi-secretive technologies and to the substances he found in the environment, he says, “… if you root these substances back to what they are designed for, you come to Transhumanistic technologies, which is the attempt to get an interface between artificial intelligence and biological. If you ask the Transhumanists themselves, they would always say they would like to give humans better access to AI — and if you look into the technologies, it’s always to the opposite way round, it’s always giving the AI access to the human, in the sense of getting the human system controlled from the outside.”--45 min---/CvcaMidCDbJa/

onawah

30th March 2023, 03:09

Unveiled! This Is The Greatest Threat Ahead!
WeAreChange
861K subscribers
27,999 views
Mar 29, 2023

"The video reveals the threat ahead and what is really happening."

L1n_8Eb8ER0

gnostic9

1st April 2023, 21:09

Ewan

2nd April 2023, 04:57

The Waiting-For-Pandemic Transhuman Cult of Biodefense

a good article about genetics, pandemics, and biodefence by Sasha Latypova.

https://www.technocracy.news/the-waiting-for-pandemic-transhuman-cult-of-biodefense/

Love peace and joy to all!

First opener from the article...

The Transhuman quest for genetic modification in order to change the human condition will end in total disaster. “Hacking the human body” is a myth perpetuated by academics like Yuval Noah Harari and Klaus Schwab with his Fourth Industrial Revolution narrative. Globally, however, biodefense spending is in the trillions and shows no signs of restraint. ⁃ TN Editor

And a selection of paragraphs...

No one can actually see, or in any way sense, what CO2 might actually be doing because it is invisible, odorless, tasteless, silent and cannot be felt by the sense of touch. Therefore, it is difficult to refute such claims because there is nothing to point to and tangibly expose the falsity of these claims.”

There is a bit of a problem with overused narratives. Climate change narrative is becoming harder to maintain as Greta Thunberg is now past the expiration date for a child actor, polar bears refuse to cooperate and keep multiplying, and the glaciers are not melting away like Al Gore promised. UFOs and aliens can only get us so far.

New fear narratives must be established: the narrative of “emerging” novel viruses has been in the works for years. Scary invisible viruses that can pounce out of a jungle any minute and are just a plane ride away from infecting half the planet with a lethal new pathogen! Even more exciting is the prospect of evil scientists making new deadly and super-spreading viruses in labs that can “leak.”

The Government mafia (HHS, NIH, DOD, DARPA, BARDA, DTRA, etc, etc,) and their vassals in academia, the biopharma industry, and media have all been feeding at the “biodefense” money trough for decades. What can be better than an invisible threat to justify printing and spending truckloads of money for mega-defense/research contracts, while flying to the global champagne-caviar events and giving each other diverse-inclusive-sustainable science awards?

The author...

Sasha Latypova is a former pharmaceutical R&D executive. She worked in the industry for 25 years, and ultimately owned and managed several contract research organizations working on clinical trials for 60+pharma companies, including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, J&J, GSK, Novartis and many others. She worked many years in cardiovascular safety assessments and interacted with the FDA and other regulatory agencies on these matters on behalf of her clients and as part of the FDA Cardiovascular Safety Research Consortium.

Edit:
Perhaps the standout paragraph..

The numerous state, military and private investors who backed the biodefense narrative, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation among hundreds of private, sovereign, and non-profit funds that plowed all that cash into the “biodefense” are waiting for the returns!

grapevine

15th June 2023, 16:41

Synthetic’ human embryos created without eggs or sperm

Scientists say they have created “synthetic” human embryos without the need for eggs or sperm in a potentially major advance.

It is currently unclear whether the model embryos have the potential to continue maturing beyond the earliest stages of development, but experts believe they may help in the study of illnesses, genetic disorders or recurrent miscarriage
more/...
https://www.standard.co.uk/tech/science/scientists-university-of-cambridge-california-institute-of-technology-boston-ivf-b1087963.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orGlM5MQAlc&ab_channel=WION
Another technology, open to abuse, but giving hope to many couples.

Gwin Ru

27th June 2023, 16:53

...

... the invisible technology:

Transhumanism THREATENS Humanity: mRNA Bioweapon Merges Human Biology With Digital Technology (https://rumble.com/v2vsp4i-transhumanism-threatens-humanity-mrna-bioweapon-merges-human-biology-with-d.html) 18:37

4 days ago

Stew Peters Network
(https://rumble.com/c/StewPeters)
Nanotechnology being forced on humanity may be the biggest cover up in world history.

Karen Kingston is here to detail her research about the reality of nanotech and how the elite continue to deny its existence.

Nanotechnology is being used for directed human evolution and is a weapon being used against all biological lifeforms.

Currently, there are no regulations that prohibit Pfizer from using electromagnetic devices that are nanotechnology on civilians.

This is a big reason why so many people are denying the existence of nanotechnology.

They do not want it to be regulated or made illegal.

Cosmetic companies Estee Lauder and Revlon have invested over half a billion dollars to secure nanotech patents.

Nanotech has been reported to be in our food supply, our soil, and it may be responsible for the rise in inflammation and cancer in the human body.

Dr. Robert Malone told Glenn Beck that the introduction of mRNA technology was the beginning of transhumanism.

These nanotechnology is targeting the reproductive health of humanity.

The same people who want us to trust science deny scientific papers that claim nanotech is real.

The bioweapon shots must be seized and the nanotech industry must be exposed.

Watch this new segment NOW at https://StewPeters.com!

v2t79uo

DeDukshyn

2nd August 2023, 06:30

Kim Iversen covers the topic of transhumanism ...

o9ovtvYA8Mg

DeDukshyn

2nd August 2023, 07:58

The Government of Canada has a website promoting transhumanism and genetic manipulation. Quite the disturbing read. I've posted this before but it belongs here as well.

https://horizons.gc.ca/en/2020/02/11/exploring-biodigital-convergence/

Johnnycomelately

2nd August 2023, 09:40

Thanks for that info. The page gets creepier right from the starting disclaimer. I only read until this:

Digital technology can be embedded in organisms, and biological components can exist as parts of digital technologies. The physical meshing, manipulating, and merging of the biological and digital are creating new hybrid forms of life and technology, each functioning in the tangible world, often with heightened capabilities.

Robots with biological brains01 and biological bodies with digital brains02 already exist, as do human-computer and brain-machine interfaces.03 The medical use of digital devices in humans04, as well as digitally manipulated insects such as drone dragonflies05 and surveillance locusts06, are examples of digital technology being combined with biological entities. By tapping into the nervous system and manipulating neurons, tech can be added to an organism to alter its function and purpose. New human bodies and new senses of identity07 could arise as the convergence continues.

My first thought is, I hope it’s just a feint of bravado to the CCP or somebody, misinfo. The disturbing thing is that these tech might be being worked on. My knowledge of this stuff is about nil, but I also don’t know much about how my smart devices work, and they work fine.

The Government of Canada has a website promoting transhumanism and genetic manipulation. Quite the disturbing read. I've posted this before but it belongs here as well.

https://horizons.gc.ca/en/2020/02/11/exploring-biodigital-convergence/

onawah

3rd August 2023, 04:02

MIT Research Review/Hydrogel Interfaces for Merging Humans and Machines
ANA MARIA MIHALCEA, MD, PHD
AUG 2, 2023
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/hydrogel-interfaces-for-merging-humans?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F905ea903-ff55-42fb-96b7-74d56bfda864_704x412.png

"Hydrogel interfaces for merging humans and machines

In this article, MIT researchers are discussing how to fuse humans with machines. I have reported that hydrogel has been found in all humans now, as well as biosensors like Quantum Dot technology. Many people do not want to face the reality that the transhumanist agenda of merging humans with machines has been underway and is currently happening in an advanced stage. The digital ID and surveillance under the skin can be seen in the blood in the form of Quantum Dot technology and hydrogel replacement of blood cells, forming rubbery clots. Nanotechnology can be used as a weapon of mass destruction for depopulation purposes or to create automaton cyborg slaves. Everything described in science and reviewed in this article, is already happening. Please review this very visual review article that clearly outlines that the purpose of hydrogel is to fuse humans with machines. You can see from the tables below that these applications are already commercialized and in current use. Specifically Polyethylene Glycol, which is the lipid nanoparticle technology of the C19 bioweapon and is used as Hydrogel in medications like Insulin is a favorite inorganic hydrogel material to facilitate human-machine fusion.The last few decades have witnessed unprecedented convergence between humans and machines that closely operate around the human body. Despite these advances, traditional machines made of hard, dry and abiotic materials are substantially dissimilar to soft, wet and living biological tissues. This dissimilarity results in severe limitations for long-term, reliable and highly efficient interfacing between humans and machines. To bridge this gap, hydrogels have emerged as an ideal material candidate for interfacing between humans and machines owing to their mechanical and chemical similarities to biological tissues and the versatility and flexibility in designing their properties.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F4de0f385-9ae3-4500-aa40-e3828948a465_1042x822.png

In addition, taking advantage of their edible, food-like properties and tunable swelling and degradation properties, hydrogels have recently emerged as a promising carrier for ingestible sensors and devices capable of long-term retention and functions in the gastrointestinal tract.

Furthermore, hydrogels with designed mechanical properties and chemical compositions have been shown to substantially enhance the biocompatibility of implantable devices by providing highly lubricious surfaces, reducing biofouling and alleviating foreign-body responses. This enhanced biocompatibility paves the way for various implantable devices to form long-term reliable and functional interfaces with the human body. Despite the great promise and recent advances in hydrogel interfaces, to the best of our knowledge, there is no systematic discussion on hydrogel interfaces for the merging of humans and machines. The literature on hydrogels as scaffolds for tissue engineering carriers for drug delivery and emerging materials for soft machines has been extensively reviewed, but existing reviews usually do not account for the applications of hydrogels as bridging interfaces between humans and machines nor do they provide the requirements or principles for the design of hydrogel interfaces.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe980c611-4929-476d-82f5-b870689d053c_872x703.png

Because hydrogels provide robust, biocompatible and tissue-matching adhesive interfaces, a broad range of hydrogels based on synthetic polymers(such as polyethylene glycol) and biopolymers (such as fibrin or gelatin) have been adopted in implantable tissue adhesives for tissue repair and integrated in devices both in academic studies and in clinically approved products.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F28e48731-c94e-4cea-9c5e-06b58ee88d3c_968x712.png

Hydrogel interfaces have been introduced as adjunct or alternatives to metallic electrodes to provide improved biocompatibility due to their tissue-matching Young’s modulus and lower bending stiffness as well as improved electrical properties resulting from their lower impedance and higher charge injection capacity. Optical interfacing has also been utilized in implantable applications for photomedicine in photothermal therapy, photodynamic therapy and photobiomodulation as well as for the modulation of neural activities in optogenetics where optical communication with the target tissue commonly relies on implanted waveguides.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F31e33f1a-03c8-43e5-95c7-421fe711a8dc_792x710.png

Machines can communicate and interact with electrically active tissues and organs in the human body, such as the brain, nerves, muscles and heart, through hydrogel interfaces functioning in the electrical mode . The electrical mode of hydrogel interfaces can be used in two types of applications based on the direction of electrical communication: from the human body to hydrogel interfaces for electrophysiological recording, and from hydrogel interfaces to the human body for electrophysiological stimulation.

Here all the different ways hydrogels can be controlled via electricity, chemistry, light and other modalities.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F3739a70e-86fa-4be7-9388-19644a391c07_718x920.png

Here the mode of fusing human with machine is explained:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff20feeb4-b12e-462b-92b4-34f3c95fc7ee_580x431.png

Here electrical conductivity is discussed via carbon nanotubes ( aka Graphene Oxide). Tunable means also externally controllable via frequency and can be another word for self learning and self growing as it is known that hydrogels in artificial brain constructions can be programmed with the resonant frequencies of human brain tissue, creating a humanoid robot with consciousness.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fafcd30b8-2fda-4cbf-9552-19f2007b0f22_892x823.png

Summary:

We live in a very advanced stage of the transhumanist agenda, in which the fusion of humans and machines is happening worldwide. For the non believers and sceptics, it is important to review the mainstream scientific literature and show what is already evident in human blood - and is described in the Presidential Nanotechnology Budget, Army Cyborg Soldier 2050 documents and more."

onawah

13th October 2023, 05:34

Nanobots creating transhumanist agenda spread via chemtrails

Pharmakeia War with Dr. Ana Mihalcea, Dr. Joseph Sansone | Unrestricted Truths AMP News
ANA MARIA MIHALCEA, MD, PHD
OCT 12 2023
https://americanmediaperiscope.com/ut-ep-448/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

(Video and podcast at the link. Dr. Mihalcea affirms what has seemed to be the best explanation, that the nanobots are being spread via chemtrails, since they are showing up in the unvaxxed and wild animals as well as the vaxxed. With more live microscopy videos. The discussion includes frank admission that there is a depopulation/transhumanist agenda afoot. )

"This was a great discussion. Please watch Dr. Sansone’s testimony before the county commissioners… he is one great soldier of freedom. I explain the contamination of wildlife and how bidirectional telemetry microrobots modify humans via optogenetics."

(Much more info in the post above.)

onawah

13th October 2023, 07:53

There are settings for such things as "heavy metal detox", and "DNA heal" on Spooky 2 devices, so that may be another solution to getting rid of what we are being infected with, though it seems like it will be an ongoing process and not one easily solved, at least for now.
There are 2 threads about Spooky 2 devices:
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?117958-Spooky-2-Rife-Machine-Affordable-Self-Healing-Detox&highlight=spooky+2
and one for members only:https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?116329-Spooky-2-Affordable-Rife-Technology-Device&highlight=spooky+2

Carlitos

16th November 2023, 11:50

A twitter post by KimDotcom of a speech by Laura Aboli - Transhumanism: The End Game

https://twitter.com/KimDotcom/status/1725089998742122808

onawah

5th December 2023, 00:55

Is Nano Domestic Quell Government Project Still Going On? How Long Have Our Bodies Been Loaded With Nano Particles In Food, Drinks And Water Supply? Are We Now Part Of The World Wide Sensor Network?
ANA MARIA MIHALCEA, MD, PHD
DEC 4, 2023
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/is-nano-domestic-quell-government?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=956088&post_id=139439786&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=p7227&utm_medium=email

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F629418d4-e10e-4741-85d3-8931785ed391_525x501.png

"Nano Domestic Quell

In 2013, a government whistleblower came forward with documents about the Project Nano Domestic Quell, which was the distribution and infection of the entire population with nanotechnology. Edward Snowden, NSA whistleblower had confirmed the information provided by Dr Well. The whistleblower was threatened and later retracted the information. The documents show a 87.2% infection rate of the general population with nanotechnology via liquids, for example Cocoa Cola, Pepsi and the municipal water supply. The whistleblower had stated that the nanotechnology was to lay dormant in human bodies but could be activated via drones and frequency to exhibit flu like illness and kill people in 10 days.

Of course that was just labelled as conspiracy. But was it?

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fa33ea16e-c91c-4fad-9df2-f4daff1adf21_527x510.png

HP was also involved in deploying nanosensors into the environment for information gathering via a highly intelligent networks of billions of nanoscale sensors designed to feel, taste, smell see and hear what is going on in the world - in other words, total surveillance.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F93f23dce-f8c5-47bf-b347-c548c3532554_638x700.png

An article about Morgellons was also included in the above link. The conclusions are interesting in light of total surveillance control grid via nanotechnology.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fe4bd91c6-bed9-4551-8867-9fe256965160_592x693.png

The interesting question is if this project has continued all along. Below Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola were found to be loaded with nanoparticles - the fluorescence means they are a bionanosensor:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fb284c52c-f30d-4712-914f-6e16e3ce0af8_810x764.png

Nanoparticles have been found in drinking water:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fd16379ac-9f68-4c8a-8124-7e867b5f58b5_802x471.png

Natural nanoparticles (NNPs) in rivers, lakes, oceans and ground water predate humans, but engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) are emerging as potential pollutants due to increasing regulatory and public perception concerns. This Review contrasts the sources, composition and potential occurrence of NNPs (for example, two-dimensional clays, multifunctional viruses and metal oxides) and ENPs in surface water, after centralized drinking water treatment, and in tap water. While analytical detection challenges exist, ENPs are currently orders of magnitude less common than NNPs in waters that flow into drinking water treatment plants. Because such plants are designed to remove small-sized NNPs, they are also very good at removing ENPs. Consequently, ENP concentrations in tap water are extremely low and pose low risk during ingestion. However, after leaving drinking water treatment plants, corrosion by-products released from distribution pipes or in-home premise plumbing can release incidental nanoparticles into tap water. The occurrence and toxicity of incidental nanoparticles, rather than ENPs, should therefore be the focus of future research.

They are also in the food supply, and have been for decades:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Fa6519a76-ed98-4127-bce1-9a5dc693d453_1225x285.png

Published 2012 click on image box for link to article

Brita Belli takes a deep dive into the growing role of nanotechnology in food and agriculture, the current lack of oversight and regulations, and the growing consensus that more information and transparency are both sorely needed in relation to this growing field.

Nanotechnology involves the engineering and manipulation of particles at a nano scale. Nanoparticles, as they’re called, are measured in nanometers or billionths of one meter. Another way to put it: If a nanoparticle were the size of a football, a red blood cell would be the size of the field. Although some nanoparticles have been found to exist in nature (carbon nanoparticles exist in caramelized foods, for instance, and silverware has been shown to shed nano-sized silver particles), it’s the nanoparticles that are engineered in laboratories that have environmental health advocates concerned.

In actuality, companies are not required to disclose nano-sized ingredients, nor is there much active questioning about their safety. Instead, Belli writes, “From the government’s perspective, nano forms of silver, iron or titanium are no different, fundamentally, from their scaled-up counterparts which have already been safety tested, so the agency has ushered the particles into the food supply under the Generally Recognized as Safe provision.”

I’ve been hearing about nanoparticles in food packaging for a while now (it’s a market Belli says is expected to reach $20 billion by 2020), but I had no idea that there was nano-coating in the works for bananas. And what I was most surprised to learn is just how many food products already contain nanoparticles. As Belli writes:

Nanoparticles can be used to purify water, as anticaking and gelatin-forming agents and in packaging to protect against UV light, prevent the growth of microbes or detect contamination. Titanium dioxide is added to a huge swath of products in nano form including paints, paper and plastics but also lends white pigment to most toothpastes and many processed foods, including Mentos, Trident and Dentyne gum, M&Ms, Betty Crocker Whipped Cream Frosting, Jello Banana Cream Pudding, Vanilla Milkshake Pop Tarts and Nestlé Original Coffee Creamer. The aforementioned products were featured in a report in February 2012 in the journal Environmental Science & Technology which concluded that each of us likely consumes some amount of titanium dioxide (TiO2) nanoparticles each day, and children under 10 likely consume the greatest amounts (around 1-2 mg TiO2 per kilogram body weight per day) due to their higher intake of frosted foods, candy, gum and other sweets.

Although there is less science focused on ingested nanotech particles than on, say, the ones that are inhaled in industrial environments, Belli does point to the few studies that exist, including a recent one out of Cornell University that looked at chickens’ abilities to absorb iron after eating nanoparticles generally considered safe for human consumption. In it, researchers found that acute exposure to the particles changed the structure of the lining of the chickens’ intestinal walls, a change the lead scientist noted “serves to underscore how such particles, which have been widely studied and considered safe, cause barely detectable changes that could lead to, for example, over-absorption of other, harmful compounds.”

When it comes to questions about the health effects of eating nanoparticles, Belli quotes a guide on the American Society of Safety Engineers’ website, which reads:

Nanoparticles may be ingested through drinking water, food additives, atmospheric dust on food, toothpaste and dental fillings and implants. Ingested nanoparticles can then be absorbed through ‘Peyer’s Plaques’ or small nodules in intestinal tissue that are part of the immune defense system. If nanoparticles enter the digestive system and proceed into the bloodstream, they could move throughout the body and cause damage.

Of course, most of this — and much of the science Belli points to — is preliminary, based on very little hard science. And if that lack of a cautionary approach to science in a multibillion-dollar industry sounds familiar, that’s because — well, it is. The comparison to genetically modified foods is unavoidable.

In fact, Timothy Duncan, a research chemist from the Food and Drug Administration, admitted as much about the nanotech industry (which likely has thousands of food and food packaging products in the research and development stage) while writing in the journal Nature Nanotechnology last year. “What’s holding back the introduction of nanofoods is the hesitation of the food industry, fearing a public backlash along the lines of what happened with genetically modified foods, and public fears in some countries about tampering with nature,” Duncan wrote.

And considering how little media coverage these larger questions about nanotechnology and food have received — not to mention inclusion on the larger “food movement” laundry list — it looks like the lesson the food industry has learned from GMOs is not one about the importance of transparency, but quite the opposite.

As Tom Philpott observed in Grist in 2010, the last time big questions surfaced about nanotech in food in the media: “As with GMOs, the strategy seems to be: release into the food supply en masse first; assess risks later (if ever).”

Titanium Oxide in foods.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F32317796-187c-4194-86e7-5b0bfed65577_1611x862.png

Here is another article from 2011:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F2e4fbb21-1e43-46d4-8e4e-c233b0078c69_820x677.png

Summary:

We have been consuming Nanotechnology for a long time. The gradual saturation of human tissues with nanoparticles involved in biosensing operations also bring into question the weaponization of these same particles with a dormant payload - that could start pandemics simply by frequency activation via drones.

We are definitely part of the Central Surveillance Nervous System, they were building a long time ago:

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_1456,c_limit,f_webp,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F216bdd96-2922-43f1-872b-3886e98411e0_1125x201.png

HP Labs has joined the race to build an infrastructure for the emerging Internet of Things. The giant computing and IT services company has announced a project that aims to be a “Central Nervous System for the Earth” (CeNSE). It’s a research and development program to build a planetwide sensing network, using billions of “tiny, cheap, tough and exquisitely sensitive detectors.”

The technology behind this is based on nano-sensing research done by HP Labs. The sensors are similar to RFID chips, but in this case they are tiny accelerometers which detect motion and vibrations.

The first CeNSE sensor to be put into the field by HP Labs is, according to the company, “about 1,000 times more sensitive than accelerometers used in a Wii, an iPhone or an automobile’s airbag system.” Other sensors planned in future include ones for light, temperature, barometric pressure, airflow and humidity.

Use Cases
Peter Hartwell, senior researcher and project team lead, listed some example use cases for these sensing nodes. The nodes could be “stuck to bridges and buildings to warn of structural strains or weather conditions [and] they might be scattered along roadsides to monitor traffic, weather and road conditions.” A bridge like the San Francisco Golden Gate might take 10,000 nodes, said Hartwell.

Other uses include embedding the CeNSE nodes in everyday electronics, tracking hospital equipment, sniffing out pesticides and pathogens in food. Ultimately they may even “recognize” the person using them and adapt.

According to HP Labs, CeNSE sensors will enable real-time data collection, analysis and better decision making.

Potential Issues
This is an ambitious project by HP Labs and there are other large IT companies, such as IBM, building out similar platforms for sensor data and services.

HP senior fellow Stan Williams noted that for CeNSE to work, “we have to make sensors that are vastly more sensitive than anything else that have ever existed before, while being absolutely dirt cheap so that we can deploy them in very large numbers.”

RFID technology has had numerous cost and technology issues over the past decade, so HP Labs will surely run into similar real-world obstacles in this project. HP Labs admits that existing sensitive detectors are expensive; but it hopes to make them much cheaper.

The Race to Build a Worldwide Sensor Network
HP Labs’ ultimate aim is to have a worldwide network of these CeNSE sensors. A trillion of them “should do the trick,” says HP. The company is hoping that at that scale, sensor nodes will cost “next to nothing, yet measure everything.” HP is also positioning this, boldly, as a technology that could “save the planet” by enabling it to be monitored.

These are big claims and the proof will be in the pudding. The questions that remain unanswered though are: how long will it take, and which company (or companies) will gain the biggest footholds in this network?

Humanity United Now - Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD is a reader-supported publication. "