Posted on

DATA SHOWS THAT CV VAXX SHOULD BE HALTED IMMEDIATELY

DATA SHOWS THAT CV VAXX SHOULD BE HALTED IMMEDIATELY

 


 

August 10, 2022 | By Steve Kirsch | Substack

You are 25X more likely to be injured and 20X more likely to die if you get the COVID shot

When you combine this result with negative vaccine efficacy, the COVID shots are completely nonsensical. Nobody should take them. We couldn’t find a single supportive anecdote!

Executive summary

I recently learned about conservative radio show host Wayne Root’s stunning anecdotal evidence about the 200 people who attended his wedding. He tracked what happened just 8 months after the wedding: 26 were injured and 7 died in the vaccinated group but nothing happened to people in the unvaccinated group, even though Wayne estimated that most of the guests were unvaccinated.

I loved the setup: it’s an almost “as good as it gets real-life randomized trial.”

A single anecdote isn’t compelling. What is compelling is that others are observing the same huge event rates. Wayne is hardly an outlier. And the fact we can’t seem to find any stories equally extreme on the opposite side has got to be very troubling for those supporting the “safe and effective” narrative.

This is the type of post-marketing research the CDC should be doing: they should follow matched (or randomly selected) groups of vaxxed and unvaxxed people over time to document injuries and deaths just like Wayne did. If Wayne can do this, why can’t the CDC? The signal is huge.

Since none of Wayne’s friends died pre-vaccine (Wayne is 61), this suggests that hypotheses such as this one are consistent with what Wayne observed:

In the year after you are vaccinated with the COVID “vaccines”

  • you are 25X more likely to be injured and 20X more likely to die
  • expect at least a 7% rate of serious injury and a 2% chance of death

would be consistent with Wayne’s observations.

I validated that Wayne’s numbers weren’t just a fluke with surveys of my reader base. Over 600 readers responded and the numbers were very similar: 21 injuries and 5 deaths per 100 vaccinated, which is very close to the numbers reported by Wayne (assuming he had an even mix of vaxxed/unvaxxed guests).

An article on The Expose just claimed that 1 in every 246 Vaccinated People has died within 60 days of Covid-19 Vaccination in England according to the UK Governmentwhich is a factor of 5 lower than my hypothesis, but that’s just limited to the first 60 days after a single dose.

And then I went even further looking for anecdotal evidence that Wayne was wrong. I asked my 50,000 followers on Gab for opposite anecdotes. None of the 372 people had an anecdote supporting use of the vaccine. Stunning.

Just comparing the number of anecdotes on each side of the narrative makes it very clear that the vaccines are making things worse.

When you combine this with the evidence of negative vaccine efficacy (VE), such as this article on San Diego by my good friend Mathew Crawford, we are left with the inevitable conclusion that there isn’t any benefit at all in any dimension to support the use of the COVID “vaccines.”

I invite all fact checkers to:

  1. Verify my data. The survey data, including the full contact info for each of the 600 respondents, is available for any fact checker to verify.
  2. Do their own survey. Mine was done in full public view.
  3. Explain why nobody I asked knew of any positive anecdotes.

When you combine all of this with the fact that

The COVID vaccines kill people at a rate that is 1,000X times higher than the Smallpox vaccine (which is deemed too unsafe to use),

it is hard to come to any conclusion other than that the “vaccines” should be stopped immediately.

Introduction

After I wrote my article on Wayne Root’s wedding, it inspired me to see for myself if other people were having the same experience as Wayne.

Wayne told me he’s 61 and he can’t recall any of his friends dying on him in his entire life. Now, in just the last 8 months, of the 200 people at his wedding, he’s learned that 7 have died and 26 have had very serious injuries (heart attack, stroke, severe cancers, etc). All of these people were vaccinated! He has heard of no incidents from his unvaccinated friends in the same time period (which is consistent with his experience with his friends pre-vaccine).

Here’s the kicker: Wayne is a conservative and most of his friends (he estimates 70%) are unvaccinated. So for all 7 deaths to be from his vaccinated friends, that’s unexplainable.

So if Wayne is telling the truth (which I believe), it means that either:

  1. Wayne is a very unlucky guy or
  2. the CDC is lying to everyone about the safety of the COVID vaccine

I liked the fact that this was almost like a real life randomized trial. Wayne’s friends self-selected as to who got the vaccine. The vaccine takers presumably would be the healthier cohort since taking a vaccine is considered to be an attribute of healthy people. Thus, if anything, we’d have expected the vaccine group to do better due to the healthy patient bias. Instead, the opposite was observed.

There were two major potential problems with Wayne’s data, so I decided to try to independently validate it by asking my followers to fill out a simple poll which more systematically collects the data that Wayne did.

My poll just asked my readers to report what they observed since 2021, not to assess causality. In other words, it was just like Wayne did… he didn’t judge causality, he just noticed a differential in the injury and death reports of his friends.

The reason for using my followers instead of an outside polling agency is that my followers are much more likely to take the time to properly answer each question. Also, the biases should be minor as I point out below.

Here is the survey data I received.

The result was stunning: my readers reported 21 injuries and 5 deaths per 100 vaccinated, which is very close to the numbers reported by Wayne.

In addition, the people who were unvaccinated had a much lower rate of injury/death (25X for the injuries; 20X for the deaths).

Our survey numbers are consistent with Wayne’s numbers.

Here is the punchline from the poll

If you’ve been vaccinated, you are:

  • 25X more likely to be seriously injured compared to the COVID unvaxxed
  • 20X more likely to die compared to the COVID unvaxxed

This means that Wayne’s results were in fact, pretty much in line with expectations based on what I discovered in the poll.

Since Wayne is a conservative, he’s going to have fewer friends who are vaccinated than the national average (70%).

If Wayne had only 125 vaccinated friends and 75 unvaccinated friends, here are the actuals and my prediction using the survey data in parens:

Wayne Root’s actuals vs. my prediction based on stats from my users. My prediction is in (). It’s nearly an exact match which suggests that Wayne’s experience is actually not so unusual.

As you can see, the estimate (in parens) is quite close to what was observed suggesting we are close to the target in the survey of my followers.

The details

Here’s the data I used. That link doesn’t disclose name and contact info (for privacy reasons), but the contact info is available for any “fact checker” who wants to verify each record. The comments are most enlightening as well.

At the time I did the calculation, there were 631 records submitted that passed basic sanity checks, all from different people.

vaxxed: 4910, 1039, 235 (total, injured, dead)
unvaxxed: 3475, 29, 8 (total, injured, dead)

Vaxxed
1039/4910 = 21.1% injured
235/4910 = 4.7% dead
Unvaxxed
29/3475 = 0.83% injured
8/3475 = 0.23% dead

Implications (from 2021 to present). If you are vaccinated, you are:
21.1/.83 = 25 X more likely to be injured
4.7/.23 = 20 X more likely to be killed

Note: the people taking the survey did not make any judgments at all as to causality. They just entered numbers observed for each category. You can see from the comments that they were appalled by what they observed.

So we have quite a stunning result that is easy to remember: you are >20X more likely to be injured or die if you’ve been vaccinated.

Adjusting the numbers based on the bias of my followers

Now we need to possibly adjust the numbers because my followers do not represent a random cross section of America.

Let’s look at the makeup of my followers:

So this just results in a higher % of unvaccinated responses in the survey since I’m basically asking unvaccinated people. If I was doing a survey on % vaccinated in America, surveying my followers would be a very bad idea! But for this topic, where we are looking at the injury rate of vaxxed compared to unvaxed, having mostly all unvaccinated responders doesn’t skew the results at all; it simply means I have more unvaxed data points in my ratio (and even with the skew, there are still more total vaxxed data points).

Also, my followers will have higher awareness of injury and death around them than the typical blue pilled person, so the numbers will likely be closer to the truth. They aren’t going to make up injuries that are not present but they are less likely to miss injuries that ARE present.

Finally, we are looking at the damage ratios of the vaxxed vs. unvaxxed so again, this is invariant of the mix of the responders (vaxxed vs. unvaxxed).

Because I have ~2% vaccine injured, that’s lower than surveys show for neutral audiences so if we applied a correction, we’d have to make the vaccine numbers worse!

I likely have a smarter and healthier group of readers than normal, so that might skew the numbers somewhat. If my readers are much less likely to die than average, then that could explain the much larger effect of the vaccine on them.

The biggest bias is respondent bias. Unlike a survey company, I didn’t pick the respondents. I asked my readers to complete the poll. You are much more likely to fill out the poll if you have a compelling story to tell. This is why my numbers are much higher than normal.

So we have an upper bound. For that reason, it is unlikely that the actual numbers are worse than this:

Vaxxed
1039/4910 = 21.1% injured
235/4910 = 4.7% dead

But here’s the really interesting point. If Wayne had 125 vaccinated guests out of 200, then the figures we got match his observations.

So while these numbers seem very high, they do match Wayne’s numbers.

Note that we didn’t track the age of our readers or the people they reported. That would be a much tougher survey to complete.

There is also likely to be some bias in that people who have seen damages may be more likely to fill out the survey than people who haven’t seen any damages at all. So if anything our survey might overstate the percentages.

However, the fact that our numbers are pretty close to what Wayne observed suggests we are over the target.

Data inconsistency

These numbers aren’t consistent with other numbers. Which one is right? We don’t have enough trustable information to answer that question right now.

Tracking numbers outside the family unit

This “problem” is happening to pretty everyone who is aware of what is going on around them.

Read this post by Anita Jader. She’s exceptional because she’s been very methodical about tracking what’s happening around her.

Have you ever seen a post like this in your life? I have not. That alone should tell you that something is very wrong. She lists 18 unusual events happening to people she’s in touch with and then asks, “How much more do you need before you’ll see an association?”

If the vaccine is safe and effective, the anecdotes are hard to explain. The lack of anecdotes on the pro-vaccine side again suggests we are over the target.

Reliable entries

When people take a lot of time to fill out the form (with comments) and have a compelling anecdote (in this case a tight knit community), this provides some of the most dramatic data points.

Here’s an example:

I live in a fishing village in Ecuador of about 3000. I estimate I know about 100 in the town by name and face. 90% of the men make their living fishing with nets. After the vaxes started my fishermen friends told me that many cannot do the work anymore. I know 6 that died right after their shot. First a 76 year old who did work everyday, the father of a friend, died the same day he got the shot. 2 of his neighbors were very sick and close to death also. They did not die but have never recovered. Others are aged 18, 23, 35, 2 in their 60’s and one 65. There are a good number of expats living here, mostly jabbed. The week of the first boosters, 3rd shots, 5 heart attacks and one death of a heart attack.

He knows 100 people.

Among the 80 vaccinated:

  • 25% rate of vax injury
  • 7.5% rate of vax death (even more compelling due to the temporal proximity of the shot)

Among the 20 unvaccinated:

  • 0% injury
  • 0% death

But the # unvaxxed is small so anything under 5% will look like 0.

Still you can see the differential here on the injury rate of the vaxxed vs. unvaxxed in this one anecdote… it’s substantial.

Here’s the kicker:

The numbers from this fishing village in Ecuador are nearly identical to Wayne Root’s numbers!

Isn’t that interesting?

I didn’t cherry pick this from the responses because it matched Wayne’s data. I cherry picked it because it was a large tight knit village case where people know each other.

Negative vaccine efficacy

The numbers we’ve been discussing above are for all-cause injury and mortality. They are definitive and all you need.

Still it is useful to compare with the efficacy of the vaccine in counteracting that.

What we find is the vaccine also has a negative effect for COVID as well.

Mathew Crawford again demonstrated that the vaccines cause you to be more likely to be infected, hospitalized, and die from COVID.

Negative VE means the shots make you more likely to be infected, hospitalized, and die:

Vaccine efficacy turns negative after you get your first booster. In this case, if you’ve been boosted, you are 12% more likely to die if you get COVID.

For fact checkers

The full dataset is available to any fact checker who is willing to verify the entries, signs an NDA to keep the names and contacts private, and who guarantees to publish the result, even if it is counter-narrative. After all, it’s important for America to know the truth, isn’t it? That’s what the fact checkers are supposed to do!

Summary

The all-cause morbidity and mortality data that anyone can collect (just like I did) is consistent with other evidence and shows that COVID vaccine program should be stopped immediately.

This is also obvious when looking for negative anecdotes vs. positive anecdotes. I couldn’t find a single positive anecdote. None of the 876 anecdotes from my readers individually supported use of the vaccine and in aggregate, there was no comparison. See for yourself and read the comments as well.

 

Link To Source Here

 


 

Posted on

Dr Merritt on V@ccines, Gene Editing, Depopulation & Rockefellers

Image Source

Gene Drive & The Great DNA War: Dr Merritt on V@ccines, Gene Editing, Depopulation & Rockefellers

August 6, 2022 | http://TheMedicalRebel.com

“This is clearly a depopulation thing, by whom? That’s where you get to the real evil here.”

 

Link To Video

Link To Full Interview

 


 

The Truth About Bill Gates

Link

 

 


 

1974: UN WHO Action to Create Conditions for Fertility Decline

 

 

Posted on

Solar geoengineering by injecting aluminum oxide aerosol into the lower stratosphere is a serious threat to global mental health

Solar geoengineering by injecting aluminum oxide aerosol into the lower stratosphere is a serious threat to global mental health

 

May 30, 2022 | Author: Giovanni Ghirga, Pediatrician |International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE, Italy) – Presented at National Congress of ISDE Italy, San Sepolcro, AR, Italy. | thebmj  | Intended for healthcare professionals  | https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o1150/rr-1  |

 

Solar geoengineering by injecting aluminum oxide aerosol into the lower stratosphere is a serious threat to global mental health

Dear Editor

A possible geoengineering method to mitigate the global warming aspect of climate change is the injection of aerosols into the lower stratosphere, closely mimicking the way large volcanic eruptions cool the climate. This method is called solar-radiation management (SRM) scheme or simply Solar Geoengineering (1). SRM has been suggested to be affordable and have high effectiveness compared with other geoengineering schemes that have been suggested to mitigate global warming (1). While sulphate aerosols are the most studied, it has been recently shown that aerosols with other compositions, aluminium oxide (alumina) and diamond, could be used to dramatically increase the amount of light scatter achieved on a per mass basis. Alumina particles formed after the alumina aerosol injection are more efficient scatterers and may have less severe technology-specific risks than sulfates. Thus, they are expected to be more efficient per unit mass for geoengineering applications (2).

Nevertheless, it has also been suggested that SRM has a low associated safety compared with other geoengineering schemes because of its possible effects on regional climate, stratospheric ozone, high-altitude tropospheric clouds, biological productivity (3), and global biodiversity (4). We want to add a possible severe effect on Global Mental Health that could be caused by using alumina as light scattering.

The average residence time of a particle in the lower stratosphere is approximately 1-2 years (1,3). After eventual transport into the troposphere, alumina particles undergo relatively rapid mixing processes by weather events, turbulence, and cloudscale overturning. They are mostly removed from the atmosphere by dry deposition, sedimentation, or scavenging by clouds, finally polluting the environment (1).

Aluminium has often been regarded as not posing a significant health hazard if the human body burden of aluminium has increased. Nevertheless, epidemiological studies suggest that aluminium may not be as innocuous as was previously thought and that aluminium may actively promote the onset and progression of Alzheimer’s disease. This condition is the most common form of dementia and may contribute to 60 –70 % of cases. In 2015, dementia affected 47 million people worldwide (or roughly 5% of the world’s elderly population), a figure predicted to increase to 75 million in 2030 and 132 million by 2050. Recent reviews estimate that each year nearly 9.9 million people develop dementia globally; this figure translates into one new case every three seconds (5). Even prolonged exposure to low levels of aluminium leads to changes associated with brain ageing and neurodegeneration (6).

Furthermore, aluminium has been included among 200 neurotoxic chemicals that silently erode intelligence, disrupt behaviours, truncate future achievements, and damage societies, perhaps most seriously in developing countries. The latter is called the “Silent Pandemic of Neurodevelopmental Toxicity in Children” (7,8). Recently, the aluminium content of brain tissue in autism spectrum disorder was found to be consistently high (9), and the prevalence of autism spectrum disorder is increasing, last CDC estimated prevalence is 1 in 44 children (10).

Worldwide land precipitation of aluminium following aerosol spraying into the lower stratosphere would increase human body exposure and seriously threaten Global Mental Health.

 

Bibliography

1) Shepherd, J. Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty (The Royal Society, 2009). Albedo Modification Strategies. Climate Intervention by Stratospheric Aerosol Albedo Modification (SAAM), pag. 66.
2) D. K. Weisenstein, D. W. Keith, and J. A. Dykema. Solar geoengineering using solid aerosol in the stratosphere. Atmos. Chem. Phys., 15, 11835–11859, 2015.
3) F. D. Pope, P. Braesicke, R. G. Grainger, M. Kalberer, I. M. Watson, P. J. Davidson and R. A. Cox Stratospheric aerosol particles and solar-radiation management. Nature Climate Change. 2012;2(10):713-719.
4) Trisos HC, Amatulli G, Gurevitch J, Robock A, Xia L and Zambri B. Potentially dangerous consequences for biodiversity of solar geoengineering implementation and termination. Nature Ecology & Evolution volume 2, pages475–482 (2018).
5) World Health Organization. Global action plan on the public health response to dementia. 2017-2025.
6) Bondy SC. Prolonged exposure to low levels of aluminium leads to changes associated with brain ageing and neurodegeneration. Toxicology 315 (2014) 1-7.
7) Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ. Developmental neurotoxicity of industrial chemicals. Lancet. 2006 Dec 16;368(9553):2167-78.
8) Grandjean P, Landrigan PJ. Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity. The Lancet Neurology, Volume 13, Issue 3, Pages 330 – 338, March 2014.
9) Mold M, et al. aluminium in brain tissue in autism. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2018.
10) CDC. National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network. 31 March 2022. Accessed 8 April 2022.

Competing interests: No competing interests

 

Link To Source Here

 


 

Posted on

Researchers Engineer Graphene To Detect CV-19

Researchers Engineer Graphene To Detect CV-19

Researchers and patents describe graphene oxide as a component of the CV-19 injections. Beyond the Internet of Nanothings (IoNT) this system comprises a technocratic prison called the Internet of Bodies (IoB).   -JD

 


June 16, 2021 | By Jacqueline Carey | University of Illinois at Chicago | Phys.org  |  https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.1c02549

Researchers at the University of Illinois Chicago have successfully used graphene—one of the strongest, thinnest known materials—to detect the SARS-CoV-2 virus in laboratory experiments. The researchers say the discovery could be a breakthrough in coronavirus detection, with potential applications in the fight against COVID-19 and its variants.

In experiments, researchers combined sheets of graphene, which are more than 1,000 times thinner than a postage stamp, with an antibody designed to target the infamous spike protein on the coronavirus. They then measured the atomic-level vibrations of these graphene sheets when exposed to COVID-positive and COVID-negative samples in artificial saliva. These sheets were also tested in the presence of other coronaviruses, like Middle East respiratory syndrome, or MERS-CoV.

Their findings are published today in the journal ACS Nano.

“We have been developing graphene sensors for many years. In the past, we have built detectors for cancer cells and ALS. It is hard to imagine a more pressing application than to help stem the spread of the current pandemic,” said Vikas Berry, professor and head of chemical engineering at the UIC College of Engineering and senior author of the paper. “There is a clear need in society for better ways to quickly and accurately detect COVID and its variants, and this research has the potential to make a real difference. The modified sensor is highly sensitive and selective for COVID, and it is fast and inexpensive.”

“This project has been an amazingly novel response to the need and demand for detection of viruses, quickly and accurately,” said study co-author Garrett Lindemann, a researcher with Carbon Advanced Materials and Products, or CAMP. “The development of this technology as a clinical testing device has many advantages over the currently deployed and used tests.”

Berry says that graphene has unique properties that make it highly versatile, making this type of sensor possible.

Graphene is a single-atom-thick material made up of carbon. Carbon atoms are bound by whose elasticity and movement can produce resonant vibrations, also known as phonons, which can be very accurately measured. When a molecule like a SARS-CoV-2 molecule interacts with graphene, it changes these resonant vibrations in a very specific and quantifiable way.

“Graphene is just one atom thick, so a molecule on its surface is relatively enormous and can produce a specific change in its electronic energy,” Berry said. “In this experiment, we modified graphene with an antibody and, in essence, calibrated it to react only with the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. Using this method, graphene could similarly be used to detect COVID-19 variants.”

The researchers say the potential applications for a atomic-level sensor—from detecting COVID to ALS to cancer—continue to expand.

Link To Read Full Article Here

 


 

 

Graphene Oxide Toxicity

 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31549672/

 

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11426-012-4620-z

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/xcfp8arvikjgi21/2-%20GRAPHENE%20OXIDE%20TOXICITY%20REPORT.pdf?dl=0

 


 

 

Design of Wireless Nanosensor Networks for Intrabody Application

LINK

 


 

3D Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles for Cloud Seeding Patent US 2022/0002159 A1

LINK

 

 


 

 

 

 

Posted on

Transcript of Evidence / Vaxx Analysis By Prof. Dr. Antonietta Gatti – Nano-pathologist

Transcript of Evidence / Vaxx Analysis By Prof. Dr. Antonietta Gatti – Nano-pathologist

In case you missed Day 4 of the CoVid Grand Jury Trials, Dr. Antonietta Gatti’s testimony below provides verification of the chemical composition and contamination of 42 standard “vaccines”. She discusses the nanotechnological content of the mRNA products and concludes that the direct nano-bio-interaction of nano particles with DNA is very dangerous. Dr. Gatti states, “I don’t see the possibility for the body to counter-act against these stimuli.”

@ 2:32.32:

 

Link To_@ 2:32.32: Transcript of Evidence / Vaxx Analysis By Prof. Dr. Antonietta Gatti with images

 

 

 


 

Posted on

Former Google CEO Issues Warning: Negotiations Urgently Needed To Address AI Dangers

Image Source_Video

Former Google CEO Issues Warning: Negotiations Urgently Needed To Address  AI Dangers

Eric Schmidt discusses some of the major challenges of Artificial Intelligence( AI ), from the lack of understanding and naiveté about the potential impact of AI twenty years ago, to the need for governments and other institutions to put more pressure on tech now, to get the technology consistent with our values (as a free society).

Schmidt urges negotiations to solve national security issues surrounding AI and to prevent a conundrum resulting from lack of preparedness and diplomacy.

The participants in this forum are many of the same technocratic entities and organizations linked with the political ruling class, big tech, private corporations, the military-industrial- intelligence-pharmaceutical-complex, with the Rockefeller Foundation as a partner.

 

 

As usual, the American people have absolutely zero input, and no role whatsoever in the decisions being made by this elite group.  -JD

 


 

July 22, 2022 | Aspen Security Forum |

A New Frontier: National Security, Artificial Intelligence, and Misinformation

 

Eric Schmidt, Chairman, National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence

Brad Smith, President and Vice Chair, Microsoft

Senator Mark Warner, Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence

Moderator: Anja Manuel, Executive Director, Aspen Strategy Group and Aspen Security Forum

 

Link To_Full Discussion

 


 

Posted on

Insects As Flying Syringes For Genetic Modification, Eugenics And Population Control

 

July 28, 2022 | By TESSA LENA VIA MERCOLA.COM | Technocracy News | PDF

Insects As Flying Syringes For Genetic Modification, Eugenics And Population Control

My presentation for the Crimes Against Humanity Task Force documents and explains the history behind “the takeover of all genetic material on earth”. The manipulation of life on earth is an old dream but technology has now provided the means to accomplish it, and Technocrat/Transhuman scientists are working day and night to change the world’s DNA. My forthcoming book, The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism, will connect all the dots to this mad program. It being serialized on https://patrickwood.substack.com/

⁃ TN Editor


 

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

> Irresponsible use of new and very advanced technologies by the military is life-threatening

> Engineered viruses can be used to edit genes in a target species, including in a heritable manner

> “Insect Allies” is a DARPA program designed to genetically modify mature plants in a live environment by releasing insects infected with genetically modified viruses

> Some scientists, although on board with genetic modification in principle, are questioning DARPA’s motives and raising concerns

> Researchers in Singapore, as well as DARPA in the U.S. have developed “remote-controlled insects”

BREAKING NEWS: The craziest crazies have somehow escaped the asylum and installed themselves in high positions of power. Insane, they are coming up with one bad idea after another and barking orders at us, mad shine in their eyes and saliva coming out of their mouths. They are crazy — and in charge of institutions, schools, newspapers and armies.

They are running around with their high-tech pistols filled with high-tech poisons and their little sadistic CRISPR scissors. They are crazy — yes, they are crazy — and they are killing us slowly, and sometimes not so slowly. Welcome to the future where toxicity is health and the old crazy is the new normal. We are not crazy — they are crazy — and they have been from the beginning. And in 2020, they stopped pretending. What now?

Project “Insect Allies”

You may think that you have seen it all but here is a great idea. Take some insects, infect them with a genetically modified virus designed to genetically edit mature plants in real time, and release them. Release them into wild and repeat, “it’s safe and effective.”

Sweet idea, right? Well, DARPA thought so, and so in 2016, they started a project called “Insect Allies” that is designed to do that. (This is a different project from Oxitec’s controversial release of GM mosquitos.) DARPA’s official story is that in the name of national security, a good way to protect the American crops from potential threats is to genetically modify them using GM viruses as genetic modifiers and insects as flying syringes. And that they just need to test it!

In a 2016 release titled, “DARPA Enlists Insects to Protect Agricultural Food Supply,” the agency stated:

“A new DARPA program is poised to provide an alternative to traditional agricultural threat response, using targeted gene therapy to protect mature plants within a single growing season.

DARPA proposes to leverage a natural and very efficient two-step delivery system to transfer modified genes to plants: insect vectors and the plant viruses they transmit. In the process, DARPA aims to transform certain insect pests into ‘Insect Allies,’ the name of the new effort.”

“‘Insect Allies’ three technical areas — trait design, insect vector optimization, and selective gene therapy in mature plants — layer together to support the goal of rapidly transforming mature plants to protect against natural or intentional agricultural disruption without the need for extensive infrastructure. The foundational knowledge and generalizable tools developed under the program could also support future agricultural innovation.”

Some suspicious peasants may foolishly wonder: What will happen in the short term and in the long term to the people who eat those plants, to the people and animals possibly bitten by those insects, to the wild insects who mate with the infected insects, and to all other life in the area and beyond that may get impacted? What ridiculous nonsense. Here is the answer, peasant: No one knows — and importantly, no one cares. Any more questions?

The first Insect Allies funded paper, titled, “Multiplexed heritable gene editing using RNA viruses and mobile single guide RNAs,” was published in 2020. Please note the word “heritable” in the headline. The paper stated:

“Mutant progeny are recovered in the next generation at frequencies ranging from 65 to 100%; up to 30% of progeny derived from plants infected with a virus expressing three sgRNAs have mutations in all three targeted loci.”

DARPA never disclosed if they tested this program outside of greenhouses.

Objections From the Scientific Community and Even the Pre-2020 Media

Actually, it turned out that a few scientists care — and at least during the pre-COVID era, they have objected.

Here is a short 2019 educational animation made by the German Max Planck Society (formerly the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History). Their main objection is the potential weaponization of the technology, they don’t mind the gene editing in principle.

But our standards for health and dignity are so low that this objection is better than no objection, and even this limited kind of objection and questioning DARPA takes some courage (even though it’s unknown if they would have objected in 2020).

 

And here is what Vice (!!) had to say in 2018 about the outcry from scientists:

“In the editorial, published on Thursday in Science Magazine, scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology and the University of Freiburg in Germany, and France’s Université de Montpellier, requested more transparency and opportunities for public discussion regarding the project and its implications.

‘Easy simplifications could be used to generate a new class of biological weapons,’ a press release reads, ‘weapons that would be extremely transmissible to susceptible crop species due to insect dispersion as the means of delivery.’”

What did DARPA say?

“In an email to Motherboard, a DARPA spokesperson rebutted the thesis of the Science Magazine piece and denied any intent to deploy technology developed through Insect Allies in an offensive setting.

‘We created Insect Allies specifically to develop technology that can deliver positive, protective traits to plants to help them survive unanticipated and/or fast-moving agricultural threats,’ the spokesperson wrote. ‘We see it as a critical addition to the national security toolkit, part of a layered strategy to preserve the security of the food supply.’”

“The Insect Allies program is a collaboration between the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Environmental Protection Agency, US Army, and other agencies. According to a DARPA slide presentation, the goal of Insect Allies is to “stably transform multiple mature crop plants in a complex, multi-species plant and insect community with enhanced trait(s) of agricultural interest” by mid-2021.”

Newsweek covered it, too. In a 2018 article, they said that “the U.S. government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has been accused of trying to create a new class of biological weapons that would be delivered via virus-infected insects.”

“Scientists with DARPA are looking at introducing genetically modified viruses that can edit chromosomes directly in fields — these are known as horizontal environmental genetic alteration agents (HEGAAs). The DARPA program is using the principles of HEGAAs but, unlike traditional methods of dispersal — like spraying fields with them — it wants to spread them through insects.”

The researchers raising the alarm asked specifically why, for agricultural use, it was so important to use insects as gene modification vectors, given that spraying was available. In response to Newsweek at the time, DARPA denied all allegations of military use and reiterated that the project’s aim was to protect American crops. In 2022, another paper was published where researchers expressed their concerns:

“The hazard and exposure potential of an HEGAA approach can vary greatly depending on the viruses, vector insects, target plant species, and genetic modifications selected and their effects. However, at the current stage of development, the most critical aspect is the compromised reliability of the HEGAA approach, owing mainly to its complex design with three different species …

They are a cause for concern because of the numerous effects that can increase the potential for hazard and exposure. Combined with the current inadequacy of corrective measures, it is clear that there is an urgent need for early analysis of whether HEGAA approaches can be inherently contained and controlled by their specific technology design.”

“Horizontal Environmental Genetic Alteration Agents”

What are HEGAAs? According to Wikipedia, the term “genetic alteration agent” first appears in 2016 in relation to this project, in a “work plan by DARPA describing a tender for contracts to develop genetically modified plant viruses for an approach involving their dispersion into the environment. The prefixing of ‘horizontal environmental’ to the former to generate the acronym HEGAA was first used in the [aforementioned] 2018 scientific publication.”

“Agents such as pathogens, symbionts or synthetic protein assemblages that can be acquired through horizontal transmission in the environment can potentially be engineered to become HEGAAs. This would be achieved using biotechnology methods to confer to them the capacity to alter nucleotides in the chromosomes of infected individuals through sequence-specific editing systems like CRISPR, ZFNs or TALENs.

No known infectious agent naturally has the capacity to gene edit eukaryotes in a manner that can be flexibly targeted to specific sequences (distinct from substantially random natural processes like retroviral integration).”

By definition, HEGAA induced gene editing events are intended to occur outside of contained facilities such as laboratories or hospitals.

While genetically modified viruses with CRISPR editing have been successfully used as research tools in laboratories or for gene therapy in clinical settings, all gene editing events are intended to physically occur within contained facilities. By contrast, HEGAAs for their intended mode of action relies on inducing gene editing events that occur largely or exclusively in the environment.”

There are two types of HEGAAs: somatic and germline. Somatic HEGAAs are not inheritable, while germline ones “impact somatic cells and also cell lineages from which germline cells can be ultimately generated (e.g. sperm, oocytes, pollen, ovules, zygotes or seeds).”

When it comes to the “Insect Allies” project, it’s a gray area. The original assumption was that “Insect Allies” involved somatic HEGAAs but the aforementioned 2020 paper shows that the genetic changes in plants were heritable. Here is more detail:

  • HEGAAs are viruses which have been genetically modified to gain a capacity to edit the chromosomes of a target species (e.g. plant or animal) when intentionally released into the environment
  • The word “horizontal” comes from their ability to be transmitted in the environment by infection
  • The word “environmental” comes from the intention for these genetically modified viruses to be dispersed into the environment
  • The words “genetic alteration agents” comes from the capacity to alter the chromosomes of a target species. This might be through causing a random mutation or introducing a new DNA sequence
  • The specificity of HEGAAs is dependent on two things (1) the range of species the genetically modified virus can infect AND (2) the presence of the suitable DNA sequences in the plant chromosomes of cells that become infected
  • An example of an insect dispersed viral HEGAA which disrupts a specific plant gene is illustrated in this figure below

insect dispersed hegaa

Image source: web.evolbio.mpg.de/HEGAAs/available-illustrations.html

 

All in all, this informational Max Planck Society affiliated website, whose purpose is “to contribute towards fostering an informed and public debate about this type of technology,” is one of the best sources of information on HEGAAs and the “Insect Allies” project. Incidentally, this particular website covers self-spreading vaccines as well. Here is a little video promo of the Euroscience Open Forum 2020:

 

 

And here it the actual 2020 panel (some of it is already outdated but very educational):

“Project Coast”

One of the panelists above mentions “Project Coast” is South Africa — and while it is not directly related to “Insect Allies,” it kind of is.

Project Coast” was a toxin and bioweapon development project that took place in South Africa during the apartheid era. As a part of that project, scientists developed covert assassination tools and methods of covert sterilization, intended against the black population of South Africa. A warning? No really, a warning?

Back to DARPA

Here is more from the MPS-affiliated informational website:

“Even as the halfway point of the Insect Allies program approaches, DARPA has chosen not to publicly describe in its response to our Science article what is the basis of their having concluded that a developmental pathway exists that circumvents the early proliferation of biological weapons (described by the black development path in the accompanying image).

This is in addition to explaining in detail why their developmental plan is easier to develop than alternative paths (described by the red paths). As our Science article makes clear, this is central to justifying the wisdom of embarking on the development of HEGAAs, and many other types of GM viruses.

Over the next five years, only a minority of anticipated CRISPR-inspired innovations will involve intentional environmental releases (see recent NAS report). HEGAAs, and some other GM viruses, have the property of an early-stage biological weapons proliferation risk that is not shared with most other proposed techniques (including avant-garde ones like gene drive).

Choosing not to clearly address these obvious issues of global concern, as detailed in the Science article, makes their current model of develop first and explain later an especially unwise path, particularly for this insect-delivered program, that in many ways appears to be designed to get carried away.”

Living Foundries

To provide a backdrop for the “Insect Allies” project, here is a brief look at the DARPA “Living Foundries” bioengineering program, launched in 2010.

DARPA’s Living Foundries program aims to “enable adaptable, scalable, and on-demand production of critical, high-value molecules by programming the fundamental metabolic processes of biological systems to generate a vast number of complex molecules.”

“Programming Biological Systems”

In order to orient ourselves in this attempted new normal, we need to understand the mindset. Please note the use of term “engineer” all throughout this benevolent-sounding presentation:

DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office

DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office was founded in 2014. Here is an informational video on, in their own words, “DARPA’s way of thinking about biological technology to defend the homeland.”

According to DARPA’s website:

“DARPA has enjoyed a strong relationship with Silicon Valley since the early 1960s, working with innovators to lay the groundwork for new industries built around Agency investments in semiconductors, networking, artificial intelligence, user interfaces, programming, materials, microsystems, and more.

[We knew that!!!] Biotech is now emerging as a breakthrough opportunity space and it represents an area that is ripe for fresh collaboration among DARPA, the nation’s top researchers, venture capitalists, and entrepreneurs.”

Here are some of the listed topic of interests:

  • Building with Biology Using Engineered Living Materials, which focused on programming DNA to grow materials to specifications at the sites where they are needed and developing living materials that are responsive to their environments and can heal when damaged;
  • Staying on Target: Minimizing Off-Target Effects in Gene Editing, which focused on making personalized medicine feasible by conducting rapid, low-cost screens of an individual’s likely responses to tailored gene therapy;
  • Creating a Pandemic-free World, which focused on DARPA’s vision of distributed healthcare that combines technology to detect pandemic outbreaks, rapidly identify and grow potent antibodies to fight infectious disease, and response tools for creating a pandemic firebreak;
  • Immunity on Demand [emphasis mine], which focused on rapidly developing and delivering nucleic-acid-based protections against infectious disease;
  • Failing Faster: De-Risking the Path to FDA Approval, which focused on using organ-on-chip technology to better predict the efficacy of new drugs in the development pipeline;
  • A Real-time Window into Your Body’s Chemistry, which focused on tissue-integrating in vivo biosensors to continuously monitor physiology over the long term to predict the onset of disease;
  • Reinventing Psychiatry Using Neurotechnology, which focused on using implanted, closed-loop neural systems to record and stimulate the brain to treat neuropsychiatric illness;
  • MindFlight: Your Brain Will Be Your Pilot Today, which focused on direct neural control of complex physical systems;
  • Memory Enhancement in Everyday Life, which focused on non-invasive electrical and auditory stimulation technology to enhance memory by facilitating the neural replay process

Is it me, or is it that the crazies are running the asylum?

Remote-Controlled Insects

If you think that you have now seen it all, well, you haven’t. Here is a video of scientists in Singapore torturing live insects and turning them into cyborgs. Horrifying.

And here is, you guessed it, DARPA:

“Through a DARPA-funded program, scientists at the University of California invented a tiny rig that connects to an insect’s brain and flight muscles. Once implanted, the device takes over the insect’s body, turning it into a remote control cyborg capable of receiving flight commands wirelessly from a nearby laptop.”

It’s all good and fun (not really, more like a horror movie), and we could close our eyes — but will it be fun if the emboldened crazies try to remote-control your children?

About the Author

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.

 

Link To Read Full Article Here

 

 


 

 

 

“The vision is that a small number of individuals in the target population could be vaccinated, and the vaccine strain would then circulate in the population much like a pathogenic virus.” p.45

Self-spreading vaccines

LINK

 

 


 

Posted on

What Is a 6G Network and How Will It Affect Us?

What Is a 6G Network and How Will It Affect Us?

“How far is humanity willing to go for the sake of technological progress? And does progress always have to mean trading off our health and safety?”

January 31,2022 | By Jane Knight | Omnia

“The power to question is the basis of all human progress”
 – Indira Gandhi

We would understand if you saw the title of this article and thought, “5G isn’t even rolled out around the world yet, why are you warning us about 6G?”

But make no mistake – the race for 6G technology is on.

Despite the potential health impacts of 5G causing its rollout to be stalled and mired in controversy, big tech firms and nations across the world are already working on its successor!

But what exactly is a 6G network, and how is it different from 5G? Moreover, what does this technology mean for humanity’s future and well-being? If you find yourself wondering about these relevant questions, then read on. We’re taking you through the basics of 6G today.

What is a 6G Network?

6G technology is the sixth generation cellular technology that is slated to succeed 5G. It’s already under development as a collaboration between policymakers and technological firms globally, and is predicted to be significantly faster than its predecessor.

Some of the biggest names in tech have come together for this purpose – in August 2021, the Center for Technology at Purdue University launched their lab named ‘Lab to Life’ which is dedicated to researching and developing 6G technology and its uses across industries. This initiative is supported by firms like Dell, Cisco, Eriksson, Qualcomm, Intel, and Nokia, among many others. This 400-acre research area is slated to be the USA’s very first 6G deployment zone.

And that’s just scratching the surface – in the past year, several 6G symposiums have been organized across Europe, the USA, and Asia to discuss the road ahead for 6G and its real-world applications. In fact, China launched a 6G test satellite in November 2020.

How Does 6G Work?

If you thought the leap in data transfer speed from 4G to 5G was a big one, then here’s a shocker: 6G wireless network is rumored to be 100 times faster than 5G. While 5G technology relied on frequencies in the microwave range to transmit data, 6G will be using even smaller wavelengths that fall in the Terahertz (THz) band that falls between 100 GHz to 3 THz.

This will enable it to transmit data at shockingly fast speeds of approximately 95 Gbps (gigabits per second), which can hit a peak max speed of up to even 1 Tbps (terabit per second).

Another way to understand the data transmission speeds with 6G is to analyze its latency, which is usually measured in milliseconds. Simply put, latency is the time it takes for data to be transmitted from its originating source to its destination. The lower the latency, the faster your data transmission speed would be.

The latency for 4G networks is around 50 milliseconds and it falls to a mere 5 milliseconds with 5G technology. 6G networks are set to reduce that to only 1 millisecond – implying an almost instantaneous data transfer speed. The high-capacity, ultra-low latency features of 6G will expand the scope of wireless technology to encompass never-before-seen applications in AI (artificial intelligence), mobile edge computing, blockchain technology, and much more.

What Will 6G Be Like?

If you’re wondering how 6G will be different from its predecessors, then the name of Purdue University’s 6G laboratory (Lab to Life) should give you a clue – this technology will seek to not just enable faster communication, but embed our very lives into a global informational grid. Thanks to its faster-than-ever data speeds, 6G is said to become the foundation over which a plethora of industries will be built. By embedding the network in systems across residential, manufacturing, and other commercial purposes, 6G is being built to become the next ‘electricity’.

With its ultra-fast computing speeds, 6G is set to give a major push to ‘cognitive technology’ where computers are able to mimic human brain functions and decision-making abilities. By connecting our homes, cars, offices, phones, wireless devices, digital wearables, and much more to each other, this technology is capable of not just continuously monitoring our lives and activities, but also playing an active part in it.

By offering real-time recommendations and converting our daily activities into a series of millions of data points, our lives will be even more accessible online by corporations and/or governments, unless watertight data privacy protocols are put in place before the roll out.

With the announcement of the metaverse world and virtual reality becoming a real-world reality with each passing day, it’s not wrong to think that we will soon find ourselves dependent on 6G-enabled technology for functioning in our day-to-day lives. VR (Virtual reality) conferences, schools, and events may become a regular occurrence, with us spending more and more of our lives inside a 6G-enabled simulation in the brick-and-mortar world.

While AI-enabled technology has its applications and benefits, the question to ask ourselves is this – where is the line between us taking advantage of technology, and technology taking advantage of us? 

Will 6G Have An Impact On Human Health?

There is mounting evidence that EMF radiation as well as the short millimeter waves used in 5G wireless technology have significant and undeniable effects on our well-being and that of the environment. Considering that 6G is estimated to be 100 times faster and uses even shorter radiofrequency waves than 5G, it is likely that we will see these effects intensified manifold with this new technology. Although research has begun on the applications of 6G technology, we still have extremely limited information on the safe exposure limits of THz frequency.

A study looking into the biological effects of Terahertz radiation (used in 6G) waves on artificial human skin and mice have revealed that it caused “DNA double-strand breakage, cell death, cell membrane change, disturbance of nerve cell growth, suppression of cell-signaling pathways as well as acute inflammation.”

Another article published by the Journal of the Royal Society shares that Terahertz radiation is reported to interfere with DNA as well as cause genomic instabilities. While a lot more research is sorely needed to fully understand how Terahertz radiation affects living beings, the preliminary information is a cause for concern and warrants urgent intervention for public safety.

Final Thoughts

How far is humanity willing to go for the sake of technological progress? And does progress always have to mean trading off our health and safety? As more news of 6G technology and its potential health impacts come to light, we as a society have to ask ourselves these two urgent questions. This is not only for the sake of our own well-being, but to preserve and protect the health, freedom, and autonomy of future generations.

References and interesting reads:

 

 

Link To Full Article Here

 


 

 Is Humanity Being Poisoned By Microwave Radiation?

Link

 


 

Posted on

mRNA Shots Are Causing Major Fertility Problems With Both Men And Women

 

mRNA Shots Are Causing Major Fertility Problems With Both Men And Women

July 25, 2022 | BY: DR. JOSEPH MERCOLA  | Technocracy News | PDF

Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., is a molecular biologist and toxicologist and director of toxicology and molecular biology for Toxicology Support Services LLC. April 23, 2021, she delivered a three-minute public comment to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

• Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., a molecular biologist and toxicologist, has called for an immediate halt to COVID-19 mRNA and DNA vaccines due to multiple safety concerns
• There’s credible concern that the COVID jabs will cross-react with syncytin (a retroviral envelope protein) and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that may impair fertility and reproductive outcomes
• In the case of the COVID shots, important animal studies that help ascertain toxic and systemic effects were not done. We’re now seeing danger signals that are not being heeded. Preliminary safety results of mRNA COVID shots used in pregnant women, published in April 2021, revealed an 82% miscarriage rate when the jab was administered during the first 20 weeks of pregnancy
• CDC data reveal more than 300 children between the ages of 12 and 18 have died from myocarditis, a now-recognized side effect of the COVID jab, yet the shot is now authorized for children as young as 5
• Since the COVID gene therapies do not prevent infection, but only lessen symptoms, they are actually a treatment, not a prevention. And there are far safer and more effective treatment available, including nebulized peroxide, ozone therapy, and hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin regimens


Conventional war is hell and Technocracy’s bio-war is worse. Nobody can argue that the existential damage being done to humanity is just an accident or an unintended consequence: It screams depopulation plus crippling all resistance to being forced into a scientific dictatorship, aka Technocracy. World citizens must resist, first by not taking any more Big Pharma COVID shots and secondly, by restoring your health if you have taken a shot.  ⁃ TN Editor

 


STORY AT-A-GLANCE

> The first COVID shots rolled out in December 2020, and it didn’t take long before doctors and scientists started warning of possible reproductive effects, as the jab may cross-react with syncytin and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that might impair reproduction

> According to one recent investigation, 42% of women with regular menstrual cycles said they bled more heavily than usual after vaccination; 39% of those on gender-affirming hormone treatments reported breakthrough bleeding, as did 71% of women on long-acting contraceptives and 66% of postmenopausal women

> Other recent research has found the Pfizer COVID jab impairs semen concentration and motile count in men for about three months

> Miscarriages, fetal deaths and stillbirths have also risen after the rollout of the COVID shots. In November 2021, Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), delivered 13 stillborn babies in a 24-hour period, and all of the mothers had received the COVID jab

> Many countries are now reporting sudden declines in live birth rates, including Germany, the U.K., Taiwan, Hungary and Sweden. In the five countries with the highest COVID jab uptake, fertility has dropped by an average of 15.2%, whereas the five countries with the lowest COVID jab uptake have seen an average decline of just 4.66%

The first COVID shots rolled out in December 2020, and it didn’t take long before doctors and scientists started warning of possible reproductive effects.

Among them were Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., director of toxicology and molecular biology for Toxicology Support Services LLC, who in April 2021 submitted a public comment1 to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), highlighting the high potential for adverse effects on fertility.

I previously interviewed Lindsay in 2021. That article is not updated with the new information, but the interview (above) is a good primer for the information she shares below. In many ways, she predicted what we are now observing.

She stressed there’s credible evidence that the COVID shots may cross-react with syncytin and reproductive genes in sperm, ova and placenta in ways that might impair reproductive outcomes. “We could potentially be sterilizing an entire generation,” she warned.

Lindsay also pointed out that reports of significant menstrual irregularities and vaginal hemorrhaging in women who received the injections by then already numbered in the thousands, and that this too was a safety signal that should not be ignored.

 

Link To Read Full Article Here

Link To Video


 

Posted on

BIOTECHNOLOGY: GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PATHOGENS

BIOTECHNOLOGY: GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PATHOGENS

July 23, 2022  |

A 2010 report written by Joel O. Almosara, Lt Col, BSC, USAF,  mentions the use of gene therapy as a weapon and reveals that the “dark side” of  biotechnology, when used maliciously or negligently can destroy human life.

On page 21, the article states:

“Biological warfare agents are mostly invisible to the human eye and naturally present in the environment. One of the advantages of using biological warfare could be “an optimal death to cost ratio; they are virtually undetectable; and they offer the potential for mass panic.”56 This is a positive motivation for nations, groups, and individuals to pursue genetically engineered pathogens as a weapon of choice. Biological warfare attacks may resemble a natural disease outbreak phenomenon and it would be very difficult to trace back to the source, thereby discounting the perpetrator’s actions.” Link

The document also describes the ability to “trigger” a dormant virus using a signal, causing sickness and death in specific target populations.

The ability of microwave radiation exposure to activate diseases is described in a recent paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9107623/

Many have concluded that the CV-19 event was a biowarfare attack, orchestrated by individuals and rogue alphabet agencies with access to biolabs and government grants. It is critical to prosecute those who are responsible for these crimes against humanity. -JD

 

 


 

 

Link To Document_BIOTECHNOLOGY: GENETICALLY ENGINEERED PATHOGENS