I repost this story now because, in the rush to develop a vaccine against the China coronavirus in the next 90 days, public health officials are mentioning several experimental technologies—never before released openly for public use. (China coronavirus archive here.)
One of those technologies is: DNA insertion.
The reference is the New York Times, 3/10/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:
“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”
“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”
“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.” [That was nearly five years ago.]
“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”
Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”
Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”
Alteration of the human genetic makeup.
Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence.
The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:
“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”…
A midwife is facing life in prison and being charged with an astounding 95 felonies for delivering babies against government regulations in the state of New York.
The case has serious ramifications for religious freedom as well, since midwife Elizabeth Catlin is a Mennonite and provides birthing services for people who share her religious beliefs.
“These women need resources, they need help,” Melissa Carman said to Yahoo News. Carman is the President of NY CPM, a non-profit that works to change New York laws to more readily allow the certification of midwives in the state.
Carman believes that Caitlin’s case is an indicator that “the heart of midwifery — the compassionate care that was given, the relationships built and the trust in a provider — is gone.”
Caitlin is even being charged with criminally negligent homicide, an allegation that she finds to be “the most devastating.”
“What they’re trying to do, I guess, is make some kind of crazy example of this person — for what, I’m not exactly sure,” said Vicki Hedley, president of the Midwives Alliance of North America (MANA).
“The fact that she is being indicted for negligent homicide is way over the top, since the baby died six hours after being in her care,” she added.
“Criminalizing women for helping other women have babies tells us all that women still are not free to make our own health care decisions — even about something so extremely personal,” said Cristen Pascucci, founder of the organization Birth Monopoly.
Nevertheless, the prosecutors defend their behavior and claim they even went easy on the charges made against Caitlin.
“There could’ve been over a thousand,” said Yates County District Attorney Todd Casella, noting that the District Attorney’s Office has colluded with the New York State Police and New York Education Department to railroad this woman.
Because of the case, Catlin has already been forced to shutter her practice and sell her house. Even though she has only just been charged, the state oppression has already destroyed her life. She is relying on a GoFundMe page to raise funds to cover her mounting legal bills.
“I’ve been blessed with piles of cards and letters with donations,” Caitlin said, noting that she has raised $10,000 through crowd-sourced funding. However, that is just a fraction of what she will need to continue her fight against the state. The page notes that “she is in immediate need of $75,000 to keep her case moving. The total amount needed is expected to be about $100,000.”
“It has been a hard and very upsetting year,” said Brenda Zimmerman, a Mennonite woman who used Caitlin’s birthing services for her two children. “Some have accepted the change, some are like me, saying, ‘This is not fair.’ Liz didn’t call me to ask her if she could deliver my babies, I called her. We feel just as at fault.”
“The prosecution of Liz’s case is just an outrageous overreach — 95 charges. I don’t think Jack the Ripper faced that many charges. It’s really insane,” Mennonite elder Ivan Martin said. “The question goes back to, who’s behind all this? It’s being driven with such a vengeance … [I challenge you to] find any Mennonite lady who says she was a victim.” …
Lies are a powerful form of magic; they can mislead large groups of people into making terrible errors, as well as cause them to be blind to the obvious. Lies make people hurt themselves while thinking they are helping themselves. It is a truly dark and horrific act of sorcery.
As the world stands at the edge of a global pandemic event, the people who are immune to the effects of lies have an opportunity to take action should the virus continue to expand beyond the borders of China. We have a small window of time, perhaps a couple of months, in which we can prepare ourselves for the fallout and ensure we are as protected as we can be. This means taking precautions to prevent viral transmission, increasing the strength of our own immune systems, prepping for the loss of supply lines and freight shipments to retailers, organizing family, friends and neighbors for mutual aid and security, as well as preparing for the inevitable government attempts at martial law.
Of course, a person cannot or will not take any of these measures as long as they believe that the virus is not a threat, or they think that the pandemic will have little effect on their daily lives. I have recently seen a discomforting level of propaganda and disinformation agents invading the media and discussion boards related to this issue. Whenever I see such an intense disinformation campaign surrounding an event, this tells me a couple of things:
1) If they are trying to overtly downplay the seriousness of the event while lying about the facts involved, it tells me that the event is a legitimate threat and it will probably get worse as time passes.
2) If they all push the same false narrative and talking points it tells me that this is an organized effort paid for by a larger party with extensive resources.
If the narrative glosses over or hides recently revealed evidence by claiming that the event is “all hype”, then it is designed to create inaction in the public – It is designed to make us apathetic, which means there is a concerted conspiracy to harm us. It is not just an attempt to hide the guilt of the people involved in creating the crisis.
So what are some of the most insidious lies being spread right now on the virus threat? Lets go through a quick list of those I’ve identified so far:…
I’ve been trying to hold my breath but I keep passing out and start breathing again! But I’m sure my assigned authority figures will help me adapt to death when the time comes.
Anyway, is it cooling or warming this time? They like to keep their PR options open don’t they, at least until they can find a way to terrorize people with the threat of climate stability.
Meanwhile real toxic industrial pollution continues unabated.
As the effects of climate change become more evident, more than half of U.S. adults (56%) say climate change is the most important issue facing society today, yet 4 in 10 have not made any changes in their behavior to reduce their contribution to climate change, according to a new poll by the American Psychological Association.
While 7 in 10 say they wish there were more they could do to combat climate change, 51% of U.S. adults say they don’t know where to start. And as the election race heats up, 62% say they are willing to vote for a candidate because of his or her position on climate change.
The survey was conducted online from Dec. 12-16, 2019, by The Harris Poll on behalf of the American Psychological Association.
People are taking some steps to combat climate change, with 6 in 10 saying they have changed a behavior to reduce their contribution to climate change. Nearly three-quarters (72%) say they are very or somewhat motivated to make changes.
Among those who have already made behavior changes to reduce their contribution to climate change, when asked why they have not done more, 1 in 4 (26%) cite not having the resources, such as time, money or skills, to make changes. Some people are unwilling to make any changes in their behavior to reduce their contribution to climate change. When those who have not changed their behavior were asked if anything would motivate them to reduce their contribution to climate change, 29% said nothing would motivate them to do so.
Concern about climate change may be having an impact on mental health, with more than two-thirds of adults (68%) saying that they have at least a little “eco-anxiety,” defined as any anxiety or worry about climate change and its effects. These effects may be disproportionately having an impact on the country’s youngest adults; nearly half of those age 18-34 (47%) say the stress they feel about climate change affects their daily lives….
Spontaneous Remission: An Annotated Bibliography
In 1993, the Institute of Noetic Sciences published Spontaneous Remission: An Annotated Bibliography. In this work, the authors, Caryle Hirshberg and the late Brendan O’Regan, defined spontaneous remission as “the disappearance, complete or incomplete, of a disease or cancer without medical treatment or treatment that is considered inadequate to produce the resulting disappearance of disease symptoms or tumor.”
Because there was no standard reference for the field of spontaneous remission before that time, the first task of the Remission Project at IONS was to catalogue the world’s medical literature on the subject. As a result, it assembled the largest database of medically reported cases of spontaneous remission in the world, with more than 3,500 references from more than 800 journals in 20 different languages.
While the authors believe that the phenomenon of remission is relatively rare, the data from their research suggest that it may not be as rare as previously believed. It appears that the impression of rarity is at least partly an artifact of underreporting, but research shows there has been an increase in the number of cases reported in the last few decades. …
The rise of widespread vaccination in the last century is very plausibly connected to the modern flood of autoimmune diseases. Type 1 diabetes, narcolepsy, anti-phospholipid syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus, miscarriage, even heart attacks and transgenderism have very plausible and sometimes documented connections to specific antigens and hormones included in or accompanying the random biochemical garbage and viral, nanoparticle and human DNA contamination which comprises vaccines. Vaccine adjuvants are designed to cause a generalized nonspecific activation of the immune system after all. How obvious does this have to be? It’s no wonder they don’t teach doctors anything about vaccines: it’s not rocket science to put this together.
They’ve known about this for decades. Seriously, how predatory can medicine be? Apparently obstetrical violence and genital mutilation are just the first satanic sacrifices imposed on children in this society.
Is there any limit to human gullibility? Is this not munchausen by proxy consent as a business model?
Vaccine-induced autoimmunity: the role of molecular mimicry and immune crossreaction
Since the early 1800s vaccines have saved numerous lives by preventing lethal infections. However, during the past two decades, there has been growing awareness of possible adverse events associated with vaccinations, cultivating heated debates and leading to significant fluctuations in vaccination rates. It is therefore pertinent for the scientific community to seriously address public concern of adverse effects of vaccines to regain public trust in these important medical interventions. Such adverse reactions to vaccines may be viewed as a result of the interaction between susceptibility of the vaccinated subject and various vaccine components. Among the implicated mechanisms for these reactions is molecular mimicry. Molecular mimicry refers to a significant similarity between certain pathogenic elements contained in the vaccine and specific human proteins. This similarity may lead to immune crossreactivity, wherein the reaction of the immune system towards the pathogenic antigens may harm the similar human proteins, essentially causing autoimmune disease. In this review, we address the concept of molecular mimicry and its application in explaining post vaccination autoimmune phenomena. We further review the principal examples of the influenza, hepatitis B, and human papilloma virus vaccines, all suspected to induce autoimmunity via molecular mimicry. Finally, we refer to possible implications on the potential future development of better, safer vaccines.
In 1962, Melvin Kaplan released his revolutionary article describing a case of an 11-year-old boy who died of heart failure due to rheumatic fever. Pathology revealed immunoglobulin deposits in the cardiac muscle of the patient, leading Kaplan to explore the role of these antibodies. He examined the reaction of sera from rabbits immunized with group A streptococcal cells to samples of human heart tissue, conjuring the first established description of what is today a well-accepted paradigm—that structural similarity between bacteria and human protein may lead to the development of cardiac injury in rheumatic fever.1
In another canonical article published that same year, Rowley and Jenkin2 described a novel theory, concerning a possible immune crossreaction between infectious agents and host antigens, causing the development of autoimmunity.
These two articles may be viewed as harbingers to a mass of scientific publications that followed, all exploring the concept of immune crossreactivity due to structural homology between pathogens and self-proteins, a concept commonly termed molecular mimicry.3,4,5,6
Molecular mimicry is a term originally referring to the ability of an organism to evade detection by its predator through assuming features of a non-edible object,7 yet the concept was expanded to address the significant homology between microbial agents and the human host. Interestingly, the theoretical consequences of such similarities may vary depending on the interpreter. Thus, almost simultaneous with the publication by Rowley and Jenkin,2 a fundamentally opposite view of molecular mimicry was presented by Damian.8 Damian addressed naturally occurring parasitic antigenic determinants that were found to elicit little or no immune reaction. He attributed this feature to the similarity of these determinants to host proteins, suggesting that molecular mimicry may facilitate immune tolerance rather than immune autoreactivity.
Nevertheless, these two seemingly rivaling hypotheses may actually coexist, explaining the ostensibly paradoxical induction of autoimmunity in the unique setting created by vaccination. …
Molecular Mimicry as a Mechanism of Autoimmune Disease
A variety of mechanisms have been suggested as the means by which infections can initiate and/or exacerbate autoimmune diseases. One mechanism is molecular mimicry, where a foreign antigen shares sequence or structural similarities with self-antigens. Molecular mimicry has typically been characterized on an antibody or T cell level. However, structural relatedness between pathogen and self does not account for T cell activation in a number of autoimmune diseases. A proposed mechanism that could have been misinterpreted for molecular mimicry is the expression of dual T cell receptors (TCR) on a single T cell. These T cells have dual reactivity to both foreign and self-antigens leaving the host vulnerable to foreign insults capable of triggering an autoimmune response. In this review, we briefly discuss what is known about molecular mimicry followed by a discussion of the current understanding of dual TCRs. Finally, we discuss three mechanisms, including molecular mimicry, dual TCRs and chimeric TCRs, by which dual reactivity of the T cell may play a role in autoimmune diseases….