Combining Health/Medical/Biodata Together with Artificial Intelligence – For OUR Benefit? Or For a Different Reason Altogether?

A.I. technology has made significant advances. But what if it never stops advancing?

As I was researching an individual (who shall not be named to protect their anonymity) – I came across a rather… intriguing company that they had an interest in.

For a little background, this individual has been speculated as getting their really young son vaccinated, even before it was authorized in their area. For additional reference, it would seem that being involved in the NHS is also an important part of their repertoire – so perhaps they are of the UK region.

Again, these are more of a supposition based on their information, so please take it with a grain of salt.

Sadly, this individual lost their son not too long ago.

Now, just out of curiosity sakes (not to condemn, provoke, judge, or anything of the sort) I took an initiative to research their twitter page for additional information. What were their other interests/involvements? What makes this person a pro-vaccine advocate? Etc. This is where the information about the NHS comes from.

And in addition, there was another company listed that really took me aback. And that will be the focus of what this post is about.

The DEMON Network

“We are the international network for the application of data science and AI to dementia research. The Deep Dementia Phenotyping (DEMON) Network brings together academics, clinicians and other partners from across the world. By connecting these people, we can identify innovative approaches to interdisciplinary collaborative dementia research across multiple institutions.

Our vision is to revolutionise dementia research and healthcare by bringing innovators together and harnessing the power of data science and AI.”

Source: [ https://demondementia.com/about/ ]

Further research into this group and the above individual’s interests revealed human genomes/genetics and deep brain integration with AI as additional fields of pursuit.

Very interesting.

And once again, just as the SATiN technology – I have to point out the incredibly unnecessary and non-sense acronym that they have decided to choose for their company.

“Deep Dementia Phenotyping (DEMON)”?

It is quite obvious the allusion that they were going for.

Now, for the sake of playing Devil’s advocate (no pun intended), perhaps they only mean it as a reference that ‘dementia’ is such an awful disease and so they are calling dementia itself a “demon”, in the most figurative of sense. Or, one can construe it in the sense that some people have described the symptoms of dementia as that of someone being demonically possessed – the change in personality, the trembling/shaking, sudden aggression, etc. So perhaps their motive was to highlight this detail – as controversial as that would be.

However, under the assumption that anyone who has faith/belief in God/Jesus Christ, or even who believes in preserving humanity in our natural state, and who would not want to tamper with His creations in such a way as to genetically modify and/or merge us (or any other living being) with man-made technology, the rationale that the groups of people initiating this sort of invasive work would deliberately choose the acronym it did for more of a shock value than anything else, and to perhaps mock those who are against this sort of contentious work, would make more sense.

There is, of course, the darker side of the argument, and that’s that the founder(s) of something like DEMON Network, fully believe that they are serving a “demonic” agenda.

No one likes to contemplate on this subject. No one wants to believe that someone running a large organization in manipulating, modifying, genetically changing, hacking the software of life, collecting medical/biological/DNA information – could possibly be involved in such a thing as “demonic worship”, or idolizing machines – like artificial intelligence, for example – or would attempt to personify a computer learning algorithm/intelligence as a “beast system”.

Yet, when digging into transhumanism, technological advancements, the agendas of certain “philanthropic” billionaires and globalists, government agencies… one thing seems to tie them all together. And that is, indeed, a reset of humanity in some way, that involves merging us with machine.

This is NO SECRET, and has been admitted by everyone from Klaus Schwab, to Bill Gates, to Elon Musk, to Henry Kissinger (who was a professor of Klaus Schwab) to institutions such as DARPA.

Getting back to the DEMON Network, who has partnered with the UK Dementia Research Institute, I have selected a few short excerpts from an interview between David Llewellyn (founder of DEMON Network) and Bart De Strooper of the UK DRI that can be found at the following link: [ https://demondementia.com/podcast-using-ai-data-to-fight-dementia/ ] “Podcast: Using AI & data to fight dementia”

David Llewellyn: “We deliberately, I mean, it’s designed to encourage collaboration and new ideas, dangerous ideas, so we want people to join who don’t know anything about dementia. Maybe they know all about transfer learning, or other forms of machine learning, or artificial intelligence.”

Interviewer Megan O’Hare: “When we got given the topic for this podcast, thought to myself, I should probably actually, work out what artificial intelligence is. Obviously we use the word a lot, and you think of that Will Smith film, and – but, and so I had to look around and there’s the cheering test. Which is basically the test of a machine’s ability to exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to or indistinguishable from that of a human.

But I wanted, because you’re both coming at it from different places, how you view A.I.? Um, to how you think it will impact dementia research? Maybe, David, we start with you?”

David Llewellyn: “Well, it’s a difficult thing to pin down. Because it obviously means different things to different people. But I think in its, in its broader sense, artificial intelligence is the idea that we’ll create machines that think for themselves, and they’re able to exhibit intelligent characteristics without, without us pulling levers; manually inputting and prodding and poking them into what they should be doing.

And the most ambitious form of artificial intelligence is a sort of creation of a new digital, sentient being, which will take over the world and enslave us.

And that’s the – that’s the thing that, that some people worry about. You know, the point at which machines don’t just match our performance, but start to exceed our performance. So that – that’s the, that is a fascinating and yet, and as yet unachieved ambition. That not everyone thinks we should be aiming for either.

I don’t think many people are arguing we’ve created a super-intelligent yet. But it’s possible. It’s possible.

Bart De Strooper: “These are the advances of molecule biology, and how it’s done at the moment is it’s very simplistic. We use a – we use a… […] I apologize to my colleagues – but we take a cell, we put a DNA in it, we express the protein, and then we see things happening, of course, and everything that’s biology. Of course! Biology’s much more complicated.

You need to – to, and that’s – so the next step in molecule biology was, if I’m boring you please interrupt me, but next step was the mouse stuff. When we changed the gene, and then we saw the whole thing change in the mouse.”

Bart De Strooper: “There will be a moment, and that’s also the vision of the DRI, there is a moment that most of the research will be in silico.

Bart De Strooper: “I think that in the 10 years, I foresee for me now, still going on, that’s – a lot of the classical biology will be replaced by, by this combination of silico prediction, and then tested. In 20 years, it’s probably going to be the classical biologists will be a rare species.

David Llewellyn: “Well if you listen to some people, artificial intelligence will make us all redundant.”

Image credited to: UK Dementia Research Institute

And as Dr. James Giordano so succinctly put it, when given funding from multiple different organizations, the possibility of “dual-use” medical/scientific interventions becomes an obvious motive.

Take a study/research that involves David Llewellyn and others on behalf of the European Task Force for Brain Health Services:

[ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8507172/ ] “Modifiable risk factors for dementia and dementia risk profiling. A user manual for Brain Health Services”

Some noteworthy possible Conflicts of Interest that could have influenced some of the research/funding/studies, etc. of such endeavors involves the following companies:

Source: [ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8507172/ ] “Modifiable risk factors for dementia and dementia risk profiling. A user manual for Brain Health Services”

AstraZeneca
BioCross
Biogen
Elan Pharmaceuticals
Genentech
Janssen
Lilly
Lundbeck
Novartis
Pfizer

Those are some extremely familiar names. Now why is this so important?

Well, aside from the very unusual name (DEMON Network) and their possible involvement/affiliations with the above listed organizations – imagine a company being able to provide a cure for such a debilitating illness – like dementia/Alzheimer’s for instance. In fact, imagine a complete cure for anything you can think of.

Cancer. The common cold. Heart attacks. Depression. Schizophrenia. ADHD. AIDS. So on and so forth.

Now ask yourself, what happens to these companies when the cure is established and no one is sick from anything anymore? Well, quite obviously, people won’t need on-going medicine/drugs/therapists/vaccines… etc., etc. Thus, putting the medical field largely out of a very lucrative business. As long as they can keep flourishing with an abundance of “sick” people, an actual CURE would destroy their whole entire foundation.

So from a strictly financial/business point of view, the medical field would be shooting themselves in the foot if they were to ever find such a beneficial treatment. The smart, yet extremely underhanded thing to do, would be to keep the falsehood going that they are treating you, while keeping you sick all the while to peddle drugs and even more treatments to “cure” additional ailments.

Now, am I necessarily saying that this is exactly what’s going on here? Well… there are many signs that certainly do point in that direction. But I am also of the belief that there are people in those institutions that don’t believe this, and who are, in fact, very honest and genuine people trying to help others with their illnesses. But it doesn’t mean that it’s not going on.

Perhaps even some in that field are becoming disillusioned with their very own profession/career and the suspicious activities that their organizations have engaged in. But one can’t help but wonder if this is the true motive of the medical institutions.

And again, it certainly does not help when they pair up with foundations named DEMON Network who are interested in implementing A.I. algorithms and tracking/monitoring human being’s physiology; under the false guise, in my opinion, of helping people.

Elon Musk makes an eerie reference

As mentioned earlier, Elon Musk, who is eager to start implementing his Neuralink implants into human beings next year (2022), has said this rather… interesting “hyperbole” about A.I.’s back in 2014:

Elon Musk: “And with artificial intelligence, we are summoning the demon. You know? You know all those stories where, there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water, and he’s like, yeah, he’s sure he can control the demon. [exaggerated winking]

It didn’t work out.

Sure this very well could have been strictly a metaphor, but in context of the individuals/organizations who truly are interested in A.I. technology, and the transhumanism efforts, and who also seem to have an uncanny alliance/affiliation with the Lucis Trust (formerly the Lucifer Trust), the supposition that it is all just a coincidence gets less and less certain.

Metabolic Machines and Demons of Life

In addition to all of that, are even more allusions to the “demonic” qualities that artificial intelligence/computing systems seem to possess. (again, no pun intended)

Thomas Feuerstein is an artist who focuses a lot on biotechnology and fuses biological organisms (algae, human cells) into his artwork. Again, with an interest in artificial intelligence as well, his take on what artificial intelligence is, coupled with his artwork, presents an even deeper meaning into a “demon network” that I don’t think many of us are aware of.

Take the following excerpts from Feuerstein’s presentation for consideration:

All quotes by Thomas Feuerstein:

“Data metabolic systems, I mean works that eat and […] digest data autonomously, and convert them into new data, always based on a software that I call “demon”.

In ancient Greece, the daemon was a translator between ideas and meta, gods and humans. And furthermore, a daemon or demon was a distributor of fate, of resources, goods and information.”

“To this day, the word “demon” hides in many common words, theories and concepts. For example, democracy comes from demos, which means people or nations. And “daemos” derives from daemon. In this sense, a daemon is a governor, a decision maker, and an allocator.”

“Demons today are not only fictional or mythical creatures in literature, religions, superstition, or pop culture. We find them also in science, technology, art, economics, and politics.

And as I said before, without demons there can be no governance, and no cybernetics.

Our daily lives are full of demons, and with the emergence of new technologies and A.I., cultural demons are becoming more and more relevant in a networked society. We find them in electronic devices, in the form of algorithmic trading, in biotechnology, surveillance technology – “

“The ancient concepts of demons we have to sink in new contexts. More and more demons become machines; biochemical and digital machines.”

“Another very strong demon, the Holy Spirit, enters not as a higher source any longer. It enhances the brain, digital and molecular. In future times maybe we are all enlightened people, speaking in tongues and glossolalia becomes a molecular and digital application in our brain.

For example, the company Neuralink, wants to implant brain computer interfaces – so called BCI, to connect the brain with the internet.

Ironically I can say in the future we may not only have artificial intelligence, we may have artificial identity.”

“Deep meaning reminds me of DeepDream from Google [editor’s note: who, unironically, removed the motto “Don’t be evil” from their code of conduct policy…], and shows that the genius is not a person with special abilities, but someone who is controlled by a higher intelligence and ruled like a puppet.”

” – Fernando Corbato and the science team at the MIT, wrote the computer program “daemon”. It was a simple backup program, and daemon was a backronym for a disk and execution monitor. And this is important, because it was the beginning of machines started to talk to themselves. It influenced all later programs from chat BOTS to search BOTS to viruses and artificial intelligence agents. And in this sense, the most mightful and greedy demon who haunts the internet today is the Google bot.”

“More and more demons take possession of our environment and connect us imperceptibly with networked processes. These demons lurk in smartphones and smart homes.”

“Another cosmist, Nikolai Federov, describes the machinist of the future as a place not for death, but for technical reanimated humans. This was science fiction at the time, but today where Google, Facebook […] are constantly collecting data, a digital reapers is approaching technical feasability.

Ironically I would say, we will end not in graves, we will end as demons in cyberspace.”

And like Thomas Feuerstein mentioned, the demon/daemon terminology to describe computer programs/artificial intelligence is an expression  – at least from a computer programmer/hacker’s point of view.

In The Original Hacker’s Dictionary, it describes daemon and demon as the following:

DAEMON (day’mun, dee’mun) [archaic form of “demon”, which has slightly different connotations (q.v.)] n. A program which is not invoked explicitly, but which lays dormant waiting for some condition(s) to occur. The idea is that the perpetrator of the condition need not be aware that a daemon is lurking (though often a program will commit an action only because it knows that it will implicitly invoke a daemon). For example, writing a file on the lpt spooler’s directory will invoke the spooling daemon, which prints the file. The advantage is that programs which want (in this example) files printed need not compete for access to the lpt. They simply enter their implicit requests and let the daemon decide what to do with them. Daemons are usually spawned automatically by the system, and may either live forever or be regenerated at intervals. Usage: DAEMON and DEMON (q.v.) are often used interchangeably, but seem to have distinct connotations. DAEMON was introduced to computing by CTSS people (who pronounced it dee’mon) and used it to refer to what is now called a DRAGON or PHANTOM (q.v.). The meaning and pronunciation have drifted, and we think this glossary reflects current usage.

DEMON (dee’mun) n. A portion of a program which is not invoked explicitly, but which lays dormant waiting for some condition(s) to occur. See DAEMON. The distinction is that demons are usually processes within a program, while daemons are usually programs running on an operating system. Demons are particularly common in AI programs. For example, a knowledge manipulation program might implement inference rules as demons. Whenever a new piece of knowledge was added, various demons would activate (which demons depends on the particular piece of data) and would create additional pieces of knowledge by applying their respective inference rules to the original piece. These new pieces could in turn activate more demons as the inferences filtered down through chains of logic. Meanwhile the main program could continue with whatever its primary task was.”

So now one has to wonder, are the agendas of the “DEMON Network” really to help those with dementia? Or, as Professor David Llewellyn implied himself, are they more interested in:

“Dr Megan O’Hare interviews Professor Bart De Strooper and Professor David Llewellyn, discussing the new UK Dementia Research Institute and DEMON Network partnership to unlock the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI).”?

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Featured image by Tayeb MEZAHDIA from Pixabay

Tal Zaks, Former Chief Scientist at Moderna, Speaks of Nanomedicine, Personalized Vaccines and Genetic Engineering in 2017

Scientist quote/unquote: “hacking the software of life.”

Tal Zaks, former Chief Medical Officer at Moderna (currently partnering with Orbimed) – gives us another look at their terminology of “hacking the software of life”, i.e. – changing/modifying our genes.

Piggybacking off of Klaus Schwab’s statements that gene-editing changes YOU, not to mention Craig Venter’s (of the Human Genome Project) admission that:

“It’s pretty stunning when you just replace the DNA software in the cell, and the cell instantly starts reading that new software, starts making a whole different set of proteins. And within a short while, all the characteristics of the first species disappear. And a new species emerges from this software that controls that cell going forward.”

Craig Venter of the NIH and Human Genome: Creating Synthetic Life | ” – trying to design what we want biology to do”

– it is clear that, by definition, “rewriting the genetic code” changes what it means to be human – or changes whatever species is being modified. Craig Venter himself says that a “new species emerges from this software”.

So while these doctors and scientists try to sugarcoat these ill-conceived endeavors (even if they were born of good intentions initially… “the road to hell is paved with good intentions”), the attempts at genetically changing our DNA have grave consequences; not only on the physical-molecular level, but on the conscious-soul level as well.

Here, Tal Zaks, in a Tedx Talk from November 2017, specifically mentions vaccines (a total of 17 times in a 10 minute presentation) to administer this genetic-changing software. In addition, he also alludes to collecting DNA in order to make “personalized vaccines”. An endeavor that DARPA is also invested in:

DNA Script Partners with Moderna to Develop On-Demand Vaccines and Therapeutics for DARPA

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., and PARIS | April 27, 2021

[ https://www.dnascript.com/press-releases/dna-script-partners-with-moderna-to-develop-on-demand-vaccines-and-therapeutics-for-darpa/ ]

“Rewriting the Genetic Code” – Tal Zaks (2017)

Source: odysee | @RedPillman | Rewriting the Genetic Code

Full transcript below. Some embellishment has been added for emphasis.

Tal Zaks: “So I started my professional life about thirty years ago as a nurse and the pediatric intensive care unit.

And I remember this one infant, let’s call him Jonathan, who came in really really ill. Seemed to have a rare genetic defect, but in those days, gene diagnosis was still in its infancy so we couldn’t really figure out what’s wrong with him.

And in the years since, as I’ve trained as a physician scientist, we’ve been living in this phenomenal digital and scientific revolution. And I’m here today to tell you that we’re actually hacking the software of life. And that it’s changing the way we think about prevention and treatment of disease.

So here’s all the biology you need to know in 30 seconds. Our body is made out of organs, our organs are made out of cells, and in every cell there’s this thing called “messenger RNA” or mRNA for short, that transmits the critical information from the DNA, our genes, to the protein, which is really the stuff we’re all made of.

This is the critical information that determines what a cell will actually do. And so we think of it like an operating system. And it’s not just in every cell of our body. It’s actually in every cell of every organism of life. It’s the same thing.

And so, if you could actually change that, which we call the software of life, 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. And I’m going to demonstrate that with three short examples.

Let’s start with the flu. So many of us get a vaccine. What is a vaccine? It is an injection in our arm where we get bits and pieces of the virus; the protein, and that teaches our immune system to recognize the virus and so when we get infected we’re not sick.

Now imagine if instead of giving the protein, we would give the instructions on how to make the protein. How the body can make its own vaccine. That’s an mRNA vaccine.

And here’s what it looks like from the cell.”

Image Source: Tal Zaks / Tedx Talks

“So the traditional approach has protein floating around your cells. An mRNA vaccine approach has the cells themselves in your own body making the vaccine.

What’s more alarming: a stranger prowling the neighborhood, or somebody who’s just broke into your ground-floor, and tripped the alarm?

That’s what happens with an mRNA vaccine. You’re tripped the alarm wire and now the cell is dialing 9-1-1. It’s calling the police at the same time as it’s making the protein and saying, ‘that’s the bad guy’.

That’s how an mRNA works. And for the last several years we’ve shown this actually works in a whole multitude of animal models. Earlier this year we published the first actual study in people. And it actually works in people.

We took a group of volunteers and injected them with a messenger RNA vaccine against a variant of flu/influenza. And all of these volunteers got the immune response we were hoping to see. The side-effect profile was pretty benign, what you would see with any normal type vaccine.

So we’ve proven the principle, this actually can work. It works in people and now we’re going to be developing a whole slew of vaccines against diseases for which we don’t have one. So that’s infectious disease.

Now for the second example, let’s talk for a minute about cancer. Horrible disease. Cancer has affected the lives of many of us and will affect the lives of many more of us as we age.

The problem with cancer at the cellular level is that the DNA is screwed up. You’ve got these mutation on this screwed up DNA, leads up to screwed up information that makes screwed up protein. And so the cell loses control.

Now, how do you figure out what is actually screwed up? Well, you got to figure out the whole sequence, right?

It took us decades and billions of dollars to sequence the human genome, and we’ve done that. We achieved that in 2003. And now we’re less than 15 years later, and it takes us a week. And we can do it for every patient. So now we can go and figure out what exactly is screwed up in a patient, and we can use that information to make a vaccine.

We take that information, say a patient with lung cancer, and we take it – we take the biopsy, we figure out the sequence, we figure out their immune system, we – and that all becomes information. It goes up in the cloud into a bioinformatic algorithm and then automatically makes a vaccine that we administer into their normal tissue; into the muscle to try and wake up their immune system.

Now the challenge, of course, is that every person’s cancer is different. Mutation happened by random chance. And so to do this you have to make it personalized.

So this is me, but if every patient is different, what we’re going to have to do is make a personalized cancer vaccine for every patient. And that’s exactly what we’ve started to do. Every patient gets a vaccine that’s based on the sequence and their own tumor.

So when we started to do this a couple years ago, my CEO stopped by one evening and said, “Tal, I get the idea but is this going to work?” And I said, “Look, Stefan. I don’t know, but we’ve got all the pieces to try and answer the question so we should try.”

And today I can tell you that I still don’t know if it’s going to work. But I know we’re able to actually run the experiment. Earlier this week the first patient was treated with a personalized cancer vaccine we made just for her.

So in the months and years to come we will know the answer of whether we can actually wake the immune system against somebody’s cancer with a personalized cancer vaccine so stay tuned.

I’m gonna finish with a third example of something called “methylmalonic acidemia” or MMA for short. Now the name doesn’t matter. Okay? This is just a disease that is caused by an enzyme that’s critical for metabolism. And children are born and they lack this one crucial gene. And so their body is not able really to fight infection properly or anytime they have any sort of stress, their body goes into crisis. They have one gene that’s gone awry and it causes a really significant disease.

If you look at what happens over time, for these children, about 1/3 of them don’t make it to the age of 10. You see here the survival curve whether the gene is completely lost or whether there’s just an aberration in it, the survival is impaired.

And, what do we do? Well there’s not much you can do because the missing protein is actually missing inside their cells. So what do we do? Well, here’s what we do. We take out their liver and we transplant the liver from a donor that is healthy and normal into these kids.

Think about it. They’re missing one critical piece of information and what we do is transplant an entire organ. Well, it fixes the problem, but what if there’s a better way? What if we could fix the missing information?

So based on innovations, nanomedicine, a new class of invention that Bob Langer across the river at MIT in Cambridge has been inventing, we’re now able to package this information and messenger RNA with a goal of giving it as an infusion, and then having it go to the liver to replace that missing information.

Is this going to work? Well we know the biology works. So together with the National Institutes of Health, we’ve studied this in a mouse model and this mouse has been engineered to have the exact same problem that the kids have. They’re lacking the one – the same gene. And you can see in the red line what happens to these mice when they’re born. Pretty much immediately they die. They cannot cope with stress. But if you inject messenger RNA that codes for the one missing protein that replaces that information, these mice, all of them survive, as you can see in the green line. And if you look at them they not only survive, they’re actually growing, they’re gaining weight, they look like they’re healthy littermates.

We’re hoping to start the clinical trial in the near future and the idea is the same thing here. 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.

I started by telling you about Jonathan and 30 years ago, and I was a nurse in the intensive care unit, I worked two night shifts, and Jonathan came in when he was about 12 months old and very quickly became dependent on a ventilator. And for the next 15 months or so, every time I came into the unit he was my patient to care for. You know, bathe, feed, treat, play with – he couldn’t talk, he was on a ventilator, but he was very much alive and you could tell – you could play with him, his eyes would – would follow me. After a while he would recognize me. Until one day I came into the unit for my shift and he was no longer there. He had died because of an infection in between shifts.

Imagine a world where we cannot just diagnose, but we can actually use the information to create vaccines to wake up the immune system to something like cancer and to fix the missing information for children with diseases like Jonathan, so that they can leave the ICU and live a healthy life.

Thank you.”

What is “nanomedicine”?

“Nanomedicine is defined as the medical application of nanotechnology. Nanomedicine can include a wide range of applications, including biosensors, tissue engineering, diagnostic devices, and many others. In the Center for Nanomedicine at Johns Hopkins, we focus on harnessing nanotechnology to more effectively diagnose, treat, and prevent various diseases.”

[ https://cnm-hopkins.org/what-is-nanomedicine/ ]

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, Johns Hopkins was the organization that the WEF (World Economic Forum / Klaus Schwab – famous for the “Great Reset” agenda) chose to moderate the EVENT 201 Plandemic Pandemic exercise, with the help of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation…

And while, of course, Mr. Zaks ends his speech high-lighting the beneficial aspects of a “gene-editing vaccine” and reminds the audience that it is to “cure cancer” or any other number of diseases, we must be alert to alternative motives and the implications of what could arise from such technological tampering of the human genome, not to mention a collection of the population’s DNA in a database – to control and alter at their discretion.

Now aside from those chilling prospects, is it worth it to forever alter a human being, and what it means to be human, by injecting them with genetic changing software? What possibilities might arise from such an endeavor? Are we SURE that they have our best interest in mind? (that is a rhetorical question, by the way… because of course they don’t) If they can change us as a species, then it follows suit that it can change our emotions, our thoughts, even our very purpose.

There are some things in life which should not be meddled with. “Life” itself, is definitely one of them.

Fact checking is extremely important. I want to reiterate not to take everything at face value; no matter what you read, where you read it from, or who you hear it from. And to be clear, do not rely on “fact checking” websites to give you accurate information either. These are just as likely, (if not even more likely…), to feed false information and false debunking accounts to manipulate the reader. Please take everything into consideration before adhering to a certain narrative – and always keep your mind open to other possibilities.

Fair use disclaimer: Some of the links from this article are provided from different sources/sites to give the reader extra information and cite the sources, but does not necessarily mean that I endorse the contents of the site itself. Additionally, I have tried to provide links to the contents that I used from other sites as an educational and/or entertainment means only; if you feel that any information deserves further citation or request to be clarified, please let me know through the contact page.

Featured image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay