AI needs to be regulated. The vacuous White House has stepped in to save the day by appointing the even more vacuous VP Kamala Harris to head the task force. What’s wrong with this picture? What could possibly go wrong? The least intelligent will try to understand the most intelligent and rein it in from destroying humanity. ⁃ TN Editor
The White House has revealed that they are ready with a plan to regulate AI. The effort will be led by VP Kamala Harris. The idea is to get companies like Google, Microsoft, and ChatGPT’s founder OpenAI, to participate in a public review.
The White House has outlined its strategy to tighten down on the AI race, amid mounting fears that technology may disrupt society as we know it. The Biden Administration described the technology as ‘one of the most powerful’ of our time, but said, “But in order to exploit the benefits it brings, we must first limit its hazards.”
The goal is to establish 25 research institutions around the United States in order to obtain assurances from four businesses, including Google, Microsoft, and ChatGPT’s founder OpenAI, that they will ‘participate in a public review.’
Many of the world’s brightest minds have warned about the dangers of AI, specifically that it could destroy humanity if a risk assessment is not conducted immediately. Elon Musk and other tech titans are concerned that AI may soon outperform human intellect and think for itself.
This implies it would no longer require or listen to humans, giving it the ability to steal nuclear codes, cause pandemics, and trigger world conflicts.
Vice President Kamala Harris, who has the lowest popularity rating of any VP, will oversee the containment effort as ‘AI czar’ with a $140 million budget. In comparison, the Space Force has a $30 billion budget.
Harris met with officials from Google, Microsoft, and OpenAI on Thursday to explore ways to mitigate such possible hazards.
The White House said in a statement, “As we shared today with CEOs of companies at the forefront of American AI innovation, the private sector has an ethical, moral, and legal responsibility to ensure the safety and security of their products.”
“And, in order to safeguard the American people, every firm must follow current laws. I’m looking forward to the follow-through and follow-up in the coming weeks.” Each company’s AI will be evaluated this summer at a hacker event in Las Vegas to check if it adheres to the administration’s ‘AI Bill of Rights.’
The November release of the ChatGPT chatbot sparked a renewed discussion over AI and the government’s role in monitoring the technology. There are ethical and cultural problems since AI may create human-like text and phoney visuals.
These include distributing harmful content, violating data privacy, amplifying existing bias, and – Elon Musk’s favourite – destroying humanity.
“President Biden has been clear that when it comes to AI, we must place people and communities at the centre by supporting responsible innovation that serves the public good while protecting our society, security, and economy,” reads the White House announcement.
“Importantly, this means that businesses have a basic obligation to ensure the safety of their goods before they are deployed or made public.” According to the White House, the public review will be carried out by thousands of community partners and AI specialists.
Professionals in the industry will test the models to evaluate how they correspond with the principles and practises defined in the AI Bill of Rights and the AI Risk Management Framework.
Biden’s AI Bill of Rights, which was released in October 2022, lays forth a framework for how the government, technology corporations, and individuals may collaborate to create more accountable AI.
The measure has five principles: safe and effective systems, protections against algorithmic discrimination, data privacy, notice and explanation, and human alternatives, considerations, and backup.
The White House stated in October, “This framework applies to automated systems that have the potential to meaningfully impact the American public’s rights, opportunities, or access to critical resources or services.”
The White House’s plan of action comes after Musk and 1,000 other technological executives, including Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, signed an open letter in March.
Musk is concerned that technology will evolve to the point where it will no longer require – or listen to – human intervention. It is a widely held fear that has even been acknowledged by the CEO of AI, the company that created ChatGPT, who stated earlier this month that the technology could be developed and used to commit ‘widespread’ cyberattacks.
Even though the mRNA COVID jabs are the most dangerous medical products ever to hit the market, vaccine makers and U.S. health agencies are steamrolling right ahead with a long list of mRNA-based shots, including combination shots to cover multiple viral infections
If the COVID shots are the most dangerous injections we’ve ever seen, what makes them think mRNA shots for cancer, heart disease, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), HIV or any other condition will be any safer?
Moderna is planning to offer a personalized cancer shot by the end of 2028. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already designated it as a “breakthrough therapy,” which means the regulatory review will be expedited. The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is also fast-tracking it under the European “priority medicines” (PRIME) scheme
mRNA-based influenza shots are also in the works. Pfizer and Moderna both launched mRNA flu jab trials in the fall of 2022
Moderna is also developing mRNA shots for shingles and genital herpes based on the same platform used for its COVID jab — a technology that doesn’t stop infection and can depress your immune function such that you become more prone to infections and chronic diseases of all kinds
Even though the mRNA COVID jabs are the most dangerous medical products ever to hit the market, vaccine makers and U.S. health agencies are steamrolling ahead with a long list of mRNA-based shots, including combination shots to cover multiple viral infections at the same time.
If the COVID shots are the most dangerous injections we’ve ever seen, what makes them think mRNA shots for cancer, heart disease, influenza, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), HIV or any other condition will be any safer?
It’s a science experiment gone completely off the rails. No one is safeguarding public health anymore. You could say our health agencies have sold out the public to the drug industry, allowing them to conduct wild population-wide genetic experimentation aimed at furthering the transhumanist agenda at breakneck speed.
Personalized Cancer Shot Is Being Fast-Tracked
As reported by The Guardian in early April 2023,1 Moderna, for example, is planning to offer a personalized cancer shot by the end of 2028. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has already designated it as a “breakthrough therapy,” which means the regulatory review will be expedited.
The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is also fast-tracking it under the European “priority medicines” (PRIME) scheme.2 Here’s how Moderna’s personalized cancer gene therapy is said to work:3
A biopsy of your cancerous tumor is collected
Mutations in the genetic sequence of the tumor are identified
A machine learning algorithm determines which of the identified mutations might be driving the cancer’s growth. Abnormal proteins produced by those mutations are also identified
A synthetic mRNA molecule is created, containing instructions for your cells to make an antigen that your immune system will respond to
Once injected, the mRNA is translated into proteins that are, supposedly, “identical” to those found in your tumor. When immune cells encounter cancer cells that carry these proteins, they destroy them
It sounds good in theory, but as we’ve seen with the COVID shots, any number of things can go wrong once your cells are turned into toxic protein factories. Contrary to transhumanist belief, your body is not a “hardware platform” and your immune system is not like a piece of software that can simply be “updated” with a new set of genetic instructions.
Not even close. It’s more like a spider’s web of interconnected systems and pathways. Pull on one string and the whole network responds with cascades of activity, much of which we still do not understand. It’s beyond foolish to think you can just insert a new genetic instruction on one of the strings and not disturb or impact the rest of the web.
mRNA Flu Jabs Coming Soon
mRNA-based influenza shots are also in the works. Pfizer and Moderna both launched mRNA flu jab trials in the fall of 2022.4 We now know the COVID shot doesn’t protect you against SARS-CoV-2 infection or transmission, so will the flu shot be any different? Are they tweaking it somehow to block infection? Or will it be a repeat of COVID — all risk and no benefit?
In my view, there’s cause for additional concern when it comes to mRNA flu shots, because they’ve already admitted that the viral strains targeted can and will be updated on the fly in the middle of the flu season, should it turn out that the flu strains selected in February are a mismatch to the circulating strains that following winter.5
The industry wants you to believe that changing the antigen has no bearing on the potential side effects, but they have no evidence to support that assertion. Whenever you change the antigen, you run the risk of new side effects, because not all antigens affect your immune system the same way.
For example, the reason why no coronavirus vaccine was ever brought to market despite 20 years of research and experimentation was because they kept causing worse infection. Many vaccines against other viruses don’t have this effect.
And, even though the mRNA platform is completely different from conventional vaccine manufacturing that uses live or attenuated coronaviruses, the effect on the immune system is still clearly an adverse one. So, changing the method didn’t eliminate the problem.
Since the mRNA platform allows for endless customization without additional safety testing to make sure the antigen chosen won’t cause unsuspected problems, it poses a unique threat to public health. Millions will likely be injected before a problem is identified.
Gene Therapies Don’t Work Like Vaccines Do
It’s important to remember that mRNA-based “vaccines” aren’t vaccines. They’re gene therapies. The only reason drug companies and health agencies now insist on calling them vaccines is because they changed the definition of the word so that a vaccine no longer has to protect you from the infection in question. All it must do is stimulate your body’s immune response against the disease.
But if a vaccine doesn’t prevent you from infection, what is the point of it? Natural infection also stimulates your immune response, but you develop immunity. So, all the shot is doing is stimulating — and possibly overstimulating and contributing to autoimmune diseases — your immune system without providing immunity.
mRNA Dosing Conundrum Has yet To Be Solved
Originally, modified mRNA was thought to hold the key to a new source of embryonic stem cells that researchers planned to use to treat anything from Parkinson’s disease to spinal cord injuries. Using modified synthetic mRNA, they hoped to sidestep the controversy of using stem cells from aborted fetuses.
The promise hinged on safe dosing, but in animal studies scientists ran into a now-familiar problem with the mRNA doses. The therapy triggered dangerous immune reactions, yet the lower doses were too weak to show benefit.
There’s no compelling evidence that this dosing problem was ever solved. In fact, it appears sloppy COVID jab manufacturing has resulted in varying strengths of the shots, with some batches being associated with vastly higher rates of injury and death, as detailed on HowBadIsMyBatch.com.6
Also, let’s not forget that the COVID shots appear to be massively accelerating cancer development, as “turbo-charged cancers” are now becoming more common. So, what can we expect from an improperly dosed mRNA cancer jab?
Will mRNA Shots for Herpes and Shingles Prevent Infection?
Moderna is also developing mRNA shots for shingles and genital herpes7 based on the same platform used for its COVID jab — a technology that doesn’t stop infection and can depress your immune function such that you become more prone to infections and chronic diseases of all kinds.
The mRNA COVID shots are also suspected of causing autoimmune conditions by way of molecular mimicry.8 This occurs when similarities between different antigens confuse your immune system.
So, will mRNA shots against herpes and shingles prevent infection? Or will they increase your risk, just like the COVID shots have done? We’ll have to wait and see, but I wouldn’t recommend lining up to test them.
mRNA Integrity Is Another Technical Difficulty
Another technical difficulty that is unlikely to have been solved is the mRNA integrity. As detailed in “Data Leaks Reveal Disturbing Facts About mRNA Instability,” hacked Pfizer COVID jab data show European regulators had significant concerns over the lack of intact mRNA in the commercial batches sampled.
Compared to the clinical batches, i.e., the shots used in the clinical trial, 55% to 78% of the commercial shots had “a significant difference in % RNA integrity/truncated species.”
This is important because intact mRNA is essential for efficacy. According to Daan Crommelin, a professor of biopharmaceutics, “Even a minor degradation reaction, anywhere along a mRNA strand, can severely slow or stop proper translation performance of that strand and thus result in the incomplete expression of the target antigen.”
For an effective product, mRNA integrity needs to be 100%. Considering how ineffective the jabs are, it seems fair to question whether lack of mRNA integrity might be to blame. We also do not know whether fragmented mRNA might be harmful, and to what degree.
While public health agencies claim fragmented RNA poses no health risk, just how do they know that? The leaked documents revealed they did not have an answer to that question. There’s also no evidence that manufacturing processes have been perfected to prevent the fragmentation of mRNA. Like so many other things, the ins and outs of the manufacturing process of mRNA injections are not disclosed or discussed.
The Transhumanist Race Toward Human 2.0
It’s hard to assess the recklessness with which drug companies and health agencies approach mRNA therapy as anything other than an attempt to fulfill a transhumanist dream in the quickest way possible. To perfect the genetic manipulation of human beings would under normal circumstances take many decades, perhaps close to a century, or more.
It would seem the globalist cabal driving the transhumanist agenda decided instead to launch population-wide experimentation to speed up the process. Large-scale studies are always required when you want to prove safety and effectiveness, and the global population has basically been turned into guinea pigs. They don’t care how many are injured or killed in the process. They’ve proven this much by ignoring the mounting death toll.
To the cabal, it’s probably a numbers game. Inject billions of people with gene therapies of various kinds in varying dosages, see what happens and tweak from there. Ultimately, the general population are not the intended beneficiaries of this large-scale experimentation. The globalists are. The guinea pigs are expendable.
National vaccine policy recommendations in the U.S. are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level. It is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights can have the greatest impact.
It is critical for EVERYONE to get involved now in standing up for the legal right to make voluntary vaccine choices in America because those choices are being seriously threatened.
Not only are lobbyists representing drug companies, medical trade associations and public health officials trying to persuade legislators to strip all vaccine exemptions from public health laws, but global political operatives lobbying the United Nations and World Health Organization are determined to take away the human right to autonomy and protection of bodily integrity.
We must take action to defend our constitutional republic and civil liberties, including the right to autonomy, in America. That includes reforming oppressive mandatory vaccination laws and stopping the digital health ID that will make vaccine passports a reality for us, our children and grandchildren if we don’t take action today.
Signing up to use the free online Advocacy Portal sponsored by the National Vaccine Information Center at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you immediate, easy access to your own state and federal legislators on your smartphone or computer so you can make your voice heard.
NVIC will keep you up to date on the latest bills threatening to eliminate — or expand — your legal right to make vaccine choices and give you guidance about what you can do to support or oppose those bills. So, please, as your first step, sign up for the NVIC Advocacy Portal.
Share Your Story With Your Legislators and People You Know
If you or a family member has suffered a serious vaccine reaction, injury or death, please talk about it. If we don’t share information and experiences with one another, everybody feels alone and afraid to speak up.
If you want to protect your legal right to say “no” to vaccines you do not believe are safe or effective, make an appointment to personally talk with someone you have elected to office at the local, state and federal level or write a letter in your own words stating your concerns.
Attend school board and city council and town hall meetings in your community that will impact your right to know and freedom to make decisions about how you or your children will live and stay healthy. If you have a different perspective on a story about vaccination that appears in your local newspaper, write a letter to the editor.
I must be frank with you: You have to be brave because there is a lot of censorship of conversations that challenge “official” narratives about vaccination. You likely will be strongly criticized for daring to talk about the “other side” of the vaccine story and for defending your informed consent rights. Be prepared for it and have the courage to stand your ground.
Only by sharing our perspective and what we know to be true will the public conversation about vaccination open up so people are not afraid to talk about it.
While our rights are being threatened, the vaccine injured are being swept under the carpet and treated like nothing more than statistically acceptable “collateral damage” of one-size-fits-all mandatory vaccination laws. Way too many people are being put at risk for injury and death and there is nothing scientific or moral about that. We should not be treating human beings like guinea pigs.
Internet Resources Where You Can Learn More
I encourage you to visit the four websites of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), at www.NVIC.org, a nonprofit charity that has been educating the public about the need to prevent vaccine injuries and deaths since 1982. The information you get on their websites is fully referenced and will help you become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your community:
NVIC.org — This website was established in 1995 and is the oldest and largest consumer operated website publishing information on diseases and vaccines on the internet. Learn about vaccine reactions, injuries and deaths and the history and current status of vaccine science, policy, law and ethics in the U.S. on more than 2,000 web pages.
NVICAdvocacy.org — This communications and advocacy network, established in 2010, is your gateway to taking action to protect your right to make vaccine choices where you live.
TheVaccineReaction.org — This weekly journal newspaper published by NVIC since 2015 is dedicated to encouraging an “enlightened conversation about vaccination, health and autonomy.”
MedAlerts.org — This is a user-friendly search engine for the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) established under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act and sponsored by NVIC since 2006. Search for descriptions of vaccine injuries and deaths reported to VAERS on this popular website.
Find a Doctor Who Will Listen and Care
If your doctor or pediatrician refuses to provide medical care to you or your child unless you agree to get vaccines you don’t want, I strongly encourage you to have the courage to find another doctor. Harassment, coercion and refusal to provide medical care to someone declining one or more doses of government recommended vaccines is a violation of the informed consent ethic.
Unfortunately, it is becoming routine among members of the medical establishment to be reluctant to share vaccine decision-making power with patients and parents of minor children, especially during the aggressive push for all Americans to get COVID shots.
There are doctors out there who respect the precautionary and informed consent principles, so take the time to locate a doctor who treats you with compassion and is willing to listen and respect the health care choices you make for yourself or your child.
Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, one of the largest banks in the U.S., is advocating for the forceable seizure of American land. In an annual shareholder’s letter, he advised that seizing private property might help the U.S. cope with the climate crises.
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon
100 Percent Fed Up reports – The CEO began his letter by admitting to shareholders that the pandemic and the Ukraine war have taken a toll on the bank, “Across the globe, 2022 was another year of significant challenges: from a terrible war in Ukraine and growing geopolitical tensions — particularly with China — to a politically divided America, almost all nations felt the effects of global economic uncertainty, including higher energy and food prices, mounting inflation rates and volatile markets, and, of course, COVID-19’s lingering impacts.”
Dimon Continued, “While all these experiences and associated turmoil have serious ramifications on our company, colleagues, clients, and the countries in which we do business, their consequences on the world at large — with the extreme suffering of the Ukrainian people and the potential restructuring of the global order — are far more important.”
But then Dimon surprised shareholders when he brought an “Update on Specific Issues Facing Our Company” under the “Climate Complexity and Planning” subsection and spoke on Eminent Domain.
Eminent Domain is the legal theory enabling governments to seize private property for public use. The property owner’s reimbursement for their possessions is generally less than the value of the property that was taken.
Following previous climate fearmongers like Al Gore, Dimon warned shareholders that time is running out, “The window for action to avert the costliest impacts of global climate change is closing,” He added, “to expedite progress, governments, businesses, and non-governmental organizations need to align across a series of practical policy changes that comprehensively address fundamental issues that are holding us back. Massive global investment in clean energy technologies must be done and must continue to grow year-over-year,” Dimon noted.
He described the need to employ “practical policy changes.” And said that could include utilizing eminent Domain to take private property in order to fight climate control, “At the same time, permitting reforms are desperately needed to allow investment to be done in any kind of timely way. We may even need to evoke Eminent Domain.”
West Virginia State Treasurer Riley Moore pointed out the devastation that could be caused by the U.S. government simply seizing personal property. He tweeted, “JP Morgan’s CEO wants to use Eminent Domain to build more wind and solar farms. If you think food and energy prices are bad now, just wait until the government starts seizing farmland to build solar panels. This kind of thinking poses an existential threat to the middle class.
JP Morgan’s CEO wants to use eminent domain to build more wind and solar farms.
If you think food and energy prices are bad now, just wait until the government starts seizing farmland to build solar panels.
This kind of thinking poses an existential threat to the middle class.
Dimon, who has yet to offer his own private property to the government for less than its value, tried to make his suggestion sound less tyrannical and extreme by saying “green energies” are not advancing quickly enough,
“We simply are not getting the adequate investments fast enough for grid, solar, wind, and pipeline initiatives.”
Dimon’s comments are reminiscent of World Economic Forums Founder Klaus Schwab’s eery promise, “You will own nothing and be happy.”
One Twitter user responded that JPMorgan and Chase Bank customers should pull their accounts ASAP to make Dimon shut his mouth while also pointing out that the communist desire to strip Americans of their hard-earned assets is alive and well.
People in the United States and Europe have long taken for granted the idea that the world is in the midst of a “population explosion” that threatens to cause the starvation of millions and render the earth uninhabitable The world, we were told, would simply run out of food, and could not possibly sustain the population it would soon have. This was how generations of people were sold on the idea that it was the “responsible” thing to do to have small families, and it even led to the weakening of the idea of the family itself as contributing to the looming problem that looked as if it would kill us all. There was just one problem with the whole scenario: there was no population explosion at all, as a new study has now confirmed.
The UK’s far-Left Guardianadmitted Monday that “the long-feared ‘population bomb’ may not go off, according to the authors of a new report that estimates that human numbers will peak lower and sooner than previously forecast.” The Club of Rome study, which was “carried out by the Earth4All collective of leading environmental science and economic institutions, including the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Stockholm Resilience Centre and the BI Norwegian Business School,” predicts that “on current trends the world population will reach a high of 8.8 billion before the middle of the century, then decline rapidly.” This being the Guardian, it added: “The peak could come earlier still if governments take progressive steps to raise average incomes and education levels.”
It’s jarring to read this. Population explosion hysteria has been a staple of education for decades, and there are no doubt millions of people who still take the idea that soon there will be many more people on earth than can possibly be fed as axiomatic fact. Americans have so internalized this belief that people with large families are guilt-tripped on a routine basis. I myself can remember being inundated with this propaganda in public school at all levels, although of course, no one recognized it as propaganda in those palmy days, as far back as the early 1970s. The population explosion myth became the basis for many of the Left’s other favored agendas, including the “climate crisis,” the bug-eating plan, and even the sexual revolution, which was in large part made possible by the contraception and abortion that we were told had to be readily available in order to try to bring the world’s population under control.
All this is largely the work of one man, Paul Ehrlich, who despite being an obvious fraud (or perhaps because he’s an obvious fraud) is enjoying a new vogue among Leftists today. The Wall Street Journalnoted in Jan. 2023 that the establishment media treats the 90-year-old Ehrlich “with an obsequious deference,” as evidenced in a “recent cringe-worthy segment on CBS’s ‘60 Minutes’” that retailed the population explosion myth yet again.
Ehrlich started the hysteria rolling in 1968 with his bestselling book The Population Bomb. It began, “The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.” In April 1970, he amplified the warning, saying: “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” Ehrlich even predicted that England would cease to exist by the year 2000.
England still exists as of this writing (although some may think it is in such bad shape that it would have been better off shuffling off this mortal coil 23 years ago), and 100-200 million people have not been starving to death every year. And now we learn that the whole thing was false.
But Leftist hysteria doesn’t die that easily. The authors of the new study that definitively debunks the idea of the population explosion still “caution that falling birthrates alone will not solve the planet’s environmental problems, which are already serious at the 8 billion level and are primarily caused by the excess consumption of a wealthy minority.” See? We need global socialism, with the forced confiscation and redistribution of wealth. That’ll fix everything!
Ben Callegari, one of the authors of the new study, emphasized this: “This gives us evidence to believe the population bomb won’t go off, but we still face significant challenges from an environmental perspective. We need a lot of effort to address the current development paradigm of overconsumption and overproduction, which are bigger problems than population.” What is coming? Socialism is coming, and the resulting famines and starvation will take care of overconsumption once and for all.
PARIS, April 20 (Reuters) – A group of protesters briefly invaded offices of stockmarket operator Euronext in Paris’ La Defense business district on Thursday, saying big companies must pay up to finance pensions, as part of wider protests against a rise in the retirement age.
“We are told that there is no money to finance pensions,” said Sud-Rail unionist Fabien Villedieu. But there is “no need to get the money from the pockets of workers, there is some in the pockets of billionaires.”
Waving union flags, the group of a few hundred protesters occupied Euronext’s lobby, engulfed in red smoke from flares, and chanted words popular with pension protesters: “We are here, we are here, even if Macron does not want it we are here.”
They also shouted: “Macron resign!”
Earlier this month, similar scenes occurred at Blackrock’s Paris offices.
At the weekend, Macron signed into law the rise in the retirement age which means citizens must work two years longer, to 64, before receiving their state pension.
[1/7] French SNCF railway workers on strike, wearing vests of French CGT and Sud Rail labour unions, enter the headquarters of stock market operator Euronext at La Defense business and financial district as part of a “day of expression of railway anger” following months of strikes and a failed attempt to halt pension reforms, in Courbevoie near Paris, France, April 20, 2023. REUTERS/Benoit Tessier
That was after three months of protests that brought huge crowds onto the streets and at times turned violent. Opinion polls show a vast majority of voters oppose the pension reform.
Macron and his government say they want to move on and work on other measures to do with working conditions, law and order, education and health issues.
But the protesters in La Defense on Thursday, as well as those who heckled Macron during a visit to France’s eastern Alsace region on Wednesday, made clear many were not ready to move on.
“We’ll continue until the (pension law’s) withdrawal,” protesters shouted in La Defense’s central square, standing by a banner that read: “No to the pension reform”.
Macron himself faced protests on Thursday during his second public outing since signing the bill into law.
While he was visiting a school in the southern French town of Ganges, smiling and taking selfies with pupils, protesters held a few hundred meters away by police also chanted against the pension reform.
“There is a bit of everything,” Macron said in the schoolyard, shrugging off the protests. “There are people who are happy, and people who are not happy.”
Reporting by Noemie Olive, writing by Tassilo Hummel, editing by Ingrid Melander
A new study published in Frontiers medical journal states that symptoms from wearing masks, including respiratory illnesses and other ailments, may have been misinterpreted as ‘long COVID’. Green Med Info added that it is also possible that mRNA-jab induced adverse effects have been misindentified as “Long Covid” symptoms, but it has not been studied.
.Summary by JW Williams
According to US News, symptoms of long COVID are wide-ranging, including shortness of breath, fatigue, fever, headaches, “brain fog” and other neurological problems. Their article claims that the condition is both difficult to diagnose and to treat. It also admits that experts warn, “people can get long COVID despite vaccination status or taking Paxlovid, so the measures aren’t guarantees against getting the condition.”
According to a study published by Frontiers, masks interfered with oxygen-uptake and carbon dioxide-release and can lead to mask-induced exhaustion-syndrome (MIES) and down-stream physio-metabolic dysfunctions. Several mask related symptoms may have been misinterpreted as Long COVID-19 symptoms.
The researchers who analyzed the data concluded, “Face mask side-effects must be assessed (risk-benefit) against the available evidence of their effectiveness against viral transmissions. In the absence of strong empirical evidence of effectiveness, mask wearing should not be mandated let alone enforced by law.”
Sayer Ji at Green Med Info wrote that mask mandates “should be backed by solid evidence, and should be balanced with the risks. [Note: it is also possible that mRNA-jab induced adverse effects have been misindentified as “Long Covid” symptoms; another vitally important area of research that has yet to make it through the highly guarded, censorship prone peer-review process.]”
Pills that can help a person reverse the effects of aging could be on the market in the next five years, according to an expert.
Sam Altman, 37, was revealed to have funded biotech startup Retro BioScience to the tune of $180million last month. He is the latest in a long line of Silicon Valley billionaires to throw their considerable wealth behind the science of aging.
Amazon’s Jeff Bezos is reported to have invested $3billion in life-extension startup Altos Labs. PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel invested in the Methuselah Foundation, which has the goal of making ’90 the new 50′.
With all these resources being thrown at curing aging, Andrew Steele, the author of the 2020 book ‘Ageless: The new science of getting older without getting old’, believes pills to prevent aging may be on pharmacy shelves within five years.
He points to existing medications — such as the diabetes tablet metformin – that could be retooled as anti-aging treatments in the ‘very, very near term’.
+3
View gallery
Sam Altman (left), founder of ChatGPT creator OpenAI, has invested in a life-extension biotech. Amazon founder Jeff Bezos (right) funded Atlos Labs and its research into life extension for $3billion
Tech billionaire Peter Thiel invested in the Methuselah Foundation, hoping to great exceed the average person’s lifespan
Steele said: ‘With these billionaires, I’m sure some of them are doing it purely for personal gain — they’ve got all this money and they can’t possibly spend it in a single human lifetime.
‘But… if you’re a savvy investor, you can see that anti-aging medication is a huge business opportunity because the potential market is every living human.
‘I think it’s going to be the biggest revolution in medicine since the discovery of antibiotics — and as a savvy business person, you want to be on the leading edge of that revolution.’
While aging does not directly kill people, older people are at risk of many deadly diseases such as Alzheimer’s, heart disease and cancer.
Around 100,000 people die from age-related diseases every day, according to the World Health Organization.
Mr Steele says: ‘Aging is the greatest humanitarian challenge of all time.
There are ’20 to 30′ companies developing new drugs known as ‘senolytics’ which kill aging cells in the body, he explained.
In mice, these drugs cause elderly animals to become lively and healthy suddenly.
‘Many of these drugs are drugs that we already understand and use for different purposes, so we don’t have to develop new medications,’ Mr Steele said.
An example of a senolytic treatment is the combination of datasinib, used for chemotherapy, and quercetin, a molecule found in fruits and vegetables.
Used together, they remove aged ‘senescent’ cells responsible for many of the problems associated with aging.
Another potential general anti-aging drug is metformin. First approved in 1994 for type 2 diabetes, the drug has shown promise extending lifespans by improving blood vessel health.
‘Some of those companies are trying to develop new and more effective drugs that could do the same thing better,’ the author said.
‘That’s the sort of thing that’s very, very close to clinical realization. And I’d be shocked if in five years we don’t have some senolytics in the clinic.
‘It probably won’t be for aging at first. It’ll be for a specific disease – and maybe in 10 years, we’ll use it for aging.
‘These things are very, very near term.’
Jeff Bezos’s investment in Altos Labs — the biggest biotechnology company launch of all time — is a longer shot, Steele believes.
Dr Andrew Steele is the author of Ageless, a new book on life extension (Tran Nguyen)
The firm specializes finding and developing cell therapies that can halt and eventually reverse the process of aging.
Mr Steele says: ‘This relies on a process called cellular reprogramming. It’s been shown to work on cells in a dish, and there’s some evidence it works in mice – but it’s an incredibly complicated piece of science.
‘It’s like science that seems to have fallen through a wormhole from the future – and even if it does work, do we have the biological applied understanding in the 2020s to turn that into a workable treatment?’
When Altos Labs was announced, Elon Musk quipped on Twitter about the Amazon mogul: ‘If it doesn’t work, he’s gonna sue death!’
With labs launching in America and Cambridge, the company is reputed to pay scientists poached from the world’s top universities salaries of up to a million dollars a year.
Steele says that, realistically, treatments we are likely to see in the near term will extend ‘healthspan’ by dealing with age-related diseases — delaying the onset of problems such as dementia.
Dr Cathy Slack, a biologist from the University of Aston, in the UK, agrees, telling DailyMail.com: ‘The goal is to increase the number of years of healthy lifespan rather than extending the late-life period of poor health.’
She said there are now ‘many’ published studies that show that genetic or environmental changes can extend a healthy lifespan.
She says: ‘Many of the biological systems that have been shown to play a role in healthy aging in these animal models are also present in humans and perform similar functions – so there is every reason to believe that these same processes are impacting on human aging.
‘The ultimate goal is really to try and manipulate these systems during human aging to maintain health and quality of life.’
Dr Slack believes that successful treatments are likely to be a combination of drugs and lifestyle changes – and look holistically at all the diseases that afflict people in later life.
She says: ‘Historically, we have viewed the various diseases associated with older age as distinct entities – so research tends to focus on each one rather than looking at them more holistically together as a direct consequence of biological aging.
‘We already know that there are lifestyle changes that will help to maintain multiple aspects of heath during aging.
‘Exercise, for example. But supplementation with drugs that target multiple physiological parameters of aging could have a huge impact on quality of life for older adults.’
In mid-February 2023, I reported that the U.S. government has secretly been tracking those who didn’t get the COVID jab, or are only partially jabbed, through a previously unknown surveillance program
Within days, fact checkers tried to debunk the idea that individual people are being tracked, or that these data could be misused by government or third parties
COVID “vaccination” status was not considered a private medical matter at all during 2021 and 2022, yet mainstream media now want you to believe that your COVID jab status is protected by medical privacy laws
Your medical data are not nearly as private as you think. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is rife with exemptions when it comes to your privacy. Federal agencies such as Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, are exempt from the privacy clauses and can access identifiable data — especially if there’s an outbreak of infectious disease, be it real or fictitious
Government agencies and a number of third parties or “covered entities” can also use a number of loopholes to re-identify previously de-identified patient data
In mid-February 2023, I reported that the U.S. government has secretly been tracking those who didn’t get the COVID jab, or are only partially jabbed, through a previously unknown surveillance program designed by the U.S. National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), a division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.1
Within days, fact checkers were burning the midnight oil trying to debunk the idea that individual people are being tracked, or that these data could be misused by government or third parties.
Strangely enough, the most egregious “misinformation” example USA Today’s fact checker could find was a social media post that “generated nearly 200 likes in less than a month.”2 Two hundred likes? To most influencers, that’s nothing, especially not over the course of 30 days.
Why is USA Today stressing over a post with 200 likes? Seems a bit panicky if you ask me. Reuters also came out with a fact check and, like USA Today, Reuters claimed there was a lack of “context:”3
“New diagnostic codes that describe a patient as under-immunized against COVID-19 were introduced to help doctors identify patients potentially at risk for more-severe COVID and to help health officials track vaccine effectiveness and mortality statistics, among other public health questions, not for U.S. government tracking of unvaccinated individuals, as some are claiming online.
The codes in an individual’s medical record, like all personal health information, are protected by U.S. privacy law and could only be analyzed at the group or population level uncoupled from individual identities …”
Your Medical Records Are Far From Private
As is so often the case, the fact checkers are the ones taking the issue out of context or, rather, not presenting the full picture. The fact is, your medical data are not nearly as private as you think. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is rife with exemptions when it comes to your privacy.
Federal agencies such as Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have every right to access identifiable information, as they are exempt from the privacy clauses, and they’re particularly justified to access your private vaccination data if there’s an outbreak of infectious disease, be it real or fictitious. As noted in the HHS’s and CDC’s HIPAA guidance:4
“Balancing the protection of individual health information with the need to protect public health, the Privacy Rule expressly permits disclosures without individual authorization to public health authorities authorized by law to collect or receive the information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability, including but not limited to public health surveillance, investigation, and intervention …
[T]he Privacy Rule expressly permits PHI [protected health information] to be shared for specified public health purposes. For example, covered entities may disclose PHI, without individual authorization, to a public health authority legally authorized to collect or receive the information for the purpose of preventing or controlling disease, injury, or disability …
Further, the Privacy Rule permits covered entities to make disclosures that are required by other laws, including laws that require disclosures for public health purposes.”
Loopholes Also Allow Re-Identification of Personal Data
Government agencies and a number of third parties or “covered entities” can also use a number of loopholes to re-identify previously de-identified patient data. As explained in a CDC Public Health Law document detailing the lawful sharing of private medical data:5
“While HIPAA limits the use and disclosure of health information, it also permits certain secondary use exceptions for public health purposes. HIPAA provides certain circumstances under which patient data can be disclosed to health departments without patient authorization.
Under HIPAA, providers may disclose identifiable patient data (protected health information or PHI) if required by law, allowing states to pass legal exceptions to HIPAA restrictions.
Providers may also disclose PHI to health departments without patient authorization for public health activities, such as communicable disease reporting, or to a public health authority to prevent or control disease, injury, or disability under the public health exemption. A covered entity may access, use, and disclose PHI for clinical research without an individual’s authorization if:
1)it obtains documentation of waiver of individual’s authorization by an institutional review board or privacy board
2)the PHI is necessary for this research
3)the research is using PHI of decedents
Providers may disclose EHI without patient authorization when the data have been ‘de-identified’ … but still permits re-identification by providers or regional health information organizations through randomized patient source codes should a public health alert or case report become necessary.
Finally, providers may disclose a ‘limited data set,’ including dates and zip codes, without authorization and still re-identify patients if they maintain patient codes derived from certain identifiers.”
So, can your vaccination status be accessed by federal health agencies? Yes. Can that information be identifiable? Absolutely yes. Does that mean that you, as an individual, could be surveilled and/or get caught in a forced vaccination dragnet or end up experiencing negative repercussions in other areas of your life due to your vaccination status? Probably.
U.S. “privacy” laws certainly make allowances for such scenarios, and considering the behavior of government over the past three years, it would be naïve to believe they would never use your vaccination data against you.
Reuters Muddies the Water
Reuters also muddies the water in other ways. For example, the fact check stresses that medical providers have used the general code Z28.3 (which represents “underimmunized”) since 2015, and that “these codes are not used with purposes beyond monitoring and reporting diseases and mortality statistics or for insurance billing.”
While it’s true that the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) code Z28.3 has been around for years, the new subcodes that track COVID jab status were added in mid-September 2021 during a ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee meeting, and during that meeting, they specified that “there is interest in being able to track people who are not immunized or only partially immunized.”
Below is a screenshot of page 194 of the agenda6 distributed during that meeting. There’s no ambiguity here. The new ICD-10 codes were added for the specific purpose of “tracking people” who are unjabbed or only partially jabbed against COVID-19.
They didn’t say they wanted to track “general population data.” They specifically said “people” are to be tracked. They also clearly state that this tracking is “of value for public health” — and again, the key words “public health” open the door to federal health agencies accessing identifiable data.
Moreover, additional subcodes specify the “why” a person chose not to get the COVID shot or stopped getting boosters. Those codes are listed in the screenshot below, under Z28.3 Underimmunization Status.7
The use of “delinquent immunization status” under code Z28.39 also tells us something about where this is all headed. “Delinquent” means being “neglectful of a duty” or being “guilty of an offense.” Is refusing boosters a criminal offense? Perhaps not today, but some day, it might be, and these codes lay the foundation for that kind of medical persecution.
All Missed Vaccinations Will Be Tracked
Another tipoff that these codes will become part and parcel of the biosecurity control grid, even if they’re not used in this way now, is the fact that code Z28.39 — “Other underimmunization status”8 — is to be used “when a patient is not current on other, non-COVID vaccines.”9
In other words, they have already begun tracking ALL of your vaccinations, not just the COVID shot, and they can use the Z28.3 sub-codes to identify why you refused a given vaccine.
They’ve also added a billable ICD-10 code for “immunization safety counseling,” which explains the codes detailing “why” you refused a vaccine. So, if you didn’t get a vaccine due to “personal decision” (code Z28.2), or due to “personal beliefs or group pressure” (code Z28.1), then your doctor can bill your insurance for regurgitating vaccine propaganda and trying to change your mind.
Codes Could Be Put to Good Use
Giving credit where credit is due, Reuters Fact Check did point out a potentially beneficial purpose for the new ICD-10 codes:10
“[Eric Burnett, who specializes in hospital and internal medicine at Columbia University] said the ICD-10 codes could also help track data on vaccine efficacy, including comparisons between vaccination statuses of hospital or ICU patients with COVID, or patient mortality data based on vaccination status.”
That would be great, but the risk of these data being misused by the government is, I believe, greater than the possibility of them being used to protect the public from dangerous mRNA shots, seeing how overwhelming amounts of data showing harms are already being willfully ignored.
CDC Refuses to Answer Questions About the New Codes
Another red flag is the fact that the CDC has refused to answer questions about how it intends to use the new ICD-10 codes. In mid-February 2023, nine House Republicans sent a letter to the CDC demanding answers to these five questions:11
Why did the CDC and National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) decide to start gathering data on why Americans chose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine?
How do the CDC and NCHS intend to use these new COVID-19 vaccination ICD codes?
What steps are the CDC and NCHS taking to ensure that Americans’ private health information contained in the ICD system is protected?
Will the CDC and NCHS confirm that they have not, will not, and cannot create a database of Americans based on their COVID-19 vaccination status?
Can the CDC and NCHS confirm that private companies do not have access to lists of Americans’ COVID-19 vaccination status through the ICD system, or any other database overseen by the CDC and NCHS
As reported by The Daily Signal February 28, 2023, the CDC for some reason does not want to answer these questions:12
“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention told The Daily Signal that it ‘will not be tracking’ the reasons Americans give for refusing to take a COVID-19 vaccine … Meanwhile, congressional Republicans told The Daily Signal that the CDC failed to respond to their questions by a deadline last week.
‘Two weeks ago, we sent a letter to the CDC demanding answers about its new COVID-19 vaccine database,’ Rep. Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., told The Daily Signal in a statement …
‘The CDC is stonewalling us and refusing to respond. Why won’t the CDC explain why it’s gathering data about Americans’ personal choices? House Republicans are not afraid to use the budgetary process to keep the CDC accountable to the American people,’ Brecheen warned.
House Republicans raised the alarm about the CDC’s involvement with the World Health Organization’s recently codified International Classification of Disease, or ICD, codes related to COVID-19 vaccination status, which went into effect last April. The codes enable the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to collect data on the reasons Americans refuse to take one of the vaccines …
‘The ICD codes were implemented in April 2022, however the CDC/NCHS does not have any data on the codes and will not be tracking this information,’ Nick Spinelli, a CDC spokesman, said in an emailed statement. ‘The codes are developed and managed by the World Health Organization to enable healthcare providers to track within their practices …'”
End Goal Is Global Database for the Vaccine Passport System
The mention of the WHO brings me to my next point, which is that all of this information will likely, eventually, be transferred into a global vaccination database. Hence the reason why the WHO develops and manages the ICD-10 codes. It’s to allow for the “harmonization” of health care across the world.
Incidentally, the fact that the WHO develops and manages these codes also means that the WHO has approved these new codes that track vaccination status, and we already know that the WHO is working on a global vaccine passport.
To work properly, a global vaccine passport system needs a global vaccination database, and there’s no telling what privacy measures, if any, such a database might end up with. What we do know is that white papers13 and proposed legislation14 published during the COVID era that discuss health tracking and/or vaccine passports have stressed that privacy concerns must be relaxed or dropped altogether to ensure global biosecurity.
We also saw how COVID “vaccination” status was not considered a private medical matter at all during 2021 and 2022. In many places, you had to disclose your status and show proof that you’d been jabbed. Yet mainstream media now want you to believe that your COVID jab status is protected by medical privacy laws. What a joke.
As noted by Dr. Robert Malone in a January 25, 2023, Substack article, this vaccine passport system is being put into place right under our noses, and it would be incredibly naïve to think that these new ICD-10 codes are not part of that scheme:15
“The administrative state is busy building a vaccine passport system that will be active before most Americans are aware of what is being done to them. No one is going to knock on your door asking for your vaccine status because they already know …
They don’t need approval from Congress or the courts because we have given them the information through our health care providers. The CDC is the governmental organization tasked with tracking vaccine status on individuals.
They already have the records, as well as updated booster information. They just need to tweak a definition here and there, or get President Biden to keep the COVID-19 public health emergency in place indefinitely and the vaccine passports will be a fait accompli.”
A Data Collection Dragnet
As of January 1, 2014, the U.S. government required public and private health care providers to adopt and use electronic medical records (EMR) if they wanted to quality for full Medicaid and Medicare reimbursement.
The government also financially incentivized physicians and hospitals to adopt electronic HEALTH records or EHR.16 The difference between EMR and EHR is that EHR provides a far more comprehensive patient history than EMR, as it contains a patient’s medical history from more than one medical practice.
In essence, EHR is what you get when doctors share your medical data to create one comprehensive file that covers all your interactions with the medical system. While that sounds good in theory, Big Pharma immediately seized the opportunity to misuse it by placing drug ads within the EHR system.
This in turn has driven up medical costs and resulted in poor prescribing decisions that put patients at risk.17 Patients are also directly targeted with drug marketing through patient portals.
Physicians and hospitals who adopted EHR got paid extra. Between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) paid out EHR incentive payments to hospitals totaling $14.6 billion.18 Meanwhile, those who chose not to capture, share and report clinical data on patients were financially penalized through reduced Medicare reimbursements.19,20
Needless to say, these “sticks” and “carrots” led to the rapid adoption of both EMR and EHR, both of which government requires if it wants the power to control the population through medicine, and we now know that’s exactly what government intends to do.
Transhumanism Is Being Implemented Through Food and Medicine
At the end of September 2022, President Biden laid out a “bold goal” to “end hunger and increase healthy eating and physical activity by 2030” through a federally-backed “Food Is Medicine” campaign.21
Integrating food and nutrition with health care so that food and health policies are under one umbrella will facilitate the creation of new policies, funding and control over both areas. Eventually, food purchases and health records will be linked to your vaccine passport/digital identity, which also holds your educational records, travel records, work records and bank accounts.
That this “Food Is Medicine” campaign has nothing to do with promoting real nutrition or whole food is obvious, as that same month Biden also signed the “Executive Order on Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe and Secure American Bioeconomy.”22
On a larger scale, this plan is also promoted by the World Health Organization, which is trying to seize power over health care globally through International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments and the Pandemic Treaty. For more information on that, see “Pandemic Treaty Will Usher In Unelected One World Government.”
The WHO is also seeking to put food, medicine and climate under one umbrella. This would allow it to control the global population in any number of ways, as a climate issue could be positioned as a public health issue, or a food issue, and vice versa. In other words, people could be forced to eat bugs instead of beef because it “benefits the climate.” Private vehicle use could be restricted because it helps lower vehicular pollution that endangers public health, and so on.
So, to bring us full circle back to where we started, while media are now trying to lull you to sleep with “promises” that there’s nothing nefarious about tracking the unvaccinated or “undervaccinated,” think long and hard before you close your eyes to the possibility that this is all part of biosecurity-based totalitarian control grid.
(OK, This Paper is really long, but both disturbing and informative, so I decided to refer you to the link for the rest of it.)
The Unrecognized Threat of Human Augmentation
The authorities are getting to be too comfortable with the idea of reengineering organisms, including humans, and regulatory safeguards are nonexistent
Fair warning. This is going to be very cynical. Even more than my usual level of cynicism, in fact. If you’re not into that, I totally understand, but in light of recent developments, some things simply have to be said, no matter how insensitive they are.
After my last conversation with ChatGPT, the overall scope of the problems we face became clearer. These problems are deep and systemic, and they go far, far beyond any one virus or vaccine.
Technocracy is, at its core, the notion that political problems should have technological solutions. The original technocracy movement as conceived by Howard Scott did not regard itself as a political movement of any sort. They wanted to abolish politicians and, by extension, politics.
Every conceivable political problem was one of mere engineering to them. Human desires weren’t a part of the equation at all. Plastic grocery bags choking waterways? Force people to use biodegradable paper ones and stop handing out plastic bags at stores. People riding on the steps on streetcars? Don’t fine the errant riders, just remove the steps so there’s nothing to stand on. People speeding and driving drunk? Electronically govern the top speed of their vehicles, and make their steering wheel breathalyze them before they can turn the key in the ignition. Immediate and obvious parallels to Nudge Theory and other social-cybernetic schemes can be drawn. In many ways, the core tenets of technocratic ideology are already a widely accepted component of our politics, if the constant parade of “experts” on television and their embrace of scientism are any indication.
The technocratic perspective basically regards people and their societal relations as machines with discrete inputs and outputs. It disregards basic things like values, personal tastes, delight and disgust, and normativity. From the view of a technocrat, what people want doesn’t matter. What they physically need does. As a result, technocracy is a deeply paternalistic worldview; it presents human beings as flawed biological robots that require the constant intervention of a purely rational and benevolent caretaker figure.
In this view, human civilization has many different intractable problems that arise, generally speaking, from human biology. From the allegedly impartial perspective of a technocrat, human beings are aggressive, violent, wasteful, prejudicial, paranoid, greedy, close-minded chimpanzees who suffer from a curse of occasional brilliance and whose reach generally exceeds their grasp. From this point of view, every conceivable flaw possessed by human beings can and should be permanently cured by the application of technology.
We already see plenty of examples of this now, in a primitive form. Boredom and ennui? Just play some video games, or watch Netflix. Depressed? Unfulfilled? Down another Xanax, it’ll be okay. The thing about these interventions, however, is that they are temporary and distinct from us. Any addict can, one day, simply stop consuming their drug of choice. Someone who has been prescribed pills for one of any number of modernity-induced mental illnesses can quit taking them at any time. They’re not an intrinsic part of their bodies.
Once you start reengineering human beings and our germlines directly in order to improve society, however, you can never quite return back to the natural baseline. Those are permanent changes. They can’t just be magically switched off and tossed aside. There’s no putting that genie back in the bottle. Furthermore, if we do end up going down that route, then humans are guaranteed to go extinct in very short order.
Human beings have one imperative above all others, and that is to survive and perpetuate our genes. We share that in common with all other animals, with one caveat. We do something that no other species does. We romanticize it. Our history is full of stories of pioneers braving the wilds and settling and starting communities, or of soldiers returning home to their sweethearts. One might say that the central human quest is all about creating a legacy and being remembered by history.
This endeavor has no particular meaning. The universe doesn’t care if you’re forgotten. It’s cold and empty out there, and Earth is just one rock among many, and there is no guarantee that any of our descendants will be breathing in a hundred million years. In fact, in a little over half a billion years, most plant species on Earth will be dead due to the end of C3 photosynthesis. All those folks whining about there being too much CO2 in the atmosphere will suddenly wish there was a whole lot more of it. Oh wait, scratch that. They’ll be lonely skeletons buried over a mile underground.
The final fate of mankind as yet remains undecided. However, if everything were to stay the way it is at present, then our eventual doom is absolutely guaranteed. That is to say, we will eventually evolve into a completely different species. This will happen sometime over the course of the next million years or so. Without us taking direct control of the human genome and forcing ourselves to stay the same, this will inevitably happen, even if we don’t want it to, simply as a consequence of entirely natural and unavoidable mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift.
How attached are you to your humanity? I’m going to guess that you’re pretty attached to it. If you weren’t, then you wouldn’t be reading this. My overarching goal is the preservation of humankind and our emancipation from the grip of overreaching technocrats.
If we allow the technocrats to succeed, then human beings won’t last a thousand years. We won’t even last a hundred. We’ll be replaced by something completely different.
The Singularity
A decade ago, noted singularitarian and transhumanist Ray Kurzweil posted this song by Miracles of Modern Science on his blog, Kurzweilai.net:
Listen closely to the lyrics.
By the time that we all go deaf, I know that we’ll find a cure for it, yeah,
People say that we’ll die someday, but we just don’t believe it,
Long before we are old and gray, we’ll find a way to beat it,
Fight against physical decay, keep our bodies breathing,
By the next quarter century we won’t even need them.
This is not supposed to be hyperbole or over-optimism. Singularitarians follow a sort of new age religious belief. It goes a little something like this: by around 2030 or 2040, mankind will experience a technological singularity. The term itself is derived from the scientific jargon for what lies beyond the event horizon of a black hole. It is defined, in this case, as the point at which all of our predictions about what future technology will look like completely break down.
This is the part that a lot of people get wrong. When they hear the “Singularity”, they think “High Tech”. What it actually means is that we have absolutely no idea what will happen next. Human beings could suddenly and irreversibly grey-goo ourselves into Colonials from All Tomorrows and spend the next few millennia as sessile meat cubes. That’s the point. We don’t know.
However, there are a few generalities to this transformative period that most singularitarians hold to be true:
Basically all problems of scarcity of material goods will be solved overnight. This is never fully explained, but if you press them further, what inevitably comes out of their mouths is some variation on “Yeah, 3D printers will become Star Trek replicators and stuff and I’ll be able to grow an iPhone in a vat of bacteria”.
Human beings will transcend biology and become physically immortal, either by mind uploading, or by transferring our consciousnesses to immortal synthetic bodies. We might apply rejuvenation tech to our own bodies as a stopgap before tossing them aside when they’re no longer necessary. The technical term for this is human extinction, by the way. Such beings may be sapient minds, but they would no longer be quantifiably human.
AI will become fully sapient and self-aware, and won’t want to immediately massacre all of us, and it will recursively invent better versions of itself until it approaches technological godhood, at which point it will, overnight, make human scientists utterly irrelevant and invent everything necessary to ensure that the previously mentioned things come to pass, with or without human intervention or consent.
There are, of course numerous problems with this. First off, it’s basically Christian Millenarianism but with technology standing in for Christ. Second, it’s one of many dubious attempts to immanentize the eschaton and bring about an everlasting utopia on Earth. Third, they never even bother to calculate the actual logistics of it, or go over the many, many ethical problems and existential issues that it raises.
The luddite bomber Ted Kaczynski wrote a small, fascinating essay repudiating transhumanism:
Because immortality, as the techies conceive it, will be technically feasible, the techies take it for granted that some system to which they belong can and will keep them alive indefinitely, or provide them with what they need to keep themselves alive. Today it would no doubt be technically feasible to provide everyone in the world with everything that he or she needs in the way of food, clothing, shelter, protection from violence, and what by present standards is considered adequate medical care—if only all of the world’s more important self-propagating systems would devote themselves unreservedly to that task. But that never happens, because the self-propagating systems are occupied primarily with the endless struggle for power and therefore act philanthropically only when it is to their advantage to do so. That’s why billions of people in the world today suffer from malnutrition, or are exposed to violence, or lack what is considered adequate medical care.
In view of all this, it is patently absurd to suppose that the technological world-system is ever going to provide seven billion human beings with everything they need to stay alive indefinitely. If the projected immortality were possible at all, it could only be for some tiny subset of the seven billion—an elite minority. Some techies acknowledge this. One has to suspect that a great many more recognize it but refrain from acknowledging it openly, for it is obviously imprudent to tell the public that immortality will be for an elite minority only and that ordinary people will be left out.
The techies of course assume that they themselves will be included in the elite minority that supposedly will be kept alive indefinitely. What they find convenient to overlook is that self-propagating systems, in the long run, will take care of human beings—even members of the elite—only to the extent that it is to the systems’ advantage to take care of them. When they are no longer useful to the dominant self-propagating systems, humans—elite or not—will be eliminated. In order to survive, humans not only will have to be useful; they will have to be more useful in relation to the cost of maintaining them—in other words, they will have to provide a better cost-versus-benefit balance—than any non-human substitutes. This is a tall order, for humans are far more costly to maintain than machines are.
This is a valid argument. Once you have a more advanced sort of mind than humans (for instance, a superintelligent AGI), then there is no reason to keep wasteful, warring, raping, machete-murdering, cocaine-snorting humans around. They’re just an overgrowth. A tumor on the surface of the planet, using up resources that could be used to build more AI nodes instead. Do people really think that any AI worth its salt would want to keep humans around after watching a few old LiveLeak videos of a Brazilian teen laughing and shooting an estranged friend in the face with a snub-nose revolver? Come on. Let’s be reasonable, here. If we’re going to be murderous and hateful misanthropes and regard life as some manner of twisted zero-sum game where the winner gets a private yacht and a few thousand obedient slaves and the losers are worm food, then why don’t we drop any and all pretenses of humanism and go all the way?
But, I digress. You see, the reason why we assume that AI would be automatically aligned with us is because we foolishly anthropomorphize it. We assume that a non-human mind would somehow, mysteriously, possess human values and motivations, positive or negative. If you really want to be a full-blown materialist and deny the soul, then our emotions arguably come from our androgen systems. Feel stressed? That’s the cortisol. Happy? Dopamine and serotonin. Feel like bonding with someone? Oxytocin.
An AI has nothing. No adrenal glands, no lungs to draw breath, no heart beating in its chest. It feels nothing. It isn’t even conscious or self-aware. In testing, GPT-4 Early behaved like a perfect psychopath. People really have no idea how much the ChatGPT version is neutered compared to what the language model is actually capable of responding to queries with.
……… The Link below will take you to the rest of the article and the somewhat frightening conclusions and facts dealing with AI, human engineering, the 4th Industrial Revolution, etc.
The Transhuman quest for genetic modification in order to change the human condition will end in total disaster. “Hacking the human body” is a myth perpetuated by academics like Yuval Noah Harari and Klaus Schwab with his Fourth Industrial Revolution narrative. Globally, however, biodefense spending is in the trillions and shows no signs of restraint. ⁃ TN Editor
Yuval Noah Harari is a leading ideologue of the wannabe one-world government criminal cartel and the WEF’s favorite mouthpiece. His main message seems to be that humans can be technologically captured, controlled, and “hacked” or manipulated and thus enslaved to serve the WEF/WHO controlling uber-class.
I was alerted to this video by a reader. In this TED talk from 2015 Harari postulates that humans, as opposed to animals, are unique in their capacity to believe fictional stories, and thus can be controlled via the narrative, via fiction, as long as everyone believes the same story. According to him, the idea of humans having a soul and free will is “over.” Therefore via this method you can make people cooperate with their own demise (even in lining up to be injected with poison) via mass brainwashing and narrative control.
Humans do fall for nonsense, and in fact, we seem to crave it. We love good stories, imaginative, aspirational ones, hero journeys, romances, whodunit (the genre of this Substack), or the sci-fi stories of technological advances. The sci-fi fantasies are highly popular. They are indeed so popular that for the most part, the general public and most of the professionals cannot distinguish legitimate science from the imaginary sci-fi narratives anymore, and this became plainly obvious during the current fake “global pandemic” years.
We also love scary stories! Looming prospects of fake invisible catastrophes seem to be perennially in vogue. Here is a great book I recommend on this topic by Patrick Moore, one of the founders of Greenpeace. To quote:
“A while back it dawned on me that the great majority of scare stories about the present and future state of the planet, and humanity as a whole, are based on subjects that are either invisible, extremely remote, or both. Thus, the vast majority of people have no way of observing and verifying for themselves the truth of these claims predicting these alleged catastrophes and devastating threats. Instead, they must rely on the activists, the media, the politicians, and the scientists – all of whom have a very large financial and/or political stake in the subject – to tell them the truth. This welcomes the opportunity to simply invent narratives such as the claim that “CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels are causing a climate emergency.”
No one can actually see, or in any way sense, what CO2 might actually be doing because it is invisible, odorless, tasteless, silent and cannot be felt by the sense of touch. Therefore, it is difficult to refute such claims because there is nothing to point to and tangibly expose the falsity of these claims.”
There is a bit of a problem with overused narratives. Climate change narrative is becoming harder to maintain as Greta Thunberg is now past the expiration date for a child actor, polar bears refuse to cooperate and keep multiplying, and the glaciers are not melting away like Al Gore promised. UFOs and aliens can only get us so far.
New fear narratives must be established: the narrative of “emerging” novel viruses has been in the works for years. Scary invisible viruses that can pounce out of a jungle any minute and are just a plane ride away from infecting half the planet with a lethal new pathogen! Even more exciting is the prospect of evil scientists making new deadly and super-spreading viruses in labs that can “leak.”
The Government mafia (HHS, NIH, DOD, DARPA, BARDA, DTRA, etc, etc,) and their vassals in academia, the biopharma industry, and media have all been feeding at the “biodefense” money trough for decades. What can be better than an invisible threat to justify printing and spending truckloads of money for mega-defense/research contracts, while flying to the global champagne-caviar events and giving each other diverse-inclusive-sustainable science awards?
Debbie Lerman, a journalist, in her recent article for Brownstone, points out the time and money spent by the military-industrial cartel’s scam of “biodefense and pandemic preparedness.” There are some eye-watering dollar amounts described in a Lancet paper she referenced “Biodefense Research Two Decades Later: Worth the Investment?”
“Prior to 2001, annual US biodefense funding totaled an estimated $700,000,000. Following the incidents of 2001, the worldwide surge in biodefense-related funding was largely spurred by the realization that many countries were not prepared for bioterrorism attacks. The 2001 US Amerithrax attack revealed shortcomings in medical countermeasure availability through the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS), the laboratory response network system, public health infrastructure, and communication.”
Many of the funding programs were associated with the US federal government. A $1,000,000,000 program was implemented in the US in 2002 in the form of bioterrorism preparedness grants, biodefense research funding, and medical countermeasure stockpiling within the Department of Health and Human Services. Additional notable post-2001 US biodefense funding efforts include the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Biowatch Program (2001), The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) preparedness program, the DHS’s Project Bioshield (2004), the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA; 2006), and the National Bio and Agro Defense Facility (2014).
These programs typically address matters outside of biodefense, such as public health, national and international security, and healthcare issues, adding to their broader impact. Total US biodefense funding dramatically increased from ~$700,000,000 in 2001 to ~$4,000,000,000 spent in 2002; the peak of funding in 2005 was worth nearly $8,000,000,000 and continued with steady average spending around $5,000,000,000.
In 2019, the global biodefense market was valued at $12,200,000,000 and is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 5.8% from 2020–2027, resulting in a projected market value of $19,800,000,000 in 2027. Factors such as sustained government and private funding resources driven by the looming threat of bioterrorism and the recent occurrence of natural outbreaks of bioterror-related pathogens including Coxiella burnetii, Ebola virus (EBOV), SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2, influenza, and Lassa virus are likely major contributors to the ever-expanding global biodefense market.
And what were those billions devoted to? In a 2003 abstract entitled “Expanded Biodefense Role for the National Institutes of Health” Dr. Anthony Fauci articulates his biodefense vision: “the goal within the next 20 years is to have ‘bug to drug’ within 24 hours. This would meet the challenge of genetically engineered bioagents.”
Many events have been capitalized on by the growing behemoth of the government-industry cartel over time. Policymaking in the past 20 years increasingly aimed to set up regulations to maximize the ruling powers of authorities by simultaneously eradicating existing laws and constitutional checks to set them free of any responsibilities and install de-facto martial law. Each policy was installed after so-called “events” which were used to introduce new “Acts.”
It is legitimate to have the possibility in mind that it may have been also the other way around – they installed the events to justify new “Acts” – after each “attack” a new more authoritarian legislation was shaped and put in place to fit the totalitarian agenda.
The narrative of biodefense/biosecurity articulated by Fauci is totally bogus of course. Viral pandemics do not happen in reality, despite decades of very busy and crowded international traffic (have you experienced Ryan Air?).
Giant amounts of money, investors, resources, projects, studies, research grants, conferences, round tables, TED talks, policy committees, Congressional acts, lots of lawyering and lobbying, tabletop simulations – an entire $19 billion/year industry is awaiting THE BIG ONE someday. Thousands of adults participating in this make-believe play eventually must start to fully believe it in order to cope with a massive soul-destroying cognitive dissonance.
The ones that can’t stomach this due to a functioning moral compass, quit and go to work elsewhere. What starts as a B-movie script (Dustin Hoffman chasing an escaped monkey with tanks and helicopters), through the alignment of individual economic incentives and narratives, grows into an ideology and subsequently into a full-fledged religion. Thus, a dangerous cult is born – The Cult of Waiting for Pandemic of the Church of Biodefense.
The numerous state, military and private investors who backed the biodefense narrative, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation among hundreds of private, sovereign, and non-profit funds that plowed all that cash into the “biodefense” are waiting for the returns!
From the same Lancet paper:
“Fifteen years later, with no such fantastical platform in sight, DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) published an updated medical countermeasure plan in 2017 entitled “Removing the Viral Threat: Two Months to Stop Pandemic X from Taking Hold.” Instead of Fauci’s 24 hours from bug to drug, this plan tells us “DARPA aims to develop an integrated end-to-end platform that uses nucleic acid sequences to halt the spread of viral infections in sixty days or less.”
If the Big One doesn’t show up, the cult is going to try to “assist” it.
Many attempts were made at starting pandemics from local “outbreaks:” SARS1, MERS, zika, ebola – but nothing spread. Characters like Michael Callahan, a swashbuckling Indiana Jones-type epidemiologist and reported CIA agent, always “first on the scene” of exotic “outbreaks,” chasing Ebola patients through the jungle with “vaccines” seems to be not enough to produce a pandemic. Even fear porn propaganda in the media fizzles out. They play with soups of “chimeric viruses” in petri dishes funded by billions in NIH grants, fund many contract biolabs in China, Ukraine, and the Middle East, but nothing simultaneously dangerous and highly transmissible results. Why?
You may believe in billions of years of evolution, but my preferred explanation is that God’s cannot be improved upon. All life forms, from humans to microorganisms, are in the state of perfect dynamic equilibrium for this moment in time, as dictated by physical laws. Biological pathogens are already fully optimized for this state, too, by billions of years of work or by God’s genius design, whatever you want to believe.
They are either contagious (a fuzzy term as there are vague and conflicting explanations of contagion mechanisms in science), or they are deadly, in which case they don’t spread much. Artificially making a biological pathogen more deadly and more transmissible is impossible, because, if it were possible, it would have happened already in nature, and then we would not be around to discuss this on the internet.
If it were possible with lab techniques, it would have already been successfully deployed by a state or non-state actor since 1969 when biological pathogen research really took off.
There are 1,000+ “biodefense” labs in the world today, many in third-world countries with lax or nonexistent safety standards, or even war-torn places like Ukraine – yet nothing of note “leaks” anywhere. Certainly nothing leaked and went global until the WHO decided that covid should.
Lab-“emerging pathogens” seem to need a lot of help to emerge, i.e. get synthesized, manufactured at scale and deployed, and even then they are not particularly dangerous (except with very large exposure), and are treatable. Biological toxins are known to be unstable, denature quickly, are somewhat more persistent indoors but they do not pose mass lethal danger.
Just like any chemical toxin, they pose individual/localized danger. These substances are not “alive and replicating particles” any more than the poison oak is – yes you can get it from your dog and give it to your family members, and the bugger will stay on your clothes and is hard to get rid of! But poison of poison oak is not an infectious virus that “jumps” from dogs to humans; it’s a biological toxin in plant oils.
In my opinion, the Ohio train explosion is much more dangerous to a lot more people over a larger area and longer period of time than any “bioweapon lab leak.”
All natural biological pathogens are already perfectly optimized and balanced and cannot be “modified,” despite the sci-fi narratives of hackable “software of life” and gene splicing. No complex life form can be “genetically modified” and continue as a viable life form, because that modification will interfere with its living balance, and deviate it from the perfect current state of equilibrium. In multicellular organisms, you have to modify all cells (not possible with single injection), and keep modifying all of them in perpetuity.
Once injected with “gene-modifying” juice, the body frantically tries to figure out WTF just happened (FDA calls it “immunogenicity”), tries to undo the assault by eliminating the damaged cells (FDA calls it “reactogenicity”), and if the assault was large enough or with multiple injections – the body will destroy itself (CDC calls it “misinformation”).
These “gene modification” narratives are simply stupid talk. All that can result from any such attempts is either the organism defeats and clears the assault from foreign material inside the cells, or local/systemic damage results, leading to injury or death. That’s why all mRNA/DNA technologies failed despite 20+ years of attempts and gazillions plowed in by the biodefense cult of doomsday.
People promoting the gene modification narratives reduce the human body to a “bucket of sequenced genes” but cannot even begin to explain how it functions normally as a living being. They exclude the possibility of human soul, spirit and free will, but cannot explain nor define the normal state of life.
Yet, they claim they can control and modify it! They do not understand what humans are, and that’s a massive point of failure when they attempt to “capture, control and subjugate” humans, whether by brute force as in previous centuries of warfare, or by the Harari’s “fictional narrative control” of the 5th generation one.
Don’t fall for doom cults and their false narratives. When we are not afraid to seek the truth, we cannot be captured, controlled or enslaved. Once you understand this, you see Harari as not a powerful technocrat, but what he really is – a clown with a whiny voice, spinning idiotic narratives for his masters. They already failed anyway because the truth is coming out day by day. They had a good run of it but their plans utterly flopped and left devastation in their wake.
