The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has no plans to further study the effects of cellphone radiofrequency radiation (RFR) on human health — even though the program’s own $30 million study that took about 10 years to complete in 2018 reported evidence of cancer and DNA damage.

The NTP said in an updated January 2024 fact sheet that it was abandoning further investigation because “the research was technically challenging and more resource-intensive than expected.”

For decades, the NTP has been the premier governmental testing program for pharmaceuticals, chemicals and radiation, according to Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH, a toxicologist and epidemiologist who served on the board of scientific counselors for the NTP when it was launched in the 1980s.

Commenting on the news, Davis said, “It is the ultimate arrogance and folly to stop doing research on this major growing environmental pollutant, precisely when we have ample evidence of harm.”

Davis has authored more than 200 peer-reviewed publications in books and journals, ranging from The Lancet to the Journal of the American Medical Association.

In February 2023, she and her colleagues published a review of more than 200 studies that linked wireless radiation to negative biological effects including oxidative stress and DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, carcinogenicity, sperm damage, memory damage and other neurological effects.

They will soon publish a “major new article” in Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development journal about “new science” on RFR and call for precaution, she said.

Davis — who also is the founding director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council at the National Academy of Sciences and the founder and president of Environmental Health Trust — called out the U.S. government for failing to ensure that wireless radiation is safe:

“The government’s decision to stop funding research on cellphone radiation is consistent with the Chinese proverb ‘If you don’t want to know, don’t ask.’

“The US government has a variation of that in the policy of, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ If you don’t want to know whether cell tower radiation is having a biological impact, stop doing the research!”

Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) and Wireless program, told The Defender:

“Discontinuing government-funded research because it is ‘technically challenging’ and ‘resource-intensive’ is not what we expect from government agencies that are supposed to protect people from the harms of big industry.

“This research is important so that people can make informed decisions when it comes to the use of technology.”

W. Scott McCollough, lead litigator for CHD’s EMR cases, agreed. “I am concerned that the absence of evidence will be contorted into a claim of evidence of absence.”

As of early last year, the NTP was still conducting RFR research. A February 2023 fact sheet said scientists had “overcome several technical issues” and developed a better system for exposing animals to RFR for their studies.

NTP said researchers were “now making progress” on four research goals:

• Determining the impact of RFR exposure on behavior and stress.
• Conducting physiological monitoring, including evaluation of heart rate.
• Investigating whether RFR induces heating.
• Further evaluating whether RFR exposure causes DNA damage.

In its January 2024 fact sheet, the NTP reported the researchers had “tested the new exposure system … in vivo rodent studies” and that their research was “complete.”

The NTP did not say whether the researchers had achieved those four research goals and, if so, what the results were. It did, however, make clear that its previous studies — which used 2G and 3G cellphones — “do not apply” to 4G or 5G technologies.

The Defender reached out to NTP’s press office for clarification about why the new fact sheet appears to contradict the NTP website (updated Jan. 8, 2024) on cellphone radiation research which says NTP still has “current research efforts,” however NTP did not respond by our publication deadline.

The NTP’s discontinuation of its RFR research suggests the U.S. government has no intention of studying the possible biological effects of 5G.

Meanwhile, researchers such as Davis continue to say there is reason for concern. Davis pointed out that infertility clinics ask men about their wireless devices and cellphone habits:

“They tell them to take these phones off their bodies and out of their pockets because there is evidence … where the greater the exposure, the lower the sperm count, and the poorer the sperm quality.

“This has been repeatedly shown in studies with human sperm done under controlled conditions, as well as cross-sectional studies.”

“In fact,” she added, “whether the government stops doing the research or not, there is a massive study underway because we have billions of people being exposed to ever-increasing levels of wireless radiation throughout the world. Millions of American children are exposed every day in classrooms.”

“The only problem is there is no control group anymore, which will make it difficult, but not impossible, to discern the impacts of wireless radiation,” Davis said.

What NTP’s 2018 study found

As The Defender previously reported, NTP researchers in 2018 concluded there was “clear evidence” that male rats exposed to high levels of RF similar to those emitted by 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors, and “some evidence” of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats.

Davis said NTP’s conclusions were consistent with and corroborated dozens of other studies. “It wasn’t like it [the NTP study] was a one-off study,” she said.

Once the word got out that the findings of the NTP study were positive — meaning the government researchers had found an association between cellphone radiation and the growth of cancerous tumors — the telecommunication industry “started its tactics” to suppress the findings, Davis said.

Davis has been researching those tactics for more than a decade. She is the author of “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family.”

Instead of the NTP study report being released in 2016, when it was first ready, she said, the telecom industry exerted pressure to subject the study’s conclusions to an unprecedented level of scrutiny.

“When the first drafts began to circulate internally, it was elevated for a peer review unlike any that has ever been conducted in the history of the entire program — and I can say that with great certainty. No other compound or substance [studied by the NTP] has ever been subject to this level of peer review,” Davis said.

A panel of external scientific experts convened for a three-day review of the study and its conclusions in March 2018.

However, rather than downplaying the study’s conclusions, the experts concluded that the scientific evidence in the study was so strong they recommended the NTP reclassify some of its conclusions from “some evidence” to “clear evidence” of carcinogenic activity.

To date, more than 250 scientists — who together have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on the biologic and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produced by wireless devices, including cellphones — signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for health warnings and stronger exposure limits.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

Following the announced resignation of the entire Future Fund leadership team on November 11, one of the companies that was supposed to receive a cash grant from it, SecureBio, lamented the fact that employees at his firm will now be out of a job unless emergency backup funding is procured.

“We don’t think it is right that anyone should lose their jobs over a financial calamity totally unrelated to the excellent work they are doing,” announced SecureBio co-founder Kevin Esvelt.

SecureBio had initially been awarded a $1.2 million grant to develop “better pandemic defenses,” according to Coin Telegraph.

Another company, a biotechnology firm called Sherlock Biosciences, was supposed to receive $2 million from the Future Fund to study infectious diseases. HelixNano, a similar firm within the same field, was supposed to receive $10 million for vaccine research.

Then there is Our World in Data, which was supposed to be given $7.5 million to “track trends relevant to humanity’s long-term prospects,” whatever that is supposed to mean.

FTX was also involved in research to “debunk” the merits of ivermectin as a viable remedy for the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19).

Another entity that was supposed to be on the dole of FTX’s “philanthropic” efforts via Sam Bankman-Fried’s (SBF) “Building a Stronger Future” initiative is ProPublica, which was to receive the first tranche of a $5 million grant this year, followed by more disbursements in 2023 and 2024.

Organizations that received money from FTX in the 90 days prior to its bankruptcy could be subject to a “clawback”

According to Molly Kovite, a lawyer and member of the “Effective Altruism” group, all of these organizations and others that received money from an FTX entity within the 90 days prior to its bankruptcy declaration could be forced to pay it all back through a process known as a “clawback.”

Two days after Kovite announced this on November 14, Open Philanthropy, the philanthropic funder that Kovite represents, announced that it is seeking applications from grantees affected by the collapse of the Future Fund. Each application will be evaluated and provided funding at the group’s discretion.

Meanwhile, U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) are requesting that SBF, the former FTX CEO, and John Jay Ray III, the current CEO, provide more information about what happened to collapse the fraudulent cryptocurrency exchange.

Some 13 different requests for documents, lists and answers have been sent by these two, who are still awaiting answers on behalf of the American public.

“The public is owed a complete and transparent accounting of the business practices and financial activities leading up to and following FTX’s collapse,” the two lawmakers wrote, emphasizing that there has been an “apparent lack of due diligence by venture capital and other big investment funds eager to get rich off crypto.”

“These developments justify our long-standing concerns that the crypto industry ‘is built to favor scammers’ and ‘designed to reward insiders and to defraud mom-and-pop investors,’” they further added.

SBF and Ray have until November 28 to provide the requested materials, which also include “complete copies of all FTX and FTX-subsidiary balance sheets, from 2019 to the present.”

Warren and Durbin also want SBF to provide an explanation for his business decisions as well as strange statements he has made on Twitter that appear to be encoded for secret communication.

The latest news about FTX and SBF can be found at Collapse.news.

Sources for this article include:

• CoinTelegraph.com 1
• NaturalNews.com
• CoinTelegraph.com 2
• NATURAL NEWS

Carbon nanotubes are being investigated as a replacement for traditional silicon-based semiconductors, according to Joe Qiu, who is affiliated with the One Army Research Office. This new technology, Qiu said, is especially useful at very high frequencies in the 30-plus gigahertz range, as well as in very short wavelengths such as millimeter wave, which are used in the naked body scanners at American airports.

We know that carbon nanotubes are a key component in the 5G networks that Donald Trump helped roll out at warp speed with billions of dollars stolen from American taxpayers.

The mass implementation of 5G technology is not just about cell phones and computers, just to be clear. There is strong evidence to suggest that it is also about connecting humans to the internet of things, also known as transhumanism, which fake “president” Joe Biden is helping to fast-track as well with Executive Order (EO) 14081, as well as others.

Former Pfizer employee Karen Kingston explains all of this in much further detail in an interview she participated in with Dr. Steven Hotze, which is available at Brighteon.tv.

“Biden’s executive order on Sept. 12 is about transhumanism,” Kingston told Hotze. “In the EO, he clearly states that it is important to fund the development of technologies that can program cells to reprogram our biology, the same way that you program a computer program.”

“It’s disheartening that there hasn’t been more movement to stop unleashing these bioweapons, neuroweapons and artificial intelligence, advanced device technologies on the American population and our children.”

They want quantum dot tattoos on every person to connect them to the 5G “and beyond” grid of globalist control

The Army says that at the moment, 5G deployment is largely limited to ranges lower than six gigahertz. There are plans, though, to “improve” these frequencies to 28 GHz and higher.

“It’s not just 5G,” Qiu says. “It’s beyond 5G.”

Within the next five years, he added, commercial use of nanotube-based integrated circuits could become a reality, though this is just an estimate. The Army has been funding such research for at least the past 10 years.

The Army is also working with quantum dot technology, the same technology that billionaire eugenicist Bill Gates talked about incorporating into Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccines.”

Quantum dots are even smaller that carbon nanotubes, it turns out, and are capable of fitting inside them. They are designed to emit very specific wavelengths, allowing them to communicate with nearby towers when embedded as a “tattoo” onto or into the human body.

They are not easy to produce, but with a seemingly endless supply of taxpayer cash, the Army is working hard to make them a common feature in American society, including in medicine.

“Congress and good-government watchdogs often wonder, with good reason, about oddball research projects that slip into the Pentagon budget with no clear connection to any military purpose,” writes Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. for Breaking Defense about the technology, referring to the secretive nature of this creepy research taking place right underneath our noses.

Kingston also spoked to Dr. Eric Nepute, by the way, about covid injections in children and the threat these injectable biological weapons pose to current and future generations. You can check out that interview at Brighteon.tv.

The latest news about the U.S. Army’s work with carbon nanotubes, quantum dots, and more can be found at Transhumanism.news.

Sources for this article include:

• BreakingDefense.com
• NaturalNews.com
• NaturalNews.com
• NaturalNews.com
• NaturalNews.com
• NATURAL NEWS

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded a malaria vaccine trial study that used genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes to “vaccinate” humans.

A team of researchers at the University of Washington conducted the study, which was published in the Science Translational Medicine journal.

The study involved 26 participants who received three to five “jabs” — or bites from a small box containing 200 GM mosquitoes — over a 30-day period.

Sanaria, a company funded in part by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), is closely connected to the research, and the researchers involved in the trial use a gene-editing technology heavily promoted by Bill Gates.

Genetically modified mosquitoes used as ‘flying syringes’

The trial used malaria-causing Plasmodium mosquitoes that were genetically modified to avoid causing sickness in humans to infect participants with a “minor” version of malaria — insufficient to cause severe illness, but enough to make the humans create antibodies.

Dr. Sean Murphy, lead author of the study, told NPR, “We use the mosquitoes like they’re 1,000 small flying syringes.”

Despite the publicity generated by this study, however, results appear to have been mixed.

Of the 14 trial participants exposed to malaria, seven contracted the disease. For the remaining seven, the protection conferred by the “vaccine” did not last more than a few months and eventually dissipated.

According to the study:

“Half of the individuals in each vaccine group did not develop detectable P. falciparum infection, and a subset of these individuals was subjected to a second [Controlled Human Malaria Infection] 6 months later and remained partially protected.”

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “infections caused by P. falciparum are the most likely to progress to severe, potentially fatal forms” of malaria.

Adverse reactions in trial participants reportedly were “what one would expect after getting bit by hundreds of mosquitoes and nothing more.”

For example, trial participant Carolina Reid told NPR her entire forearm “swelled and blistered.”

Despite the study’s mixed results, the researchers claimed the “results support further development of genetically attenuated sporozoites as potential malaria vaccines.”

The researchers suggested several reasons for using live mosquitoes rather than a vaccine that could be delivered via a syringe, including that the use of live insects made sense, as the P. falciparum parasite quickly matures inside the mosquito.

In addition, the process of developing a version of the parasite that could be delivered via a syringe was described as “costly and time consuming.”

Nevertheless, according to Murphy the study will not be used for the mass vaccination of humans. However, the researchers involved in the trial said they believe the approach they used can eventually result in the development of a “substantially more effective” malaria vaccine.

At present, only one malaria vaccine is in use. The RTS,S vaccine produced by GlaxoSmithKline was approved by the World Health Organization in October 2021, but reportedly has an efficacy rate of only 30-40%.

Dr. Kirsten Lyke, a vaccine researcher at the University of Maryland, described the use of a genetically modified live parasite as a vaccine as “a total game changer,” saying the team of researchers “went old school with this one.”

“All things old become new again,” Lyke told NPR.

Lyke, who was not involved in the GM mosquito malaria trial, led the Phase 1 trials for the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and also served as co-investigator for COVID-19 vaccine trials administered by Moderna and Novavax.

Stefan Kappe, a parasitologist at the University of Washington and the Seattle Children’s Research Institute — who was one of the authors of the study — said that the approach described by Lyke is already being worked on by the team, adding that the team believes “we can obviously do better.”

However, according to Kappe, “increasing production capability to scale up manufacturing will require investment.”

The research team said that the vaccine developed from this process will eventually be administered via syringes, in order to administer a “more accurate dosage.”

According to Lyke, the use of a slightly more mature version of the GM parasite used during this trial could better equip the human body to prepare an immune response.

Murphy added that his team’s approach utilizes a whole weakened parasite rather than one of the proteins the parasite produces, as with the RTS,S vaccine.

Gates-linked firm provided GM parasites used in trial

According to NPR, the University of Washington partnered with Sanaria, a “small company” that produces the modified parasites.

According to its website, Sanaria is “a biotechnology company developing vaccines protective against malaria,” and its “vaccines have proven highly protective against Plasmodium falciparum infection in humans.”

The company also said it developed “an innovative approach to malaria using Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) sporozoites (SPZ) as the platform technology for immunizing people against malaria infection.”

Two of Sanaria’s listed donors — PATH MVI and the Institute for OneWorld Health — are beneficiaries of funding from the BMGF.

PATH, which founded the Malaria Vaccine Initiative (MVI), describes itself as “an international nonprofit organization that drives transformative innovation to save lives and improve health,” working “with partners in private industry, government, and academia to develop malaria vaccines.”

PATH MVI said it advises and partners with “public institutions, businesses, grassroots groups, and investors to tackle the world’s toughest global health problems — which includes malaria, a notoriously complex parasite.”

As far back as 2008, when it received a $168 million grant, PATH MVI has received funding from the BMGF.

Aside from the BMGF, other PATH MVI donors include Chevron, the ExxonMobil Foundation, the USAID Malaria Vaccine Development Program and Open Philanthropy.

As Open Philanthropy — one of whose main funders is Dustin Moscovitz, co-founder of Facebook along with Mark Zuckerberg — funded a monkeypox tabletop simulation that  “predicted” a global monkeypox pandemic in May 2022, the same month an outbreak occurred.

Open Philanthropy has, over the past decade, provided hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and grants for “global health,” “biosecurity and pandemic preparedness” and “global catastrophic risks.”

In turn, the Institute for OneWorld Health, which claims it “partner[s] with communities in developing countries to bring permanent, sustainable healthcare to the chronically underserved,” has received multiple grants from the BMGF, including a 2004 grant for the development of a malaria vaccine.

Other Sanaria donors include the NIH and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Center for Infectious Disease Research, the National Institute of Standards, the Military Infections Disease Research Program and the European Vaccine Initiative.

Gates’ enthusiasm for gene-editing technology ‘off the charts’

One of the novel aspects of the University of Washington trial was that the parasites used were “disarmed” using CRISPR — or Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats — gene editing tools.

CRISPR is described as “a component of bacterial immune systems that can cut DNA” that “has been repurposed as a gene editing tool,” acting “as a precise pair of molecular scissors that can cut a target DNA sequence, directed by a customizable guide” — a piece of RNA with a “guide” sequence that attaches to the target DNA sequence.

According to geekwire.com:

“When it comes to fighting malaria and other mosquito-borne diseases … CRISPR-Cas9 and other gene-editing tools are being used to change the insects’ genome to ensure that they can’t pass along the parasites that cause those diseases.”

Gates — an enthusiastic proponent of CRISPR — previously suggested CRISPR could be used to eliminate mosquitoes that transmit malaria.

According to a 2018 Business Insider report:

“Gates has long been supportive of using genetic editing tools. He was one of the early investors in Editas Medicine, one of the first companies to start trying to use CRISPR to eliminate human diseases.

“Gates Foundation researchers have worked for nearly a decade on ways to use genetic editing to improve crops and to wipe out malaria-carrying mosquitoes.”

In a 2018 Foreign Affairs article written by Gates, he specifically addressed CRISPR’s potential malaria-related applications:

“Scientists are also exploring other ways to use CRISPR to inhibit mosquitoes’ ability to transmit malaria — for example, by introducing genes that could eliminate the parasites as they pass through a mosquito’s gut on their way to its salivary glands, the main path through which infections are transmitted to humans.”

In a 2021 blog post addressing recent CRISPR-related developments, Gates said his “excitement about CRISPR has grown from super high to off the charts.”

And in a July tweet commemorating the 10th “birthday” of CRISPR, Gates described it as “one of the most important inventions in medicine, biology, and agriculture.”

Gates also helped fund the currently approved RTS,S malaria vaccine — as did Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, with which the BMGF is a partner.

Some scientists, however, are less enthusiastic about CRISPR’s gene-editing applications, warning they may result in unintended, harmful consequences.

For instance, in testimony submitted to the British Parliament in 2020, scientists Claire Robinson of GMWatch and Michael Antoniou of King’s College London warned:

“GM (including gene editing) of crops, animals and foods leads to several different types of unintended genetic mutations, which unpredictably alter the function of multiple gene systems of the organism.

“Altered patterns of gene function will unpredictably change the biochemistry of the organism.”

And even Gates, in his 2018 Foreign Affairs article, could not ignore the myriad of ethical controversies associated with CRISPR.

Nevertheless, Gates and the BMGF have been proponents of GM mosquitoes even beyond CRISPR.

For instance, the BMGF provided funding to Oxitec, a firm that has conducted pilot projects in Florida and Brazil using GM mosquitoes, purportedly with the aim of reducing the spread of mosquito-borne viruses.

In Brazil, the GM mosquitoes that were released were said to lack the ability to produce offspring — but were nevertheless found to have reproduced.

The BMGF also reportedly was “heavily involved” in trials using GM mosquitoes in India — and even went as far as to propose, in 2017, alongside the Johns Hopkins Center for Communication Programs, the development of a mosquito emoji, to be “used for public health campaigns.”

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) ramped up an ongoing study that was began eight years ago with the launch of its “BRAIN 2.0” initiative (Brain Research via Advancing Innovative Neurotechnology) last week. The scope and complexity of BRAIN 2.0, which provides $600 million to comprehensively map our 86 billion neurons and their uncounted connections, are comparable to that of the Human Genome Project. The project is anticipated to cost $5 billion in total.

Theoretically, once this accurate brain atlas has been built in silico, digital tools may be used to directly modify neural function. John Ngai, the director of the BRAIN Initiative, demonstrates an unsettling fixation on this approach.

Ngai recently spoke with Stat News and mentioned two specific outcomes of his ongoing neuro-mapping work. The first is a cutting-edge brain-computer interface that was implanted at the University of California, San Francisco last year and enables amazing thought-to-text communication. The other is a significant advance in deep brain stimulation at Baylor University, which involves implanting electrodes to change behaviour and mood in order to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder and depression.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), where “man-computer symbiosis” has long been a paradigm, shares Ngai’s fixation with cyborgs. The defence agency’s participation in the BRAIN Initiative is publicly known and open. However, our greatest military minds also have a strong interest in human enhancement, in addition to the NIH’s stated goal of healing.

“DARPA has been a pioneer in brain-machine interface technology since the 1970s, but we began investing heavily in the early 2000s,” boasted Justin Sanchez, the director of DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office. “We’ve laid the groundwork for a future in which advanced brain interface technologies will transform how people live and work.”

In certain cases, this transformation uses non-invasive technology like wearable neuro-bands or skull caps in addition to brain implants. The DARPA programme manager Phillip Alvelda said, “Imagine what will become possible when we upgrade our tools to really open the channel between the human brain and modern electronics.” The program’s objectives include “Bridging the Bio-Electronic Divide” and developing a “High-Resolution, Implantable Neural Interface.”

If BRAIN 2.0’s atlas is effective, it will be an essential link across this “bio-electronic divide.” The area of the brain will be mapped and available for conquest.

‘The Century of Engineered Biology’

This insane effort to change fundamental biology goes all the way down to the genome. The White House said two weeks ago that $2 billion will be used by the National Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Initiative to reshape life as we know it. “We need to develop genetic engineering technologies and techniques,” the executive order reads, “to be able to write circuitry for cells and predictably programme biology in the same way in which we write software and programme computers.” The Advanced Research Initiatives Agency for Health (ARPA-H) will receive an additional $1 billion, and a total of $6.5 billion has been proposed for its “high-risk, high-reward” projects.

Renee Wegrzyn, the new agency’s first director, informed her coworkers on Wednesday that people can now change their DNA at will. But because gene-editing technologies like CRISPR have become so accessible and affordable, she said that there is a serious risk to humankind from accidental pathogens or deliberate bioweapons.

“We’re ushering in the century of engineered biology,” Wegrzyn declared with a weird fake-smile, “whether it’s through gene-editing, or it’s through engineering of living medicines that will be in our gut — or in soil to promote fertilization and growth, especially as we face challenges like climate change.”

What more is in store for us in this “century of engineered biology”? Wegrzyn, a former programme manager for DARPA, predicts that this transformation will result in “human-machine convergence” and the development of “Human 2.0.”

“These are things that are somewhere on the horizon,” she told the Long Now Foundation in 2017, “that genome engineering and gene-editing will be a part of. So how do we make sure we can pursue this future in a safe manner?”

Wegrzyn, carrying the transhumanist banner, praised “defensive enhancement,” using mass vaccination as an example to strengthen our immune systems. Additionally, she talked about “offensive enhancement,” which includes changes to people’s “performance” and “cognitive state.”

She sneered, “It’s evolution on steroids, and now it’s in our control.” With a strange chuckle, she assured the audience that “we’re solidly on the defensive side.” If that’s the case, her DARPA projects were outliers at the agency.

It’s simple to see a gloomy future of progressively insane “safe and effective” campaigns when thinking about that culture of radical enhancement (pdf below) combined with the vaccine-obsessed NIH. The founding of ARPA-H seems to be a formal union between the biomedical establishment and the military-industrial complex, with BRAIN 2.0 acting as the stepchild holding the wedding band.

Federally Funded Transhumanism

For good reason, many sceptics, including myself, refer to this officially supported transhumanism. The connection is clear. The original transhumanist Max More declared humanity’s emancipation from our natural inheritance in his 1999 essay “Letter to Mother Nature“:

THROUGH GENETIC ALTERATIONS, CELLULAR MANIPULATIONS, SYNTHETIC ORGANS, AND ANY NECESSARY MEANS, WE WILL ENDOW OURSELVES WITH ENDURING VITALITY AND REMOVE OUR EXPIRATION DATE. … NOT CONTENT WITH THAT, WE WILL SEEK COMPLETE CHOICE OF OUR BODILY FORM AND FUNCTION, REFINING AND AUGMENTING OUR PHYSICAL AND INTELLECTUAL CAPABILITIES BEYOND ANY HUMAN IN HISTORY. … WHILE WE PURSUE MASTERY OF OUR OWN BIOCHEMISTRY, WE WILL INCREASINGLY INTEGRATE OUR ADVANCING TECHNOLOGIES INTO OUR SELVES.

We’ve entered a weird period where modifying human brains and bodies, as well as the underlying DNA, may soon be as commonplace as nose jobs and genetically modified tomatoes are right now. Your tax money are providing the groundwork for the essential decision to transition from healing to enhancement, which is just around the corner.

Selective abortions and smartphone symbiosis are current issues. Designer infants and wearable brain-computer interfaces will be the rage tomorrow. Renee Wegrzyn and John Ngai, to their credit, have both stated that we need public discussions on how far we go with these technologies. Trans children, offensive metaverse ads, and vaccine requirements have been all we’ve seen so far.

It’s crucial that you consider where we are right now and the direction that these efforts to alter DNA and irradiate brains are taking. We must insist on creating our own future plans, to the extent that our voices are heard, since irresponsible technocrats are already working on them, regardless of our opinions.

Article cross-posted from Great Game India.