COVID, of course, by DARPA

 

*

Well, I’m cutting to the chase  –even though I won’t be skipping the BATS, rats and vats in this scenario–  DARPA’s M-O is the essence of speed. They kind of deny it.

“ ‘We have been thinking about and preparing for this a long time’ …said Amy Jenkins, manager of DARPA’s antibody program, which is known as the Pandemic Prevention Platform, or P3 …In that program and other [programs], DARPA has quietly been seeding the ground for…a rapid cure for a pathogen like covid-19 for years…”

*

This quote above, and all others following, comes from a Washington Post article published back on July 30, found at https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/how-a-secretive-pentagon-agency-seeded-the-ground-for-a-rapid-coronavirus-cure/ar-BB17njj7

A no-brainer, you could say, but a good condensed catch-up story on DARPA’s CoV footprint in vaccine-making.  Unfortunately, there’s not a dot in this piece about delivery tech, test methods or formulas also sponsored by DARPA, suggested by ‘other programs.’ Please do read on to ‘DARPA’s Darkest Agenda’ and the activist post found at ‘Stillness in the Storm’, and ‘DARPA’s Man in Wuhan’ below.

Nonetheless: “ ‘Being at DARPA at this time is exciting…because we get to see the research work that was funded… ten to fifteen years ago now really start to pay off,’ acting director [and current deputy dir.] Peter Highnam said…” speaking of COVID.

Remember this is fun!

Paying Off

“The first company [Moderna]… to enter clinical trials with a vaccine…was funded by DARPA. So was the second company [Inovio]. And the P3 program has already led to the world’s first study in humans of… antibody treatment… In addition to Moderna, two other pharmaceutical companies –Pfizer and CureVac—are pursuing RNA vaccines… CureVac was also funded by DARPA… …  DARPA also funded… companies [unnamed]  that manufacture vaccines…in tobacco-like plants as well as a ‘self-assembling vaccine’ platform at Massachusetts General Hospital…  ”

Something I appreciate is the article asking the natural question about treatment with antibodies:

 “Instead of forcing the body to produce antibodies using a vaccine, why not just inject the best antibody directly? The DARPA team began to pursue that aim in parallel. [Dan] Wattendorf called the rapid delivery of an antibody using RNA ‘the more aspirational dream.’ The idea was to take…the best antibody out of thousands in the bloodstream. Then, the genetic code of that antibody could be injected [into combat troops]…to give…protection…immediately. Protection could range from a few weeks to a few months –enough time for a deployment. In a pandemic, DARPA envisioned using such antibodies as a ‘firebreak’… For example, if one person in a nursing home tests positive, the antibody could be given to all the other residents…  DARPA had funded the development of rapid antibody technologies for years. Then, around 2016, DARPA director Arati Prabhakar [second woman in the chair, after Regina Dugan] wanted to weave [the programs] together into a production line… The result was the Pandemic Prevention Platform, which Prabhakar signed off on before leaving DARPA in January 2017. The goal of [P3]…was to develop an antibody for any virus within 60 days of receiving the blood sample of a survivor.”

Credit for DARPA’s Pandemic program, however, goes to “a brainy Air Force doctor named Dan Wattendorf [who] helped push rapid pandemic response further to the top of DARPA’s priority list… Wattendorf had ideas for a solution. In 2010, he took to a conference room at DARPA…to make a pitch…[and] Regina E. Dugan…greenlight[ed] his proposal. The result was a program called ADEPT, which invested $291 million from 2011 to 2019 in an array of technologies… ‘It may turn out to be the most important program from my time at the agency,’ said Dugan, who ran DARPA from 2009 to 2012. Chief among Wattendorf’s targets for the program: delivering vaccines and antibodies by implanting their genetic code… Wattendorf hoped to short-circuit [conventional methods by] cutting out the manufacturing process… By 2010, scientists had tested the idea using DNA with mixed results. Wattendorf wanted to try its single-stranded sibling RNA. If successful, RNA could be used to develop both vaccines and antibodies… It also offered a one-size-fits-all approach; in the future, scientists would need only the genetic code…   At least initially, the antibodies won’t be delivered using RNA, although Duke University plans to manufacture an RNA version of its antibody, meeting the original DARPA vision for the program.  Wattendorf…left DARPA and now works for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.”

*

*

DARPA’s Darkest Agenda

“DARPA-backed DNA and RNA vaccine companies, including Moderna, Inovio as well as Germany’s CureVac, have been unable to get their products licensed for human use, largely due to the fact that their vaccines have failed to provide sufficient immunity in human trials… Several workarounds for this issue have been proposed, including vaccines where the genetic material (RNA or DNA) ‘self-amplifies’ …[by] incorporation of nanotechnology…as the carriers for the genetic material”…

“[A] long-standing DARPA program, now overseen by BTO, is known as “Living Foundries.” According to DARPA’s website, Living Foundries “aims to enable adaptable, scalable, and on-demand production of [synthetic] molecules by programming the fundamental metabolic processes of biological systems to generate a vast number of complex molecules that are not otherwise accessible… The types of research this “Living Foundries” program supports involves the creation of “artificial life” including the creation of artificial genetic material, including artificial chromosomes, the creation of ‘entirely new organisms’…

“Changing human brain chemistry and functionality at the cellular level is only one of numerous DARPA initiatives aimed at changing how human beings think and perceive reality. Since 2002, DARPA has acknowledged its efforts to create a “Brain-Machine Interface (BMI).” Though first aimed at creating “a wireless brain modem for a freely moving rat,” which would allow the animal’s movements to be remotely controlled, DARPA wasn’t shy about the eventual goal of applying such brain “enhancement” to humans in order to enable soldiers to “communicate by thought alone” or remotely control human beings (on the enemy side only, so they say) for the purposes of war….

“According to one recent report on DARPA’s N3 program, one example of “minimally invasive” technologies would involve: an injection of a virus carrying light-sensitive sensors, or other chemical, biotech, or self-assembled nanobots that can reach individual neurons and control their activity independently without damaging sensitive tissue. The proposed use for these technologies isn’t yet well-specified, but as animal experiments have shown, controlling the activity of single neurons at multiple points is sufficient to program artificial memories of fear, desire, and experiences directly into the brain…

“In 2011, DARPA announced its “Rapidly Adaptable Nanotherapeutics” program, which seeks to create a “platform capable of rapidly synthesizing therapeutic nanoparticles” aimed at combating “evolving and even genetically engineered bioweapons.” DARPA’s plan for these nanoparticles, which media reports described merely as “tiny, autonomous drug delivery systems,” was to combine them with “small interfering RNA (siRNA),” which are snippets of RNA that can target and shut down specific genes…

“ [The] current coronavirus crisis appears to be the perfect storm that will allow DARPA’s dystopian vision to take hold and burst forth from the darkest recesses of the Pentagon into full public view. However, DARPA’s transhumanist vision for the military and for humanity presents an unprecedented threat, not just to human freedom, but an existential threat to human existence and the building blocks of biology itself.”

Read it all, by Whitney Webb, at https://www.activistpost.com/2020/05/coronavirus-gives-a-dangerous-boost-to-darpas-darkest-agenda.html

*

*

Dr. Michael Callahan of Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) Boston

a.k.a.‘DARPA’s Man in Wuhan’ by Raul Diego

“Dr. Michael Callahan was given a leave of absence from his senior executive role at United Therapeutics (UTHR) in the wake of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, China; sent there to assist colleagues handling mass infections… under his joint appointment at a Chinese sister hospital of the Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, where he has maintained a faculty appointment since 2005 [as a program officer of DARPA]…

“Soon, Callahan would be…briefing U.S. officials on the location of the next likely outbreak… The doctor marveled at the “magnificent infectivity” of the disease, which sits “like a little silent smart bomb in your community”… [Callahan] has dedicated his life to studying these microscopic killers. “Triple boarded”  in internal medicine, infectious diseases and tropical medicine, Callahan, nevertheless also has a strong entrepreneurial streak, that drove him to launch no less than 11 companies and develop 8 patents.

“Callahan’s nose for business came into play early on in the pandemic. After studying data from over 6,000 patient records from Wuhan, he reportedly detected a pattern that could point to a possible treatment using a low-cost and widely available ingredient of an “over-the-counter histamine-2 receptor antagonist called Famotidine”, more commonly known as the brand name Pepcid… Simultaneously in the U.S., it is claimed, an old colleague of Callahan’s, Dr. Robert Malone, had been conducting a study… working alongside U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) consultants to carry out supercomputer-based analyses to identify existing FDA-approved drugs that may be useful against the novel coronavirus responsible for COVID-19. Per their analyses, famotidine turned out to be the “most attractive combination of safety, cost and pharmaceutical characteristics”…

In the ‘90s, Callahan and Massachusetts General Hospital were in the center of the U.S. program to convert the former USSR bioweapons program, and it’s weaponeers, into a ‘peaceful use’ industry making vaccines and drugs for the global marketplace. The conversion of Soviet bioweapons was also the subject of the 2001 book ‘Germs’ by Judith Miller, Stephen Engleberg, and William Broad.

“In 2005, just as he was getting ready to decorate his new office at DARPA, Michael Callahan testified before Congress together with Ken Alibek – former deputy director of the Soviet Biopreparat, who defected to the U.S. and became the darling of the bioterror alarmists in and out of government. In his prepared statement, Callahan concluded with a chilling statement that summarizes the general sentiment shared by many in his circle: “The dark science of biological weapon design and manufacture parallels that of the health sciences and the cross mixed disciplines of modern technology. Potential advances in biological weapon lethality will in part be the byproduct of peaceful scientific progress. So, until the time when there are no more terrorists, the U.S. Government and the American people will depend on the scientific leaders of their field to identify any potential dark side aspect to every achievement…” –Michael Callahan. Callahan would receive DARPA’s highest commendation, the DARPA Achievement Award, for his success with the Accelerated Manufacture of Pharmaceuticals (AMP) program. But, it would be another program of his creation that would prove prophetic. Prophecy was another program created by Callahan at DARPA. It sought to ‘transform the vaccine and drug development enterprise from observational and reactive to predictive and preemptive’ through algorithmic programming techniques. In layman’s terms, the program proposed that ‘viral mutations and outbreaks’ could be predicted in advance to more rapidly counter the unknown disease with preemptive drug and vaccine development.” …………………………

Read it all  https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/07/investigative-reports/darpas-man-in-wuhan/

*

The Covid-19 Healthcare Coalition

“According to its website, the Covid-19 Healthcare Coalition was established as “a coordinated public-interest, private-sector response to the Covid-19 pandemic, convening healthcare organizations, technology firms, nonprofits, academia, and startups.” The coalition, which was launched by the intelligence and defense contractor MITRE, also includes tech giants like Google, Microsoft, Palantir, Salesforce, and Amazon and allows its member organizations to “collaborate, collect, analyze, visualize, and share data and insights.” With access to the data from partnered health-care institutions, such as the Mayo Clinic and the Cedars-Sinai Health System, these tech companies are “helping” the coalition “unlock large-scale analytics for Covid-19.” Institutions tied to the US government, and the NSCAI in particular, such as the CIA’s In-Q-Tel, are also members of the Covid-19 Healthcare Coalition. Notably, the recent advances in US-based efforts to “predict” or “automate” Covid-19 diagnoses are all tied to this very coalition. Indeed, all of the companies and institutions mentioned thus far in this report have engaged in developing these tools, as Diagnostic Robotics, Salesforce, Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Mount Sinai Medical Center are all coalition members”….

 

https://unlimitedhangout.com/2020/09/reports/new-pentagon-google-partnership-suggests-ai-will-soon-be-used-to-diagnose-covid-19/

*

*

Q and A

Healthcare? –DARPA

5G and the Internet of Things? –DARPA

Thought control? –DARPA

The future? –DARPA, DARPA, DARPA

Any questions?

*

*

Pentagon will coordinate the ‘free’ covid-19 vaccine deployment:

• *

*

*

Antibody Problems

•                                                                            

For example……

*

Nancy Banks, AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire, 2010:

“The HIV antibody tests are another scientific conundrum never fully explained. An elevated antibody count has been historically used to identify those who have developed immunity to a disease… This elevated count is claimed to indicate that you have developed immunity from being exposed to [a] particular virus. This is the underlying theory of vaccines. If your antibody count drops, you are said to need a booster shot for the specific purpose of raising your antibody levels called titers. It is claimed that the vaccine will raise your immunity to the disease by increasing your antibodies against this pathogen. The immune system is imminently more complex, but this is the theory that has been rolled over from the 19^th century to justify the ever expanding roster of mandated vaccines.

“Yet in the case of HIV, when your antibody titers are already elevated, indicating that your body is working normally and has developed immunity to HIV, you are said not to be immune and are subject to the development of AIDS –a scientific wonder never explained by those promoting this theory. Yet the AIDS promoters are promising a vaccine against AIDS although they know that any vaccine would produce the exact antibodies, in which case people would be said to be immune from AIDS. Needless to say, the vaccine trials have all been gigantic failures. If you are already confused, that seems to be the point of ‘HIV’ science.” –pp58-59,  AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire, by Nancy T. Banks, MD, 2010

*

“One of the early treatments for HIV was a process called plasmapheresis, in which blood is removed from a patient and put into a centrifuge, with white cells and platelets in one area, red blood cells in another, and plasma in yet another. The plasma was known to contain antibodies that in HIV/AIDS caused part of the problem. The plasma was replaced with albumin so that the blood volume was maintained, then the blood was returned to the individual. Many patients experienced significant relief from this treatment, though they weren’t cured.” –p275, Plague, by Kent Heckenlively and Judy Mikovits, PhD

************************************************************************

Lewis Thomas, The Youngest Science, 1983

(ch8,’Neurology’, p74) …”we learned that John Dingle’s laboratory [at Harvard] was being mobilized for a trip to Halifax, Nova Scotia, where a meningitis epidemic had just been recognized [c1940] and the health authorities…requested help from Harvard. So we packed…[and] I went to work on the treatment of meningococcal meningitis with a new sulfonamide called sulfadiazine, of which I had never heard… We were in Halifax for about a month, culturing the spinal fluids of several hundred patients with meningitis, collecting samples of serum from these patients and other people who did not develop meningitis but were in close contact, in order to study the role of antibodies in protection against the disease, and recording with care the clinical course of the illness under treatment with sulfadiazine…[which] was wonderfully effective. The only patients who failed to recover were those with a rapidly developing and overwhelming infection—some of them became comatose within a few hours and were brought to the hospital in deep shock, their skin surfaces covered everywhere by areas of hemorrhagic necrosis (looking very much like the Shwartzman phenomenon which I was to study several years later), and these patients were dead before we could start treatment. All the rest, the majority, recovered promptly when given sulfadiazine…[with] none of the late complications—blindness, deafness, mental confusion—which had occurred in earlier epidemics of untreated meningococcal meningitis.

“We came back to Boston with crates of cultures and sera, and my laboratory was committed to the problem of the meningococcus and the mechanism of its peculiar affinity for the surfaces of the brain and spinal cord in human beings. None of the conventional laboratory animals were particularly vulnerable [p76] to this organism: rabbits, guinea pigs, rats and mice could tolerate the intravenous injection of huge numbers of live meningococci without turning a hair, and the bacteria disappeared from their bloodstreams within ten minutes or so. It was evident that the animals possessed a highly effective mechanism for their protection, and I settled down to find out more about this. The first and simplest possibility, that they were able to kill off the injected meningococci by means of an already-existing ‘natural’ antibody, was easiest to test in rabbits, so rabbits became the laboratory’s routine animal. We quickly learned that the serum of a normal adult rabbit was capable of destroying almost any number of meningococci; when up to a million organisms were added to a single milliliter of freshly obtained rabbit serum, and the mixture then incubated for a few hours at 37 degrees Centigrade, the specimens became sterile. If the serum samples were heated at 56 degrees Centigrade for an hour before adding the bacteria, the bactericidal action was completely lost, indicating that the killing power depended on the presence of complement (a sequence of proteins, still incompletely understood, which makes possible the action of antibodies against antigens on the surface of bacteria).

“We thought it useful, given so powerful an example of natural immunity already in existence in animals, to see whether we could obtain even stronger antibacterial sera by immunizing the rabbits. We injected animals with suspensions of heat-killed meningococci, and collected sera at weekly intervals… Within the next few days we encountered our paradox: the sera from the immunized rabbits [p77], which had been capable of killing a million meningococci in a few hours, had now lost this property. There were potent and specific antibodies in these sera, as we could show in other kinds of tests—agglutination, precipitation, and complement fixation tests. But, with the appearance of a specific antibody, the bactericidal activity vanished.

Moreover, something of the same sort could be shown in the whole rabbit in vivo. When we injected live bacteria into the bloodstream of our immunized animals, and then measured the survival of the bacteria by serial blood cultures, we were surprised to learn that the blood cultures were still positive twenty-four hours later in the more intensively immunized rabbits, in contrast to the unimmunized animals, in which all of the meningococci had disappeared within ten to fifteen minutes.

By this time it was late April of 1941 and I was in a hurry. The problem had turned into something fascinating, involving both paradox and surprise. I knew I was expected back in New York the next January to become a neurologist, so I worked as fast as I could. What I had run into was an antique immunologic phenomenon called the ‘prozone’ in which an excess of antibody turns off the immune reaction unless the serum is sufficiently diluted. However, the difference in my laboratory –what was new—was that it worked in vivo: an immunized animal could lose, as the result of being immunized, its own natural defense. This might, I thought, have useful implications for susceptibility in certain human infections beyond meningitis –typhoid fever and brucellosis, for example—and I wanted to get on with it.

“However, as it turned out, I never got to finish the problem or even answer the principal questions. Nor did I ever get back to the Neurological Institute [in NYC]. The Rockefeller Institute [p78] was put on notice in late 1941, then mobilized as a naval medical research unit; I was assigned to it as a lieutenant, and received orders to turn up in New York, in uniform, by the end of March 1942. John Dingle and I reluctantly agreed to bring the still inconclusive problem of the in vivo prozone to a premature end and write the work up; to this day [1983] I’ve never been able to return, full-time, to the problem. It still hangs there in my mind, and I don’t believe any other laboratory has ever settled it.” –pp 74-78, The Youngest Science, Notes of a Medicine-Watcher, by Lewis Thomas [MD], 1983

*

Wikipedia:

“In an agglutination test, a person’s serum (which contains antibodies) is added to a test tube, which contains a particular antigen. If the antibodies agglutinate with the antigen to form immune complexes, then the test is interpreted as positive. However, if too many antibodies are present that can bind to the antigen, then the antigenic sites are coated by antibodies, and few or no antibodies directed toward the pathogen are able to bind more than one antigenic particle.^[3] Since the antibodies do not bridge between antigens, no agglutination occurs. Because no agglutination occurs, the test is interpreted as negative. In this case, the result is a false negative. The range of relatively high antibody concentrations within which no reaction occurs is called the prozone.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hook_effect

**************************************************************************

From Dr. Banks again, AIDS, Opium, etc.:

“Folate, one of the B vitamins, is necessary for the production and maintenance of new cells… Folate deficiency hinders DNA synthesis and cell division by affecting co-enzyme synthesis and the metabolism of certain amino acids. Folate is also necessary for the production of the energy molecule ATP in the mitochondria. (p260) Sulfanomides inhibit folic acid synthesis… The metabolism of the double folic acid inhibitor T/S [Trimethoprim/Sulfamethoxazole, used to treat AIDS] is an important part of the AIDS story. Because bacteria, fungi and parasites have the same mitochondria as humans, the consequence of using T/S should have led to the following assumptions: Sulfamethoxazole blocks the synthesis of folic acid in both human and microbial mitochondria, and therefore human cells are just as vulnerable as microbial cells; trimethoprim likewise blocks the activation of folic acid… The metabolic product of sulfamethoxazole, especially the toxic product hydroxylamine, has to be detoxified by glutathione, the three-amino-acid master antioxidant… The lack of this powerful antioxidant leads to nitrosative and oxidative stress… This decreases the production of ATP the energy molecule, leads to mtDNA damage and to disruption of protein synthesis…

“This predictable disruption of cellular metabolism as a result of oxidative and nitrosative stress caused by this drug combination… [leads] to increased cell disintegration… or to cellular transformation to tumor cells that switch to the less efficient cytoplasmic glycolytic energy production… [A] decade before the sudden appearance of opportunistic fungal infections and Kaposi’s sarcoma as AIDS… it was already recognized [c1970] that long-term medication with folic acid inhibitors could provoke neutropenia (low white blood cell count) and systemic fungal infections… (p262)

…”Microbes and humans possess the same type of eukaryotic cells. If a drug attacks the metabolism of the microbe, it also has the possibility to attack the metabolism of the human, and a range of antibiotics have been shown to do just that. However, the microbes…have the ability to adapt to hostile environments… Many of the drugs humans create to kill microbes end up killing themselves. It is now known that Trimethoprim, Azothioprine and AZT suppress the function of nitric oxide (NO) gas producing Th1 immune cells and after a few days cause a Th1/Th2 switch of cellular immunity. This is important because it is the NO gas-producing Th1 cells that kill intracellular parasites. If the Th1 cells are prohibited from producing NO gas because of exhaustion from chronic overexposure to free radicals or because of malnutrition, then the ability to mount an effective response of what is called cellular immunity (as opposed to humoral, or antibody immunity) is thwarted, and this gives rise to the overgrowth of opportunistic microbes. It also gives rise to a Th2 counterbalance with an increase in antibody production. This is why HIV patients respond positively to the HIV test. Not because there is [or isn’t] a virus, but because the organism is responding in an evolutionary biologically programmed way to environmental stressors.”  –p263, AIDS, Opium, Diamonds and Empire

*

*

 

******************************************************************

7 Reasons Why Antibodies Can’t Possibly Provide Immunity

http://theothersideofvaccines.com/2018/12/7-reasons-why-antibodies-cant-possibly-provide-immunity/

*

*

Eugenics and Vaccines

*

Turn back the clock a hundred years to a Supreme Court decision that upheld a case of involuntary sterilization in Buck v. Bell (1927), the most famous legal ruling in the American eugenics crusade against the ‘unfit’. The majority decision, written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., sanctioned the practice of sterilization surgery by public health authorities with these words:

“It is better for all the world if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles is enough.”  Holmes was referring to Carrie Buck, her mother Emma, and her young daughter, Vivian, born in March of 1924 while Carrie was institutionalized by the State of Virginia. (source ref. p121, War Against the Weak, by Edwin Black, 2003)

The broad principle of compulsory vaccination, we infer from Holmes, is the preeminent exercise of the state to dispense with any perceived biological threat to society for the common good, established in 1905 (Jacobson v. Massaschusetts) as the right to “vaccinate and revaccinate” according to the dictates of the state. War Against the Weak further informs readers that the influential Holmes “asserted that the idea of inherent rights [of individuals] was ‘intrinsically absurd’,“  and taught as a matter of course in his 1881 lecture series, The Common Law. Citing statistics kept until the end of 1940, Edwin Black reported that in sum “no fewer than 35,878 men and women had been sterilized or castrated—almost 30,000 of them after Buck v. Bell.” (p123) What is not reported by Mr. Black’s statistics is whether and how many of the numbers of sterilized were committed to institutional life sentences as were Carrie Buck and her mother. Carrie’s daughter Vivian was adopted and assessed to be ‘normal’ in every way and eugenical standards shortly fell out of favor.

Rise of the New Biology, or ‘newgenics,’ rapidly followed: “A concerted physicochemical attack on the gene was initiated at the moment in history when it became unacceptable to advocate social control based on crude eugenic principles.” –p9, The Molecular Vision of Life,[sub-head] Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology by Lily E. Kay, 1993. “During the 1930s a new biology came into being that by the late 1950s was to endow scientists with unprecedented power over life. These three decades culminated in the elucidation of the self-replicating mechanisms of DNA and an explanation of its action in terms of information coding, representations that laid the cognitive foundations for genetic engineering. Scientists could now manipulate genes on the most fundamental level and attempt to control the course of biological and social evolution…[p3]… By defining life in terms of fundamental physicochemical mechanisms, molecular biology ultimately narrowed its principal focus…based on the protein paradigm, the premise that the salient features of life—reproduction, growth, neural function, immunity—could be explained through the structures and functions of proteins. In fact, guided by the protein paradigm, research on antibodies occupied a key position with the new biology. This important chapter, however, has been written out of the history of molecular biology.” –p5, ibid.

Let’s write the antibody chapter back in.

*

War Against the Weak concludes with “Eugenics Becomes Genetics” and “Newgenics” chapters [pp411-444]] and a statement from James D. Watson, co-discoverer with Francis Crick of double-helix DNA structure, who “told a British film crew in 2003, ‘If you are really stupid, I would call that a disease. The lower 10 percent who really have difficulty, even in elementary school, what’s the cause of it? A lot of people would like to say, ‘Well, poverty, things like that.’ It probably isn’t. So, I’d like to get rid of that, to help the lower 10 percent.” –p442, War Against the Weak

…….more to come……

Postscript From The Herd

*

•                                                                                

*

Hey, there’s lots to share including how the the vaccinia (cow-derived) virus, alleged to prevent smallpox, became a BW agent and compares to the coronavirus. In fact, both are the ‘largest of viruses’ with the most genetic material –vaccinia under military study in the 1980s was the promising entity to make a “supervaccine” with room in its genome to accommodate as many as 30 or 40 antigens. Maybe vaccinia was dropped in favor of coronavirus. But we’ll get to that in time. Mooving on, “We might mention here that herd immunity theories have been proven wrong time and time again. In fact, evidence suggests that vaccinated children [and animals] are more likely to be reservoirs of disease than their unvaccinated peers.” –p30, The Vaccine Religion, Mass Mind & the Struggle for Human Freedom, by Walene James (founder of Vaccination Liberation), published 2011. “Commercial interests have also transformed the definition of herd immunity. From Dorland’s Medical Dictionary (1944) we find that herd immunity means ‘freedom of a group from some disease…usually brought about by some sanitary measure such as providing pure water or milk, drainage, etc.’ Today freedom of a group from certain diseases is said to be the result of…the…vaccinated. The magic number required to produce this version of herd immunity keeps rising as vaccine failures become more evident.” –p54, ibid.

“Remember that geometric axiom you learned in highschool—the whole is greater than the sum of its parts? The vaccine model turns that one on its head by substituting one part of the immune system for the whole system and one aspect of the immune response for the full immune response to infectious challenges. This is, of course, the antibody.

   “ Most of us think of the nose, mouth and throat as the normal portals of entry for any substance. If we extend this to include the gastrointestinal tract and respiratory system as well as the skin whose porosity makes it another portal of entry, we have what are called the primary immune organs, more commonly known as ‘the first line of defense.’ If a foreign substance survives the mucosal lining and secretions of the primary immune system, the lymphatic and circulatory systems take over. These systems contain scavenger cells such as lymphocytes, leukocytes and macrophages which devour bacteria and other elements foreign to the body and, along with serum complement and interferon, are some of the components that create non-specific immunity. These cells and their function are sometimes called ‘the second line of defense,’ or aspects of the secondary immune system.

   “Antibodies and disease-specific immunity are ‘the third line of defense,’ as  an aspect of the tertiary immune function. What does this tell us about the importance of antibodies? They are hardly a major player in the creation of immunity. In fact, studies and even records of epidemics reveal that those with high titer (antibody) count have a high degree of susceptibility to the disease for which they were vaccinated, and those with low titer count have a high degree of immunity. What does this mean? A person whose vital forces are strong will have fully functioning primary immune organs or outer defenses, and foreign proteins such as ‘pathogenic’ bacteria, viruses or other toxins will never reach the bloodstream. This is assuming that infectious challenges enter the body naturally, by way of the primary immune organs. But vaccinations? Vaccines bypass the natural portals of entry by being injected indirectly into the bloodstream. Vaccines are injected into a muscle which then makes its way into tissues and then into the bloodstream—a transport method which the entire immune system is designed to prevent.

…”Researcher Dr. Wendel Belfield said that ‘antibodies are not needed when the primary immunological defense (leukocytes, interferon, etc.) [what we call ‘innate’ immunity] is functioning at…capacity.’ And ‘antibody production appears to occur only when the ascorbate (vitamin C) level of the primary defense components are at low levels, thereby permitting some [pathogens] to survive the primary defense.’ Other researchers have pointed to the naivete of assuming that there is a one to one correspondence between antibody and antigen and that the doctrine of ‘one antibody, one antigen’ is incorrect.

…”The purpose of vaccines, which function as antigens, is to provoke antibody production. High blood antibody count is supposedly indicative of disease-specific immunity. That it is not indicative of immunity and may well indicate immune weakness will be…a price [we pay] for those circulating antibodies…

“Did you know that cell receptor sites in the brain are identical to the cell receptor sites in the immune system? This means that any injury to the immune system by foreign substances can be directly transmitted to the brain.” —pp33-35, The Vaccine Religion

C you next time.

*

PPS — Read ‘Disease Begins in the Brain’ https://jenniferlake.wordpress.com/2009/09/20/dis-ease-begins-in-the-brain/

*

*