Part 9 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”
My maternal instinct leads me to sense a relatively new feature has been added to the dystopian, anti-life, nature-defeating and dangerous game afoot . . . Given the abundance of anecdotal reports from women (both injected and non-injected with medical devices pertaining to COVID) exhibiting menstrual irregularities, and pregnant women enduring unexplained miscarriages, I have been occupied with ascertaining knowledge about the potential method of transmission. What I have uncovered, within the context of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs), may be applicable to plausible concerns that have surfaced in the past month.
Accordingly, multiple researchers have been questioning, speculating, and even debating amongst themselves with respect to the mode of passage from one jabbed person to another, who is unjabbed. These bright minds are also attempting to hone in on precisely what is being transmitted. Please read here (Makia Freeman posits that re-wiring genetic code may be affecting physical and energetic fields), and watch here (from the 28 to 37 minute timestamps, Dr. Carrie Madej suggests injected people may be acting as wireless antennae), here (David Icke hypothesizes the jabbed may be broadcasting a frequency), and here (five prominent physicians emphasize this is an undetermined form of transmission, but not viral shedding) in this regard.
The central question I would like to address is as follows: If ENPs are present in these new, experimental injections — purportedly addressing a new condition called COVID — are they able to be transmitted to non-injected individuals; and if so, by what mechanism?
In my published “fictional” account, “Confessions of an Engineered Nanoparticle,” I discussed that injections may incorporate ENPs. For additional framework, review this astute analysis from October 2009 at PreventDisease.com exploring the immersion of nanoparticles in vaccines, including the dangers and the potential long-term agendas, such as “control of the global populace.” From the 2009 article, “Through nanotechnology, researchers have . . . been able to create artificial pores able to transmit nanoscale materials through membranes.” The article continued, “However fraudulent, it was an imperative for world powers and pharmaceutical cartels to promote the effectiveness of vaccinations and enact national pandemic preparedness policies which mandate vaccinations. In 2005 the World Health Organization (WHO) developed international health regulations that would bind all 194 member countries to pandemic emergency guidelines which could enforce such a mandate. Without these procedures of public health (and propagandized vaccine campaigns) in place, there would be little or no voluntary cooperation from the public to roll up their sleeves and accept the inoculations. Public participation is an essential tool that will soon allow big pharma to inject the most effective surveillance tool ever designed into billions of people.”
Before proceeding with my brief explanation, I encourage readers to review Part 3 (on self-spreading vaccines), Part 4 (on pheromones), and Part 6 (on nanorobots) in this current series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots.” By converging much of that information, one may get closer to comprehending how ENPs operate in ways that are unique to advanced nano-sized materials, and how these features may apply to transmission.
Significantly, this academic paper published by Dr. Yuval Elani in September 2020, “Interfacing Living and Synthetic Cells as an Emerging Frontier in Synthetic Biology,” may also help to provide rich context to understand the nascent methodology combining biological and biotechnological (synthetic biology) architecture, including protein engineering, and its implications. As described by Dr. Elani, “The most dominant form of artificial cells involve cell‐sized capsules, such as liposomes, polymersomes, coacervates, proteinosomes and hydrogel particles, which act as the chassis. These compartments can be functionalised with biomolecular components, including transmembrane channels, enzymes, cytoskeletal elements, gene circuits, and transcription/translation machinery. In doing so, cellular characteristics can be mimicked. These include cellular processes and behaviours (e.g. signalling cascades, communication, motility, energy generation, replication, and computation) as well as architectural motifs (e.g. membranes, organelles, and tissues).” The main takeaway from this paper is that by deploying these “micromachines,” the intermingling of living and synthetic components will give rise to new modes of function and responses never before observed in humans. This will require new language, such as “embedded hybridization,” “hybrid bioreactors,” and “synthetic signaling cascades,” to depict the emergent engineered communication.
Old paradigms will no longer be sufficient to comprehend what may arise through the addition of synthetic cellular and molecular systems, introduced by bio-engineering tactics that are proliferating much too rapidly for us to understand, let alone properly regulate, or willingly permit.
I am sounding the alarm to those who remain illiterate in “bio-nano” speak, as the bio-nano colonizers will continue to invade our pristine biological form with their synthetic, bio-computing edifice — that is, until we grasp their method of bottom-up digitized colonization and stop it in its tracks through peaceful, yet bold action.
While ENPs may migrate through the air and through dermal exposure (and via ingestion), what is most important to grasp is that they may not literally be jumping from one person to another (or “shedding”). Instead, they may emit signals that are not only incoherent to the human body in which they penetrate, but may also send out disruptive signals (much like a mis-tuned musical instrument or un-tuned, fuzzy radio station) to those who are not injected. Think of a metronome gone rogue, so to speak. In this case, their transmission may not be through physical contact, but rather, through piezoelectric and excitation properties or an evanescent field — not compatible with natural, biological operability.
Essentially, ENPs, which exhibit unique electromechanical and conductivity characteristics, can operate through various processes, such as nanopiezotronics (or nanophotonics, ionic forces, electrostatic capacitance, or perhaps a form of resonance energy transfer, such as surface plasmon resonance, or plasmoelectrics), that may account for this resulting disruptive cascade of signaling among human beings (who, until recently with the introduction of implantable synthetic biological components and engineered nanomaterials, along with pervasive EMFs), engaged in exclusively biologically-programmed piezoelectric interpersonal communication (including chemosignaling via pheromones) — akin to quorum sensing among bacteria.
Readers may want to view the documentary, “Resonance Beings of Frequency,” portraying how humans convey natural frequencies amongst each other, as we are beings of unique sympathetic resonance who are entrained together (much like similarly-tuned tuning forks). I also encourage reading my post from June 2020 discussing the synchronization of humans via heart entrainment. Exposure to artificially-induced EMFs (and now, ENPs that may triangulate with drones, 5G, or radiofrequencies) may adversely influence us by interrupting our natural flow of electrical impulses.
As per Pfizer, in their published protocol for the clinical trial of the experimental COVID concoction (see p. 67-69), they mention observing and studying pregnant women and lactating women (unjabbed) who were exposed via inhalation or skin contact to trial participants who were jabbed. While ENP transmission is typically exhibited by electromechanically emitted signals, there may be two exceptions to this method of transmission (as evidenced in studies), in that ENPs may be able to be transmitted directly from a mother to a fetus through the placenta (see here and here), and they may be able to pass directly from a mother to a baby while breast-feeding (see here under “Lactation: Risk Summary”).
Please review my end references to this post that may further elucidate the (often smart-enabled) transmissible workings of ENPs when introduced into the human population. Of significant interest, one leading DARPA-funded researcher in the area of semiconductor-piezoelectric nanomaterials is Zhong Lin Wang, of Georgia Tech, who authored several of the linked studies.
Additionally, a premier corporate innovator in the field of nanolectronics, including biologically-embedded electrostatic sensors and actuators (BioMEMS), is Coventor, a Lam Research company, which has received DARPA funding for its efforts in the application of BioMEMS to medicine and homeland security. I remind readers that I referenced Lam Research in my first essay (in April 2020) at POM, in relation to the first reported U.S. death from COVID of Patricia Dowd, a 28 year-long employee at said company. While it has taken over a year to put most of the COVID puzzle pieces together, it seems I may have come full circle.
Given what I have learned about the technology of nano-scale, biologically embedded, wireless intelligent sensing devices (that may exhibit piezoelectric transducer capabilities), I find it curious that venture capitalist Moncef Slaoui, who is a chief scientist in bioelectronics (see here, here, here, and here regarding his collaborators) was selected as the initial leader of Operation Warp Speed. In addition to serving on the Board of Moderna — and evoking the first installment in my series in which I highlighted Singapore’s A*STAR — Slaoui served as a member of A*STAR’s Advisory Board. In 2016, when Slaoui was Chairman of Global Vaccines at GSK, he asserted, “This agreement with Verily to establish Galvani Bioelectronics signals a crucial step forward in GSK’s bioelectronics journey, bringing together health and tech to realise a shared vision of miniaturised, precision electrical therapies. Together, we can rapidly accelerate the pace of progress in this exciting field, to develop innovative medicines that truly speak the electrical language of the body.” Could Operation Warp Speed be serving as the jump-start for the mass implantation and implementation of weaponized electroceuticals (introduced without informed consent), designed to be interconnected and to interface with the cloud? What better way to insert pervasive and programmable “smart” bioelectronic networks — that are electromagnetically sensitive — than through injection (under the guise of a medical therapy)?
To all fellow moms out there: Protect yourselves and your beloved babies (young and old) — and for goodness sakes, listen to your mothers’ intuition! Do not allow yourselves to be tricked into accepting what may eventually result in mechanistic and degenerate interpersonal communication, defined by 0s and 1s. May you lead your families in tune with the innate rhythm and sacred pulse of Mother Nature. Humanity needs us now, more than ever.
Cautionary note: At this time, while my position on transmissibility from injected individuals to non-injected individuals (specifically with respect to COVID-related jabs) is evolving, I sense that most adverse effects attributable to incoherent signaling may be temporary and non-lethal. However, I suggest caution for particular populations (mainly pregnant women and lactating women currently nursing their babies) when coming in close contact with individuals who have been jabbed with new experimental medical devices (see Endnotes 1 and 2). Perhaps, this may be a time for young mothers to temporarily recede from direct contact from those who have been penetrated by the impetuous prick.
Anecdotal note: As background history, I breast-fed my children for many years, and stopped more than 10 years ago. Subsequently, my ability to lactate discontinued. When I was actively nursing, and would go through longer bouts of time during the day without breast-feeding, I would frequently get a physical feeling in my breasts, referred to as “let-down.” Needless to say, I could barely recall that feeling, until last week, when — out of the blue — I felt this very sensation. This is not normal. It lasted for about 10 seconds. I had been food shopping earlier in the day. I can only guess that most of the people shopping (as well as the supermarket staff) have been jabbed with experimental nanotech-laced biologics. It was a busy shopping day. When I felt that “let-down”— which I have not felt for 10+ years for good reason — I could not help but register, and mentally note it. Then, when listening to a video essay presented by David Icke (also linked above), he noted (at the 5-minute time stamp) the very same symptom presenting in another woman. I had been hearing many first and second-hand reports of menstrual irregularities (which I have also been experiencing), but not let-down. So, I thought it was a one-off. But, given this other report, I suspect that my hormones were influenced by piezoelectric signaling my body received when present among jabbed people — that is clearly not coherent with my current age and physical status. No, my body did not begin lactating out of nowhere — but the feeling was there. Then I found this document, “The use of Piezoelectricity for Rapid Increase of Milk for Insufficient Lactation.” Take this information, and my story, as you will. I cannot ignore it.
1) On the topic of engineered nanoparticles and hormones, it was reported in April 2020 that DARPA-funded researchers at MIT were able to remotely control hormone release in humans by injecting novel magnetic nanomaterials that modulated ion channels.
2) An additional warning may be implied from studies related to water-soluble carbon nanoparticles that were utilized in India to prevent mosquito larvae from reaching maturity. It was suspected that the mechanism was suppression of a specific hormone.
“Nanoparticle communications: from chemical signals in nature to wireless sensor networks” Nanotechnology Perceptions, March 2014.
“More generally, the need to convey information between two separated entities has always existed, in both the animal kingdom and in human society. There are many methods in which data can be encoded, transported and decoded. In human society, common ways of communicating include delivering physical packets (mail), speech (acoustic waves), modulating electromagnetic waves at various frequencies (radio waves in air, and optical waves in fibres), and visual observation of physical movements (hand, flag, or smoke signals). In the animal kingdom, chemicals can also be used to convey very simple messages. This chemical signalling can exist on a cellular level, and also in an external environment.”
“A good question is, why would we devote our time and resources to study chemical communication? There is, of course, scientific curiosity: to better understand how organisms signal to each other. Important questions can be asked, such as will a breakdown of signalling cause collapses in colonies? Aside from this, chemical signalling can also inspire engineers to design chemical-based communication systems. On a microscopic scale, microsurgery and drug delivery robots will likely need to communicate with each other (Fig. 1), and this cannot be achieved with conventional electromagnetic waves. This is primarily due to the antenna size and transmission energy constraints of electromagnetic wave-based communication systems. Nanosized particles can be emitted at a relatively low energy expenditure level, and allowed to propagate to neighbouring robots. This article will discuss such challenges in greater detail lateron. In this section, we will examine how organisms signal using chemical molecules in nature, and how this can be extended to form a general communications system.”
“Nanonetworks: A new frontier in communications” IEEE, by Ian F. Akyildiz (abstract only)
“Novel nano-antennas based on nano-materials as well as the terahertz band are investigated for electromagnetic communication in nanonetworks. Furthermore, molecular communication mechanisms are presented for short-range networking based on ion signaling and molecular motors, for medium-range networking based on flagellated bacteria and nanorods, as well as for long-range networking based on pheromones and capillaries. Finally, open research challenges such as the development of network components, molecular communication theory, and new architectures and protocols, which need to be solved in order to pave the way for the development and deployment of nanonetworks within the next couple of decades are presented (emphasis added).”
“Nanonetworks: A New Frontier in Communications” Communications of the ACM, November 2011 (full text)
“Downscaling existing communication paradigms. The tools provided by nanotechnology are enabling the extension of well-known communication techniques to the nanoscale. First of all, carbon nanotubes and graphene nanoribbons have been proposed for electromagnetic nano-antennas.6 A graphene-based nano-antenna is not just a mere reduction of a classical antenna, but there are several quantum phenomena that affect the propagation of electromagnetic waves on graphene. As a result, the resonant frequency of these nanostructures can be up to two orders of magnitude below that of their non-carbon-based counterparts. However, their radiation efficiency can also be impaired because of this phenomenon. Second, carbon nanotubes have also been proposed as the basis of an electromechanical nano-transceiver or nano-radio,5 able to modulate and demodulate an electromagnetic wave by means of mechanical resonation. This technique has been experimentally proved in reception, but would require very high nanoscale power sources for active transmission.“
“Terahertz Band: Ultra-broadband communications in nanonetworks. Focusing on the use of graphene-based nano-antennas and thinking of the expected maximum size of a nanomachine, the Terahertz Band (0.1THz-10THz) enters the game. Indeed, we have recently shown that a one-micrometer-long graphene-based nano-antenna would expectedly resonate in the aforementioned band.6 This very high-frequency range, in between the microwaves and the far-infrared radiation, has recently caught the attention of the scientific community because of its applications in security screening and nanoscale imaging systems. In our case, we think of the Terahertz Band as a very large transmission window that can support very high transmission rates in the short range, that is, up to a few Terabits per second for distances below one meter, or as several transmission windows more than 10 gigahertz-wide each as we’ve recently shown.For the time being, it is not clear how nanomachines with limited capabilities can exploit the properties of this huge band, but several options come to mind.”
“. . . we proposed the use of pheromones for molecular communication in long-range nanonetworks, such as, for transmission distances approximately one meter. Pheromones are molecules of chemical compounds released by plants, insects, and other animals that trigger specific behaviors among the receptor members of the same species and whose propagation relies also on the molecular diffusion process.”
“Nanoantenna — A Review” International Journal of Renewable Energy Technology Research, January 2015
“Another application of the nanoantennas is to create more compact, faster circuits and computers that use packets of light, instead of electrons for carrying signals. Such photonic circuits could be used for a new type of sensitive sensors which detect tiny traces of chemicals and biological materials, making them useful for applications including analyzing a patient’s DNA for medical diagnostics, monitoring air quality for pollution control and detecting dangerous substances for homeland security (emphasis added).”
“Nanopiezotronics” Advanced Materials, by Zhong Lin Wang, 2007
“The new field of nanopiezotronics” Materials Today, by Zhong Lin Wang, May 2007
“Recent progress in piezotronics and tribotronics” Nanotechnology, January 25, 2019 (abstract only)
“This review highlights advances in piezotronics and tribotronics with focus on fundamental theories, nanoscale materials, functional devices and simulations. Our emphasis is mainly about their application for third-generation semiconductor. The concepts and results presented in this review show that the piezotronics and tribotronics will facilitate the development of MEMS/NEMS, self-powered sensing, man-computer interfacing, and active wearable electronics (emphasis added).”
“What is Nanophysics: Survey of Course Topics” by Branislav K. Nikolić, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Delaware
“Piezoelectric Response of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes” Materials, April 21, 2018
“Carbon nanotubes: properties and application” Materials Science and Engineering: R: Reports, January 15, 2004, by Valentin N. Popov (abstract only)
“Safety Assessment of Carbon Nanotube Nanocomposites: Challenges and Perspectives” JSM Nanotechnology & Nanomedicine, by Tian Xia
“Graphene-based chemiluminescence resonance energy transfer for homogenous immunoassay” ACS Nano, April 24, 2012 (abstract only)
“Physicists Discover an Unexpected Force Acting on Nanoparticles in a Vacuum” Science Alert, by Fiona MacDonald, April 11, 2017
“Nano-bio-computing lipid nanotablet” Phys.org, by Thamarasee Jeewandara, March 5, 2019
“Carbon Nanotubes” (describes CNTs as “probably the best electron field-emitter known”)
“Lipid nanoparticles in COVID-19 vaccines: The new mercury to antivaxxers” Science-Based Medicine, by David Gorski, February 15, 2021 (Note: read between the lines)
“Comparing Semiconductor Nanocrystal Toxicity in Pregnant Mice and Non-Human Primates” Nanotheranostics, 2019
“ZnO nanoparticles embedded in polyethylene-glycol (PEG) matrix as sensitive strain gauge elements” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, November 2014
“Call for Papers: Special Issue on: Design and Fabrication of Microscope and Nanoscale Devices for Application in Energy, Environment, and Medicine” ASME Journal of Nanotechnology in Engineering and Medicine
“Hybrid BEM/FEM Coupled Electromechanics” Coventor (A Lam Research Company)
Business profile for Debjyoti Banerjee (previously a team leader in microfluidics/MEMS at Coventor)
Verily Leadership (Note the bio below of Co-founder, Brian Otis)
“As a Fellow at Verily, Brian pushes the frontier of medical device innovation, leading the company’s discovery and rapid prototyping efforts. He joined Verily from the University of Washington Department of Electrical Engineering where he was an Associate Professor. Previously, Brian held positions at the University of Washington Kelly Tremblay Brain and Behavior Laboratory, the UC-Berkeley Ralph Freeman Neuroscience Lab, The Berkeley Wireless Research Center, Intel Corporation and Agilent Laboratories. He received his MS and PhD in Electrical engineering in the field of low power integrated circuits for wireless sensors from the University of California, Berkeley.”
“Verily’s nanoparticle program finds its swerve with Verve” by Mark Audeh, Nanoparticle Program Lead, Verily, May 7, 2019
“One of the first programs at Verily, back when it was still a part of Google X, was our nanoparticle program. At the time, we wanted to see whether nanoparticles could be designed to find and attach to particular types of cells and to be detected and measured by a body-worn device once the nanoparticles found their targets . . . Theoretically, nanoparticles can be engineered to deliver specific therapies to individual cells or tissues . . .“
“. . . nanoparticle irreproducibility was an ongoing problem for us . . . Many commercially available particles we worked with initially were insufficiently characterized and exhibited inconsistent properties . . . While nanoparticle-based therapeutics exist, they only serve to alter the solubility, toxicity, or pharmacodynamics of a drug . . .”
“We saw an opportunity to contribute meaningfully in this area, by developing a high-throughput synthesis and screening platform to engineer libraries of well-characterized nanoparticles with predictable properties at scale (emphasis added).“
“Such a platform would allow us to . . . generate a considerable amount of data on novel nanoparticle formulations that will help us better understand their behavior and improve future design . . .“
“. . . We have also invested in and optimized instrumentation for in-depth, high throughput characterization and data capture on all of the particles we produce to develop a clear picture of the physical characteristics and chemical composition of the particles (i.e. size, charge, stability) and the impact they have on biological behaviors.This includes assessing binding to specific cell types, toxicity, tissue penetration, and so on (emphasis added).”
“In addition to this high throughput in vitro screening, we have developed a proprietary method of ‘barcoding’ unique particle formulations to conduct in vivo studies in what we anticipate will be a faster and more efficient manner. Currently, particles are tracked in vivo largely using fluorescence, making it challenging to study more than one at a time. By embedding unique DNA “barcodes” in the particles, we can track them with precision in vivo using DNA sequencing. This means we should be able to study many unique formulations in a single in vivo model, tracking each formulation’s location and stability independently. We are just beginning this work of assessing the biology of formulations in vivo (emphasis added).“
“By gathering all of this information on the chemistry, the physical characteristics, in vitro assay results, and in vivo study results, we are building a data analysis pipeline to more efficiently design and synthesize particles in the future (emphasis added).“
“Verily, I swear. Google Life Sciences debuts a new name” STAT, by Charles Piller, December 7, 2015
Business profile of Andrew Conrad, Founder and CEO of Verily, a Google Life Sciences company
“Nano Liposomes in Novel Drug Delivery Systems: a review” Nanotechnology, February 2016
“Ionizable cationic lipid for RNA delivery” (patent)
“Lipid Nanoparticles Enabling Gene Therapies: From Concepts to Clinical Utility” Nucleic Acid Therapeutics, June 2018
“Nanotoxicity: a key obstacle to clinical translation of siRNA-based nanomedicine” Nanomedicine (Lond), February 2014.
“The positive charges can facilitate interaction with the negatively charged cell surface [35,36]. Cellular damage can be caused by direct interactions between the cationic groups and cellular components, or indirectly by reactive oxidative species (ROS) formed in the presence of cationic materials. The resulting cell toxicity can be manifested in an acute or delayed manner . It should be noted that the mechanism about how cationic nanomaterials cause cyto-toxicity is still not well understood and an alternative mechanism has been proposed . Other obvious damage includes ‘lysosomal overload’ of poorly biodegradable nanocarriers, which results in the accumulation of visible autophagic vacuoles and apoptotic cell death  (emphasis added).”