Category: Biology

Dobbs versus reality

The US Supreme Court has overturned Roe V Wade and turned the matter of legal abortion back to the states, where it never should have left.

I will not get into legalities. That’s beyond me. I only want to recount my experience not of abortion, but as a young boy raised in an intensely Catholic environment. I was 21 when Roe v Wade came down, and I was appalled and disgusted. At that age, so inexperienced and overly righteous, I had no problem in judging that women, once pregnant, needed to stay pregnant, and either put up their children for adoption, or set aside their lives, futures and careers and raise that child.

How do unwanted pregnancies happen? Poor judgment, strong impulses, changes in circumstances, and probably most importantly, alcohol. Slowly over time my attitudes began to soften. Sometimes pregnancy is an unplanned mistake, and if there is a way out without killing a fully formed baby (or fetus), I thought it best to take it. What is more important – the life of a fetus, not fully formed or sentient, or that of a young woman, who should be allowed to make a mistake and still have a future.

Continue reading “Dobbs versus reality” →

Endless pressure, endlessly applied.

Backyard, Bozeman, Montana. Dreaming of summer.

Wildness, wilderness and roadless areas are all words that we use to describe lands that remain as nature intended, untrammeled by man’s unquenchable thirst for comfort, convenience and attachment to shiny objects. Fragments of Montana, Idaho, Alaska and smaller parcels scattered about the Lower 48 are all that remain of the once vast wild landscape that existed before Europeans occupied (colonized) and exploited anything and everything that could be converted into gold, silver of fiat money. It was all wilderness once. Lately I’ve been reflecting on experiences and events that have influenced my life in the Northern Rockies. Yes, I’m a transplant, originally from “The East.” College in Denver, and then migrating to Missoula, Montana in the winter of 1974-75. I wrote the following piece for a group I helped to found in 1987 in Swan Lake, Montana, The Friends of the Wild Swan. wildswan.org

After 35 years of grassroots wilderness and forest-ecosystem activism, it’s worth reflecting on one of Friends of the Wild Swan’s most important accomplishments:  wildlands protection.  In 1987, the social, cultural and political climate surrounding the wilderness/roadless-areas debate was highly contentious, to put it mildly.  All across western Montana, and in the Swan Valley in particular, public outrage and resentment was growing rapidly against the rapid expansion of clearcut logging on Plum Creek’s (“checkerboard”) corporate holdings, and indiscriminate clearcutting on publicly-owned forest land managed by the U.S. Forest Service.

Continue reading “Endless pressure, endlessly applied.” →

Audubon Schmodubon

I used to be a member of Audubon Society, in fact, up until 2021. We are a funky lot of people who devote time and energy into identifying, feeding, studying and talking about birds. Our back deck is usually a minor mess, as birds are not careful when feed is available. It is a tiered ecosystem where birds at the highest perch use their beaks to scatter seed below, looking for the most desirable morsel. Down below birds that are ground feeders hunt and peck. Seed that ends up below the deck accumulates until a doe or buck passes by.

Why, I was asked, do we care about these species? “Unconditional love” was the only answer I could muster. They show no gratitude, in fact do not even know we are caring for them. A bird pecking away at a seed bell strung from a wire has no clue he is not on a tree, one with abundant mealy worms.

Continue reading “Audubon Schmodubon” →

Part 10: mRNA Mavericks and Everyware ~ Re-assembling Life via Ribocomputing

An Inconvenient Truth About COVID Injections

Part 10 of the Series, “Of Monkeys, Mice and Men: From Natural Bodies to Digitized Bots”

“Of all the new frontiers opening up for computation, perhaps the most startling is that of the human body. As both a rich source of information in itself and the vehicle by which we experience the world, it was probably inevitable that sooner or later somebody would think to reconsider it as just another kind of networked resource . . . The motivations for wanting to do so are many; to leverage the body as a platform for mobile services; to register its position in space and time; to garner information that can be used to tailor the provision of other local services, like environmental controls; and to gain accurate and timely knowledge of the living body, in all the occult complexity of its inner workings . . . In every moment of our lives, the rhythm of the heartbeat, the chemistry of the blood, even the electrical conductivity of the skin are changing in response to [the] evolving physical, situational, and emotional environment. If you were somehow able to capture and interpret these signals, though, all manner of good could come from it . . . Doctors could easily verify their patients’ compliance with a prescribed regimen of pharmaceutical treatment or prophylaxis; a wide variety of otherwise dangerous conditions, caught early enough, might yield to timely intervention . . . The information is there; all that remains is to collect it. Ideally, this means getting a data-gathering device that does not call undue attention to itself into intimate proximity with the body, over reasonably long stretches of time.” (p. 48-49)

~ Adam Greenfield, author of Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing 

This is the final installment of a series I launched in December 2020 (see Endnote 1). Although I had intended to wrap up this series with a concentrated focus on transhumanism, given this topic saturation on the airwaves (see links in Endnote 2), I would like to circle back to what I touched upon (Singapore as a bioengineering propagator worldwide) in the Prologue and Part 1, and to which I promised I would return.

A Brief mRNA Refresher

In 2018, Moderna President, Stephen Hoge, stated, “Why are we so passionate about messenger RNA? . . . It starts with the question of life . . . And in fact, all life that we know flows through messenger RNA . . . In our language, mRNA is the software of life.” He elaborated that cells use messenger RNA (mRNA) to translate the genes of DNA into “dynamic” proteins, involved in every bodily function. 

Theoretically, mRNA prompts proteins to be made in our bodies — thereby placing drug factories inside us. In a 2018 interview with C&EN, Moderna’s Hoge asserted, “You could ultimately use mRNA to express any protein and perhaps treat almost any disease . . . It is almost limitless what it can do.”

According to pharmaceutical giant GSK — which, like Moderna, also manufactures vaccines based on mRNA technology — messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) is a biological molecule that is naturally produced in human cells and carries genetic code for the cells to produce proteins. The company purports that synthetic mRNA vaccine technology is a new platform for vaccines — which will disrupt the field of vaccinology. 

mRNA Mavericks in Singapore

For the record, I was not avoiding the most commonly discussed topic when it comes to the COVID injections — that of mRNA. Rather, I intended to complete this exploratory journey with discourse of mRNA, in my unique way, and I appreciate the patience exhibited by POM readers. 

As I implied in my Prologue, the task of penning this series was to examine what I referred to as the “alchemical marriage of synthetic biology and COVID,” and to provide evidence that biotech tinkerers were re-imagining humanity in a quest for re-genesis. I suspected early on that the impending injections would not only be mandated, but would represent a covert method of re-assembling nature, thereby possibly re-defining what it means to be “human.” COVID was simply a commercialized catalyst — akin to a pitch deck — in marketing advanced technologies that were waiting in the wings, with mRNA playing a pivotal role. My guess is . . . we have not seen anything yet — at least in terms of where they intend to take a human being. 

In reference to the slogan of the Great Reset — build back better — I posed the question, “Could building back — using a plethora of genetic modification projects — be a means to a dead end of humanity, and worse, to biological life itself?” I return to this question in this final installment, and to individuals who may have played (or continue to play) a central role in human genetic modification; and thus, may be considered progenitors of synthetic (or re-assembled) humanity, or perhaps may be more aptly termed “re-genitors.” 

Continue reading “Part 10: mRNA Mavericks and Everyware ~ Re-assembling Life via Ribocomputing” →

Meet the Graphene Industry’s Superhero, Mr. G: Friend or Foe?

Is Mr. G a superhero or a villain — or both, or somewhere in between? If he is a friend, then to whom? If he is a foe, then what could be his goals?

This is not a survey, nor a yay or nay poll. If readers would like to offer a response or take a specific stance, please do your best to substantiate your insights with evidence (preferably primary sources, such as scientific literature, industry white papers, or news releases from academia).

Continue reading “Meet the Graphene Industry’s Superhero, Mr. G: Friend or Foe?” →

Judge doesn’t buy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lies.

A federal district court judge recently ruled in favor of grizzly bears and bull trout in a lawsuit filed by grassroots environmental groups challenging the 2018 revised Flathead Forest Plan. The Flathead National Forest in Northwest Montana has a long history of giving priority to timber industry interests at the expense of wildlife, native fisheries, water quality and what’s left of the untrammeled mixed conifer forest landscape that surrounds Glacier National Park. What happens outside Park boundaries influences what happens inside the arbitrary boundary, and visa versa.

U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy cited Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in ruling that the federal agencies were negligent in abandoning the prior Plan’s Amendment 19 road management protections (The forestwide Plan recovery standard for over 30 years) for grizzly bear and bull trout. Molloy said: “it’s like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet.” Amendment 19’s road closure and removal requirements are credited with putting threatened grizzly bears on a path toward recovery.

2021-06-24-doc.-116-opinion-and-orderDownload

Amendment 19’s requirement that culverts be removed from unnecessary, permanently-closed roads is credited with helping protect threatened bull trout from the sediment released by inevitable clogging and wash-outs where culverts intersect unused and abandoned logging roads.

Continue reading “Judge doesn’t buy U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lies.” →

Free Wally: Tracing the Spike Protein Drama to a Llama

I dedicate this exploratory essay to my friends and family who received a COVID injection (without proper informed consent); and to all the individuals way back in the cheap seats, who may not be able to hear what I am saying, due to the drowned-out noise of Gain-of-Function (GOF) research, lab leaks, and e-mail leaks.

SPOILER ALERT: When I refer to a “spike protein” herein, it is NOT because I support the notion that a protein arose from a virus, nor do I think it “sheds” or operates in the way that has been postulated by individuals referenced below (all of whom maintain that there is a SARS-CoV-2 virus).

There has been much recent drama (and rightly so) centered around the spike protein of the purported SARS-CoV-2 virus, and more specifically, what is being described as the expression of the synthetic spike protein as a result of COVID injections.

It seems that Dr. Byram Bridle, Dr. Joseph Mercola (see here and here), Judy Mikovits, Stephanie Seneff, Dr. Russell Blaylock, and Dr. Sherri Tenpenny all agree that the spike protein — at the very least, the one that is being produced for/by the injections — is a toxin (see Endnote 1). The general consensus among them is that it is a bioweapon. Indeed, Tenpenny emphasized (interview linked above) that the spike protein is the bioweapon (not “the virus”), based on a study of a “harmless pseudovirus” that was conjugated with spike proteins, yet caused pulmonary arterial damage.

I am content knowing we can all move forward in agreeing this may be a lab-created bioweapon; however, why do so many still have tunnel vision, remaining fixated on GOF research? Could there be other labs doing related research — perhaps protein R&D, or even more precisely, “spike protein” R&D (sans virus)? And how do synchrotrons factor in to all of this? As you read further, I offer a plot twist in this regard, so I hope you can stay tuned as I set up the prelude . . . 

Continue reading “Free Wally: Tracing the Spike Protein Drama to a Llama” →

Clearing the Air: Febreze and the J&J Jab

Raise your hand if you have a bottle of Febreze air freshening or fabric spray in your house. Okay, you can put your hands down. Actually, I have a feeling not too many POM readers have Febreze laying around the house.

I have never used Febreze products, so I do not have any anecdotal evidence pointing to their efficacy. However, the manufacturer, Proctor & Gamble (P&G), purports that it is the first company to develop technology that literally eliminates odors. As asserted by the company: “Back in 1994, a P&G research & development scientist discovered that a fancy little starch molecule used in dryer sheets (AKA cyclodextrin) could actually be used to clean away bad odors from fabrics—without throwing them into the wash. With an obsessive determination over the course of four years, he perfected that technology into a simple, water-based sprayable formula… and in 1998, Febreze Fabric Refresher made its debut.” Essentially, cyclodextrins used in the laundry product trap odor molecules so that they do not reach the scent receptors in your nose. This is curious in light of my previous POM post on chemosignaling and the significance of scents, as well as the phenomenon of anosmia purported to be a common symptom of COVID.

But that is not the full story . . . In its infancy, Febreze was not a marketing success. In fact, as reported in 2016 by Anand Damani, of Behavioural Design, it was a major flop, and P&G desired to promote their product more effectively. Apparently, as Damani elucidated, P&G hired behavioral experts to create a “craving” for the product, by instilling the habitual use of Febreze. In 2012, Charles Duhigg, Pulitzer-prize winning journalist, who has a special interest in the science of habits (particularly, the militarized application of the science of habit formation) presented an interesting back story on the creation of the “Febreze habit loop.” He described that P&G had kept an extensive (and proprietary) library of videos of homemakers cleaning their houses, from which they studied their cleaning rituals. From their observations, the company’s R&D specialists had determined that a new marketing campaign needed to focus on the Febreze product being the final touch ritual after a cleaning session, emphasizing that the area cleaned would smell as good as it looked. But there was no reward there, because the product destroyed scents. Duhigg explained that the researchers went back to the lab, and P&G “spent another 3 million dollars inventing a perfume that was strong enough to withstand the chemicals of Febreze, so that they could pour it into the bottles.” Febreze sales skyrocketed, and it became a billion dollar a year product — chemically designed to “kill bad scents.”

My aim in this short essay is to clear the air on this “fancy little starch molecule” — cyclodextrin, and 2-hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrin (HPBCD), in particular. So bear with me, as I geek out a bit on the science. I think, by the end, you will see why I took a vested interest. 

Continue reading “Clearing the Air: Febreze and the J&J Jab” →

Part 9: Tuned In ~ A Mother’s Intuition on Transmission from the Jabbed to the Un-Jabbed

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?

Continue reading “Part 9: Tuned In ~ A Mother’s Intuition on Transmission from the Jabbed to the Un-Jabbed” →

Another small piece of paradise won’t be destroyed today.

A little good news for trees and critters in the upper Priest River area in northern Idaho. After years of battling the U.S. Forest Service and it’s work games, a federal judge wasn’t fooled by the “happy talk” and sent the agency back to the drawing board. This by no means is the end of this battle, but it does demonstrate, I believe, that the simple strategy of endless pressure, endlessly applied can produce positive results, even in the face of overwhelming odds against winning. The misuse of the “categorical exclusion” to NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) is one of the Forest Service’s favorite administrative maneuvers to further one of the primary neo-liberal economic principles: deregulation.

Always good to stay positive, even when the world seems like it’s crashing down upon us. This piece appeared first in CounterPunch, April 30, 2021. https://www.counterpunch.org/

APRIL 30, 2021

The Legal Showdown at Hanna Flats

BY MIKE GARRITYFacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Hanna Flats, Idaho Panhandle National Forest. Photo: Paul Sieracki.

The upper Priest River area in the Idaho Panhandle National Forest has the largest contiguous area of old-growth cedar, hemlock, and grand fir in the interior Western United States and the largest concentration of ancient cedar stands in northern Idaho.  Because of the bowl-shaped topography the high ridges on three sides capture cold air in the lower elevations and trap cool moist air in the summer.  The result is that the low-elevation winter snowpack is deeper and more persistent than elsewhere in northern Idaho and summertime conditions are relatively moist and cool compared to neighboring areas which makes the area less susceptible to wildfires.

Continue reading “Another small piece of paradise won’t be destroyed today.” →