Posts Tagged ‘DNA’

 

Yesterday, I posted about the risky experimentation that will fuck up your DNA from Moderna. Today, I learned that Trump’s junta has outrageous conflicts of interest with that very company. They will try and inject the population with their experiments, no doubt.

In this depraved Kakistocracy, this is WHY that guy is appointed:

 

Trump’s New COVID-19 Czar Holds $10 Million In Vaccine Company Stock Options

 

We also have psychopath Dershowitz arguing that the government can forcibly vaccinate anyone they like, erasing human rights from America. Liberal pseudo-intellectuals may get on board that idea as they mindlessly approve any medical development under the banner of “science.” Not a one of them could tell you what the scientific method actually is, but that is their religion.

Seems like a perfect storm of fuckery.

 

The DARPA-backed project would use a method that is known to cause severe genetic damage that has actually been shown to aggravate the conditions it was meant to cure.

 

MODERNA’S CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER HAS DESCRIBED THE COMPANY’S PRODUCTS AS “HACKING THE SOFTWARE OF LIFE” AND PERMANENTLY ALTERING A PERSON’S GENETIC CODE.

AP_306450007027.jpg

 

Vladimir Putin has come out this week with odd comments about someone collecting biological samples of Russian citizens for unknown purposes. This leads in a particularly troubling direction.

“Let them do what they want, and we must do what we must”.
-Putin

Putin Questions US Air Force DNA Collection From Ethnic Russians

“Do you know that biological material is being collected all over the country, from different ethnic groups and people living in different geographical regions of the Russian Federation? The question is – why is it being done? It’s being done purposefully and professionally. We are a kind of object of great interest.”

 

That clock keeps ticking closer to midnight.

fraud.png

FBI, DOJ And Their Forensic Scientists State They’ll Continue Using Discredited Junk Science To Put People Behind Bars

 

 

The questions that DNA analysis had raised about the scientific validity of traditional forensic disciplines and testimony based on them led, naturally, to increased efforts to test empirically the reliability of the methods that those disciplines employed. Relevant studies that followed included:

• a 2002 FBI re-examination of microscopic hair comparisons the agency’s scientists had performed in criminal cases, in which DNA testing revealed that 11 percent of hair samples found to match microscopically actually came from different individuals;

• a 2004 National Research Council report, commissioned by the FBI, on bullet-lead evidence, which found that there was insufficient research and data to support drawing a definitive connection between two bullets based on compositional similarity of the lead they contain;

• a 2005 report of an international committee established by the FBI to review the use of latent fingerprint evidence in the case of a terrorist bombing in Spain, in which the committee found that “confirmation bias”—the inclination to confirm a suspicion based on other grounds—contributed to a misidentification and improper detention; and

• studies reported in 2009 and 2010 on bitemark evidence, which found that current procedures for comparing bitemarks are unable to reliably exclude or include a suspect as a potential biter.

Beyond these kinds of shortfalls with respect to “reliable methods” in forensic feature-comparison disciplines, reviews have found that expert witnesses have often overstated the probative value of their evidence, going far beyond what the relevant science can justify. Examiners have sometimes testified, for example, that their conclusions are “100 percent certain;” or have “zero,” “essentially zero,” or “negligible,” error rate. As many reviews—including the highly regarded 2009 National Research Council study—have noted, however, such statements are not scientifically defensible: all laboratory tests and feature-comparison analyses have non-zero error rates.

 

roundup

Glyphosate is “definitely genotoxic”, says Prof Chris Portier, a co-author of the report by the World Health Organisation’s cancer agency, which classed glyphosate as a probable carcinogen

Prof Christopher Portier, one of the co-authors of the recent report by the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which determined that glyphosate is a probable carcinogen, said at a scientific briefing today, “Glyphosate is definitely genotoxic. There is no doubt in my mind.”

Glyphosate damages DNA, says World Health Organisation expert

2015-04-16_bus_8642620_I1

Amazon, Google race to get your DNA into the cloud

Corporate hagiography completely ignores security and ethical issues of having your genetic blueprints available for exploitation by these corporations.

chernobyl_legacy_photo

Nuclear industry lies include a one-size fits all concept called “dose” of radioactivity.  This is an apples vs. oranges fallacy.  Being beamed from outside your body vs. ingesting radiation and having it take up residence inside the nuclei of your cells are two completely different situations.  Any honest scientist must accept that.  The nuclear mafia employs very few of those.

Dr. Chris Busby:

Fukushima Fallout Damaged the Thyroids of California Babies

“For what is done by these people is to dismiss any evidence of increased rates of cancer or any other disease by shouting at it: “the doses were too low”. In this way, reality is airbrushed away. What is this quantity “dose”? It is a simple physics-based quantity which represents the absorption of energy from radiation. One Sievert of gamma radiation is one Joule per kilogram of living tissue.

This might work for external radiation. But it doesn’t work for internal exposures to radioactive elements which can produce huge effects on cellular DNA at low average “doses”. It is like comparing warming yourself in front of the fire with eating a hot coal. Or comparing a punch to stabbing. Same dose, same energy. Very different effects…

Our paper reports 44 confirmed thyroid cancer cases in 0-18 year olds in Fukushima prefecture in the last six months (a figure that has since risen to 53). In the hypothyroidism paper we discuss the 44 cases relative to the population and calculate that this represents an 80-fold excess based on national data prior to the Fukushima Iodine releases.

This presents a severe challenge to Dr Wolfgang Weiss of the UN and WHO, who stated last year that no thyroid cancers could result from the Fukushima disaster as the “doses were too low”. How does he explain the 80-fold increase in this normally rare condition?

Or rather, when will he admit that the entire scientific model that underpins his views is fraudulent? And that nuclear radiation is – roughly speaking – 1,000 times more dangerous to human health than he is letting on?”