There is a culprit. There is evidence. They knew what they were doing. They are guilty. They should be stopped.
By Dr. Guy Hatchard
For the last thirty years, it has been well-known that gene editing causes unintended consequences. Experiments on animals, crops, and now synthetic meats have been throwing up unexpected aberrations. Experiments with gene therapy on humans are dogged by failures.
Aberrations and failures both actually translate properly into the six-letter word ‘deaths’. The word unexpected is also a misuse of the English language. I should have used ‘inevitable’ because that is fully corroborated by past experience.
Thirteen years ago disastrous genetic experiments on cows were already in full swing here in New Zealand (“NZ”) sponsored by the government. Genetically modified cows were born with ovaries that grew so large they caused ruptures and killed the animals. They were formed when human genetic code injected into a cow cell was added to an egg from a cow’s ovary and put into a cow’s uterus.
Despite this disaster, under permits subsequently issued by the NZ Environmental Risk Management Authority in 2010, AgResearch was authorised to put human genes into goats, sheep and cows for a period of 20 years to see if the animals can produce human proteins in their milk. AgResearch scientists hoped that inserting parts of the human genetic code would enable ruminants to produce milk containing proteins that could be used in human medical applications.
A Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (“MAF”) investigation found deformities and respiratory problems among animals at the facility – something AgResearch had been open about – saying it was a foreseeable by-product of the project. In other words, they knew in advance it would all go to custard.
A Dr Suttie at AgResearch said the root of the trouble with the cows was that the human FSH genes had affected the whole calf and not the mammary glands only, as was intended – a problem that did not show up in trials on mice. He summarised:
“This was not intended to happen. But, bluntly, this is what research is all about.”
Tell me about it, visit a pharmaceutical testing facility, as I did in the early 2000s, and you will find giant high temperature incinerators built to accommodate the mistakes (for mistakes read maimed animals).
A friend of mine Michael Antoniou, PhD, in an October 2022 interview with The Defender, agrees, stating that, “innately, gene editing also can bring about unintended DNA damage … even at the site of your intended edit or elsewhere in the DNA of your target cells, with unknown downstream consequences.”
A report published in the Journal of Genetics and Genomics in 2020 found CRISPR gene-editing in rice resulted in numerous unintended and undesirable on-target and off-target mutations.
Antoniou described this as “a grave oversight, because we know that gene editing is not precise … the evidence is there to show that you will always have unintended DNA damage in addition to what you want … a whole spectrum of unintended DNA damage that accumulates at the multiple steps of the gene editing process.”
Antoniou should know, he has been researching gene therapy at the prestigious King’s College London for decades. His conclusion: it is at this time neither safe nor effective. Among qualified researchers his opinion is not an outlier, it is the norm, but what makes Antoniou unusual is that he is prepared to speak up publicly.
When gain-of-function research was restarted in 2017 and at the first sign that Pfizer and others were going to rush production of mRNA vaccines, just about everyone in the gene therapy field should have been shouting “NO” from the rooftops. They didn’t. Many were complicit, some sat on their hands and they are mostly still sitting on their hands even now, as evidence of serious harm accumulates.
Just like the poor NZ calves whose lives were maimed and cut short by a biotech experiment, people are dropping dead suddenly or dying slowly from “unexpected” (read inevitable) illness. Still, no one in authority wants to know. In fact, they are doubling down.
At the latest count 93 doctors have died in Canada during the pandemic, many of them young, but the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario has issued advice to doctors encouraging them to insist that their patients are vaccinated, saying:
“It is also important that physicians work with their patients to manage anxieties related to the vaccine and not enable avoidance behaviour. For example, for extreme fear of needles (trypanophobia) or other cases of serious concern, responsible use of prescription medications and/or referral to psychotherapy may be available options.”
So, the unvaccinated are to be subjected to psychological third-degree or chemical restraint.
Once and for all, those in authority seem ignorant and/or confused about the well-known mutagenic propensity of biotechnology. Genetic modification is dangerous, very dangerous, and all but impossible to contain, and certainly impossible to recall. If during the last three years you haven’t learned that, you must have a very closed mind, a determined death wish, a reckless greed, or take an unnatural joy in torture.
Those who know about the dangers of biotechnology, who have undertaken gain-of-function research or involved themselves in the project to experimentally inject the entire world’s population with novel instructions overriding complex natural genetic processes, or who have simply kept quiet, are, there is only one word for it, guilty by act or omission.
It is time to close the doors of the biotech laboratories playing with deadly pathogens, the biotech vats, and the ‘we dared’ philosophies. Time to close off the billions of dollars of government funding and commercial investment. Time to shut the door to military involvement. Time to insist that the media tell the truth about dangers and the corrupt fact checkers stop hiding it. The alternatives are too apocalyptic to contemplate.
by Guy Hatchard, PhD,
Join: 👉 https://t.me/acnewspatriots
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of AC.NEWS
Disclaimer: This article may contain statements that reflect the opinion of the author. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). AC.News will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article www.ac.news websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner. Reprinting this article: Non-commercial use OK. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.