Top Health Tools
Top Health Tools

Top Reports
Top Reports
Top Articles
Top Articles

Top Reviews
Top Reviews
YouBlog Archive

From Dee Nicholson
Health Canada is keeping us healthier and safer by banning digestive enzymes....NOT!!!!

Insider news is that this new restriction is the result of ONE MAN, not a team of scientists, and it is a THEORETICAL RISK CREATED BY HIM AND ONLY HIM, NOT A PROVEN ONE!

Those who suffer from digestive complaints such as Irritable Bowel Syndrome, Celiac disease, acid reflux, and more will REALLY be suffering when their means of staying healthy goes away because of this IDIOT.... and who the hell has ever heard of this George Tardik, anyway.....

THIS IS AN ABUSE OF POWER AND A BETRAYAL OF THE TRUST OF THE CANADIAN PEOPLE. SINCE WHEN DOES HEALTH CANADA H AVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE CANADIANS SUFFER? (Witness what happened IN COURT at the Truehope trial.... a Health Canada official stated on the record that Health Canada did not care that people died because of their decision.... and the judge in his decision said Health Canada was INHUMANE!!)


From Phil Segrave
The original report in the thread below sourced the video as something a whistleblower leaked. It would take expertise, facial recognition technology and/or access to a Pentagon calendar of meetings to determine who the speaker was to verify the authenticity of the video. However, open minded researchers should consider the weight of evidence before dismissing, debunking and/or ignoring the serious and profound implications of The God Gene (vectoring chemtrails, brain barrier penetrating viruses, involuntary manipulation of free will genes, etc.). When considering the total contents of this report, I think the video is credible.

As for the Time Magazine article (extracted and sourced below), after review your pharmacogeneticist may be quick to point out there is no connection between university projects identifying areas of the brain that are condusive to spiritual enhancement manipulation and the protein in specific viruses that can be used for genetic engineering as a military weapon whether vectored by chemtrails (airborne) or by vaccines into populations without their knowledge or consent.

All I can say to your pharmacogenetist is to evaluate the dismal track record of past government operations (listed below) regarding dragonian experiments on military personnel and civilians and the legislation (such as Title 50 sourced below) that psuedo-legalizes these operations in case there is any blow back adverse reaction law suits and prosecutions. Then ask the question, 'if it is possible to genetically engineer genes to make people involuntarily adopt behaviors that comply with military objectives, is it not plausible the technology would be developed as a weapon'?

One thing is certain, it is vital this subject not be relegated to the trash bin and further investigation be given highest priority which includes the distribution of credible information to as many people as possible because our only security is safety in numbers. The Court of Public Opinion is our only recourse. We must win the information war because only a political solution can defeat a physical war, be it with non-lethal soft kill weapons or otherwise.

Table of Contents: Oct. 25, 2004
Monday, Oct. 25, 2004

The God Gene Is religion part of nature's evolutionary scheme? Scientists are asking whether spirituality might be embedded in our DNA 62

Religion: Is God in Our Genes?
By Jeffrey Kluger Jeff Chu/ London; Broward Liston/ Orlando; Maggie Sieger/ Chicago; Daniel Williams/ Sydney Monday, Oct. 25, 2004

It's not hard to see the divinity behind the water temples that dot the rice terraces of Bali. It's there in the white-clad high priest presiding in the temple at the summit of a dormant volcano. It's there in the 23 priests serving along with him, selected for their jobs when they were still children by a bevy of virgin priestesses. It's there in the rituals the priests perform to protect the island's water, which in turn is needed to nurture the island's rice.

If the divine is easy to spot, what's harder to make out is the banal. But it's there too--in the meetings the priests convene to schedule their planting dates and combat the problem of crop pests; in the plans they draw up to maintain aqueducts and police conduits; in the irrigation proposals they consider and approve, the dam proposals they reject or amend. "The religion has a temple at every node in the irrigation system," says David Sloan Wilson, professor of biology and anthropology at Binghamton University in Binghamton, N.Y. "The priests make decisions and enforce the code of both religion and irrigation."

Ask true believers of any faith to describe the most important thing that drives their devotion, and they'll tell you it's not a thing at all but a sense--a feeling of a higher power far beyond us. Western religions can get a bit more doctrinaire: God has handed us laws and lore, and it's for us to learn and practice what they teach. For a hell-raising species like ours, however--with too much intelligence for our own good and too little discipline to know what to do with it--there have always been other, more utilitarian reasons to get religion. Chief among them is survival. Across the eons, the structure that religion provides our lives helps preserve both mind and body. But that, in turn, has raised a provocative question, one that's increasingly debated in the worlds of science and religion: Which came first, God or the need for God? In other words, did humans create religion from cues sent from above, or did evolution instill in us a sense of the divine so that we would gather into the communities essential to keeping the species going?

Just as a hurricane spins off tornadoes, this debate creates its own whirlwind of questions: If some people are more spiritual than others, is it nature or nurture that has made them so? If science has nothing to do with spirituality and it all flows from God, why do some people hear the divine word easily while others remain spiritually tone-deaf? Do such ivied-hall debates about environment, heredity and anthropology have any place at all in more exalted conversations about the nature of God?

Even among people who regard spiritual life as wishful hocus-pocus, there is a growing sense that humans may not be able to survive without it. It's hard enough getting by in a fang-and-claw world in which killing, thieving and cheating pay such rich dividends. It's harder still when there's no moral cop walking the beat to blow the whistle when things get out of control. Best to have a deity on hand to rein in our worst impulses, bring out our best and, not incidentally, give us a sense that there's someone awake in the cosmic house when the lights go out at night and we find ourselves wondering just why we're here in the first place. If a God or even several gods can do all that, fine. And if we sometimes misuse the idea of our gods--and millenniums of holy wars prove that we do--the benefits of being a spiritual species will surely outweigh the bloodshed.

Far from being an evolutionary luxury then, the need for God may be a crucial trait stamped deeper and deeper into our genome with every passing generation. Humans who developed a spiritual sense thrived and bequeathed that trait to their offspring. Those who didn't risked dying out in chaos and killing. The evolutionary equation is a simple but powerful one.

Nowhere has that idea received a more intriguing going-over than in the recently published book The God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into Our Genes (Doubleday; 256 pages), by molecular biologist Dean Hamer. Chief of gene structure at the National Cancer Institute, Hamer not only claims that human spirituality is an adaptive trait, but he also says he has located one of the genes responsible, a gene that just happens to also code for production of the neurotransmitters that regulate our moods. Our most profound feelings of spirituality, according to a literal reading of Hamer's work, may be due to little more than an occasional shot of intoxicating brain chemicals governed by our DNA. "I'm a believer that every thought we think and every feeling we feel is the result of activity in the brain," Hamer says. "I think we follow the basic law of nature, which is that we're a bunch of chemical reactions running around in a bag."

Even for the casually religious, such seeming reductionism can rankle. The very meaning of faith, after all, is to hold fast to something without all the tidy cause and effect that science finds so necessary. Try parsing things the way geneticists do, and you risk parsing them into dust. "God is not something that can be demonstrated logically or rigorously," says Neil Gillman, a professor of Jewish philosophy at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City. "[The idea of a God gene] goes against all my personal theological convictions." John Polkinghorne, a physicist who is also Canon Theologian at England's Liverpool Cathedral, agrees: "You can't cut [faith] down to the lowest common denominator of genetic survival. It shows the poverty of reductionist thinking."

Is Hamer really guilty of such simplification? Could claims for a so-called God gene be merely the thin end of a secular wedge, one that risks prying spirituality away from God altogether? Or, assuming the gene exists at all, could it somehow be embraced by both science and religion, in the same way some evolutionists and creationists--at least the less radicalized ones--accept the idea of a divinely created universe in which evolving life is simply part of the larger plan? Hamer, for one, hopes so. "My findings are agnostic on the existence of God," he says. "If there's a God, there's a God. Just knowing what brain chemicals are involved in acknowledging that is not going to change the fact."

Whatever the merits of Hamer's work, he is clearly the heir of a millenniums-long search for the wellsprings of spirituality. People have been wrestling with the roots of faith since faith itself was first codified into Scripture. "[God has] set eternity in the hearts of men," says the Book of Ecclesiastes, "yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end."

To theologians in the 3rd century B.C., when Ecclesiastes is thought to have been written, that passage spoke to the idea that while all of us are divinely inspired to look for God, none of us are remotely capable of fully comprehending what we are seeking. Scientists in the 21st century may not disagree, provided that "hearts of men" is replaced with "genes of men." The key for those researchers is finding those genes.

Hamer began looking in 1998, when he was conducting a survey on smoking and addiction for the National Cancer Institute. As part of his study, he recruited more than 1,000 men and women, who agreed to take a standardized, 240-question personality test called the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI). Among the traits the TCI measures is one known as self-transcendence, which consists of three other traits: self-forgetfulness, or the ability to get entirely lost in an experience; transpersonal identification, or a feeling of connectedness to a larger universe; and mysticism, or an openness to things not literally provable. Put them all together, and you come as close as science can to measuring what it feels like to be spiritual. "This allows us to have the kind of experience described as religious ecstasy," says Robert Cloninger, a psychiatrist at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., and the designer of the self-transcendence portion of the TCI.

Hamer decided to use the data he gathered in the smoking survey to conduct a little spirituality study on the side. First he ranked the participants along Cloninger's self-transcendence scale, placing them on a continuum from least to most spiritually inclined. Then he went poking around in their genes to see if he could find the DNA responsible for the differences. Spelunking in the human genome is not easy, what with 35,000 genes consisting of 3.2 billion chemical bases. To narrow the field, Hamer confined his work to nine specific genes known to play major roles in the production of monoamines--brain chemicals, including serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine, that regulate such fundamental functions as mood and motor control. It's monoamines that are carefully manipulated by Prozac and other antidepressants. It's also monoamines that are not so carefully scrambled by ecstasy, LSD, peyote and other mind-altering drugs--some of which have long been used in religious rituals.

Studying the nine candidate genes in DNA samples provided by his subjects, Hamer quickly hit the genetic jackpot. A variation in a gene known as VMAT2--for vesicular monoamine transporter--seemed to be directly related to how the volunteers scored on the self-transcendence test. Those with the nucleic acid cytosine in one particular spot on the gene ranked high. Those with the nucleic acid adenine in the same spot ranked lower. "A single change in a single base in the middle of the gene seemed directly related to the ability to feel self-transcendence," Hamer says. Merely having that feeling did not mean those people would take the next step and translate their transcendence into a belief in--or even a quest for--God. But they seemed likelier to do so than those who never got the feeling at all.

Hamer is careful to point out that the gene he found is by no means the only one that affects spirituality. Even minor human traits can be governed by the interplay of many genes; something as complex as belief in God could involve hundreds or even thousands. "If someone comes to you and says, 'We've found the gene for X,'" says John Burn, medical director of the Institute of Human Genetics at the University of Newcastle in England, "you can stop them before they get to the end of the sentence."

Hamer also stresses that while he may have located a genetic root for spirituality, that is not the same as a genetic root for religion. Spirituality is a feeling or a state of mind; religion is the way that state gets codified into law. Our genes don't get directly involved in writing legislation. As Hamer puts it, perhaps understating a bit the emotional connection many have to their religions, "Spirituality is intensely personal; religion is institutional."

At least one faith, according to one of its best-known scholars, formalizes the idea of gene-based spirituality and even puts a pretty spin on it. Buddhists, says Robert Thurman, professor of Buddhist studies at Columbia University, have long entertained the idea that we inherit a spirituality gene from the person we were in a previous life. Smaller than an ordinary gene, it combines with two larger physical genes we inherit from our parents, and together they shape our physical and spiritual profile. Says Thurman: "The spiritual gene helps establish a general trust in the universe, a sense of openness and generosity." Buddhists, he adds, would find Hamer's possible discovery "amusing and fun."

The Buddhist theory has never been put to the scientific test, but other investigations into the biological roots of belief in God were being conducted long before Hamer's efforts--often with intriguing results. In 1979, investigators at the University of Minnesota began their now famous twins study, tracking down 53 pairs of identical twins and 31 pairs of fraternal twins that had been separated at birth and raised apart. The scientists were looking for traits the members of each pair had in common, guessing that the characteristics shared more frequently by identical twins than by fraternal twins would be genetically based, since identical twins carry matching DNA, and those traits for which there was no disparity between the identicals and fraternals would be more environmentally influenced.

As it turned out, the identical twins had plenty of remarkable things in common. In some cases, both suffered from migraine headaches, both had a fear of heights, both were nail biters. Some shared little eccentricities, like flushing the toilet both before and after using it. When quizzed on their religious values and spiritual feelings, the identical twins showed a similar overlap. In general, they were about twice as likely as fraternal twins to believe as much--or as little--about spirituality as their sibling did.

Significantly, these numbers did not hold up when the twins were questioned about how faithfully they practiced any organized religion. Clearly, it seemed, the degree to which we observe rituals such as attending services is mostly the stuff of environment and culture. Whether we're drawn to God in the first place is hardwired into our genes. "It completely contradicted my expectations," says University of Minnesota psychologist Thomas Bouchard, one of the researchers involved in the work. Similar results were later found in larger twin studies in Virginia and Australia.

Other researchers have taken the science in a different direction, looking not for the genes that code for spirituality but for how that spirituality plays out in the brain. Neuroscientist Andrew Newberg of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine has used several types of imaging systems to watch the brains of subjects as they meditate or pray. By measuring blood flow, he determines which regions are responsible for the feelings the volunteers experience. The deeper that people descend into meditation or prayer, Newberg found, the more active the frontal lobe and the limbic system become. The frontal lobe is the seat of concentration and attention; the limbic system is where powerful feelings, including rapture, are processed. More revealing is the fact that at the same time these regions flash to life, another important region--the parietal lobe at the back of the brain--goes dim. It's this lobe that orients the individual in time and space. Take it off-line, and the boundaries of the self fall away, creating the feeling of being at one with the universe. Combine that with what's going on in the other two lobes, and you can put together a profound religious experience.

Even to some within the religious community, this does not come as news. "In India in Buddha's time, there were philosophers who said there was no soul; the mind was just chemistry," says Thurman. "The Buddha disagreed with their extreme materialism but also rejected the 'absolute soul' theologians." Michael Persinger, professor of behavioral neuroscience at Laurentian University in Sudbury, Ont., puts the chemistry argument more bluntly. "God," he says, "is an artifact of the brain."

Even if such spiritual deconstructionism is true, some scientists--to say nothing of most theologians--think it takes you only so far, particularly when it comes to trying to determine the very existence of God. Simply understanding the optics and wiring of the eyes, after all, doesn't mean there's no inherent magnificence in the Rembrandts they allow us to see. If human beings were indeed divinely assembled, why wouldn't our list of parts include a genetic chip that would enable us to contemplate our maker?

"Of course, concepts of God reside in the brain. They certainly don't reside in the toe," says Lindon Eaves, director of the Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics at Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond. "The question is, To what is this wiring responsive? Why is it there?"

Says Paul Davies, professor of natural philosophy at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia: "I think a lot of people make the mistake of thinking that if you explain something, you explain it away. I don't see that at all with religious experience."

Those religious believers who are comfortable with the idea that God genes are the work of God should have little trouble making the next leap: that not only are the genes there but they are central to our survival, one of the hinges upon which the very evolution of the human species turned. It's an argument that's not terribly hard to make.

For one thing, God is a concept that appears in human cultures all over the globe, regardless of how geographically isolated they are. When tribes living in remote areas come up with a concept of God as readily as nations living shoulder to shoulder, it's a fairly strong indication that the idea is preloaded in the genome rather than picked up on the fly. If that's the case, it's an equally strong indication that there are very good reasons it's there.

One of those reasons might be that, as the sole species--as far as we know--capable of contemplating its own death, we needed something larger than ourselves to make that knowledge tolerable. "Anticipation of our own demise is the price we pay for a highly developed frontal lobe," says Persinger. "In many ways, [a God experience is] a brilliant adaptation. It's a built-in pacifier."

But the most important survival role religion may serve is as the mortar that holds a group together. Worshipping God doesn't have to be a collective thing; it can be done in isolation, disconnected from any organized religion. The overwhelming majority of people, however, congregate to pray, observing the same rituals and heeding the same creeds. Once that congregation is in place, it's only a small step to using the common system of beliefs and practices as the basis for all the secular laws that keep the group functioning.

One of the best examples of religion as social organizer, according to Binghamton University's Wilson, is early Calvinism. John Calvin rose to prominence in 1536 when, as a theologian and religious reformer, he was recruited to help bring order to the fractious city of Geneva. Calvin, perhaps one of the greatest theological minds ever produced by European Christianity, was a lawyer by trade. Wilson speculates that it was Calvin's pragmatic genius to understand that while civil laws alone might not be enough to bring the city's deadbeats and other malefactors into line, divine law might be.

Calvin's catechism included the familiar Ten Commandments--which, with their injunctions against theft, murder, adultery and lying, are themselves effective social organizers. Added to that were admonitions to pay taxes, perform civic duties, behave in a civil manner and submit to the authority of magistrates. "You must understand religions very thoroughly in relation to their environments," says Wilson. "And one problem for Calvin was to make his city function."

The heirs to Calvinism today--Presbyterians, many Baptists and believers in the Reformed tradition in general--see the roots of their faith as something far more divine than merely good civic management. But even some theologians seem to think that a deep belief in the laws of God can coexist with the survival demands of an evolving society. "Calvin had a reverence for the Scriptures, which then became institutionalized," says James Kay, professor of practical theology at the Princeton Theological Seminary. "The Bible is concerned about justice for the poor, equity and fairness, and all of those things were seen to in Calvin's Geneva."

Other struggling cultures have similarly translated godly law into earthly order and in doing so helped ensure their survival. The earliest Christians established a rough institutional structure that allowed them to transmit their ideas within a generation of Christ's death, and as a result succeeded in living through the Roman persecution; the Jews of the Diaspora moved as a cultural whole through the nations of Europe, finding niches wherever they could but maintaining their identity and kinship by observing the same rites. "All religions become a bit secular," says Wilson. "In order to survive, you have to organize yourselves into a culture."

The downside to all this is that often religious groups gather not into congregations but into camps--and sometimes they're armed camps. In a culture of Crusades, Holocausts and jihads, where in the world is the survival advantage of religious wars or terrorism? One facile explanation has always been herd culling--an adaptive way of keeping populations down so that resources aren't depleted. But there's little evolutionary upside to wiping out an entire population of breeding-age males, as countries trying to recover from wars repeatedly learn. Why then do we so often let the sweetness of religion curdle into combat?

The simple answer might be that just because we're given a gift, we don't necessarily always use it wisely. Fire can either light your village or burn down the one next door, depending on your inclination. "Religions represent an attempt to harness innate spirituality for organizational purposes--not always good," says Macquarie University's Davies. And while spiritual contemplation is intuitive, says Washington University's Cloninger, religion is dogmatic; dogma in the wrong hands has always been a risky thing.

Still, for every place in the world that's suffering from religious strife, there are many more where spirituality is doing its uplifting and civilizing work. A God who would equip us with the genes and the smarts to cooperate in such a clever way is a God who ought to be appealing even to religious purists. Nonetheless, sticking points do remain that prevent genetic theory from going down smoothly. One that's particularly troublesome is the question of why Hamer's God gene--or any of the others that may eventually be discovered--is distributed so unevenly among us. Why are some of us spiritual virtuosos, while others can't play a note? Isn't it one of the central tenets of religion that grace is available to everybody? At least a few scientists shrug at the question. "Some get religion, and some don't," says Virginia Commonwealth University's Eaves.

But this seeming inequity may be an important part of the spiritual journey. It would be easy for God simply to program us for reverence; it's more meaningful when the door is opened but you've got to walk through on your own--however hard those steps may be for some. "I have never had a Big Bang conversion experience," says the Jewish Theological Seminary's Gillman. "My sense is that slowly and gradually, out of a rich experience of the world, one builds a faith."

Such experiences may ultimately be at least as important a part of our spiritual tool kit as the genes we're born with. A poor genetic legacy but lucky spiritual circumstances might mean more than good genes and bad experiences. "Fortune includes the possibility of divine grace as well as environmental influences," says Cloninger.

No matter how the two factors balance out, scientists may eventually find that trying to identify the definitive cluster of genes that serves as our spiritual circuit board is simply impossible--like trying to draw a genetic schematic of love. Still, they're likely to keep trying. "I am personally convinced that there is a scheme of things," says Davies of Macquarie University, "that the universe is not just any ragbag of laws." In the end, genes may prove to be a part of that scheme--but clearly one of very many.

From Phil Segrave

FunVax: Fundamentalist Vaccine: Pentagon Video, Document Reveal Aerial Vaccination Plan

The Pentagon may vaccinate large populations in the Middle East with what is being called FunVax – a fundamentalist vaccine. As explained by Pentagon researchers, the FunVax uses an airborne virus to indiscriminately infect populations considered high risk for religious fundamentalism. The virus in this vaccine purportedly has been tested and shown to reduce fundamentalism and religiosity in all who are infected by damaging what is called the "God gene." ...

...The FunVax report concludes that "high atmospheric dispersal or dispersal by ground level moving objects appear to be the most practical. Once initial dispersal is accomplished, infection will be transmitted person to person." Atmospheric dispersal would likely use what has been referred to as chemtrails. Many have claimed chemtrails are simply paranoid fantasies of conspiracy theorists. This document and other easily verifiable information on chemtrails available at this link prove that jets have been used to spread substances on the unsuspecting general population numerous times.

Genospirituality: genetic engineering for spiritual and religious enhancement.

The most frequently discussed role for genetic engineering is in relation to medicine, and a second area which provokes discussion is the use of genetic engineering as an enhancement technology. But one neglected area is the potential use of genetic engineering to increase human spiritual and religious experience - or genospirituality. If technologies are devised which can conveniently and safely engineer genes causal of spiritual and religious behaviours, then people may become able to choose their degree of religiosity or spiritual sensitivity...

Ideally, shamanistic consciousness could be modulated such that trances were self-induced only when wanted and when it was safe and convenient; and then switched-off again completely when full alertness and concentration are necessary...

Interview With Joey Lambardi About The Fundamentalism Vaccine (FunVax)
Posted on April 25, 2011 by funvax

The following is an interview with Whistle Blower Joey Lambardi. It was recorded over the phone at 1:32 pm April 23rd, 2011 and transcribed by volunteers at the FunVax blog.

It was DoD footage from a lecture hall in the pentagon (video above). The video was date stamped 4/13/05 so someone was holding onto this for awhile. I received it, the second week of February of this year. So, on it, it had one of the guys from the other video, the party video, giving a presentation. I just have an 8 minute clip from this presentation, but basically, this guy, he must be a scientist. This guy is giving a lecture about the brain and a gene called VMAT2 to a group of men in suits as well as various military uniforms. He talks about religion and was showing MRI brain scans. He said that the inhibition of VMAT2 could, over time, cause a persons brain to shift from a religious brain structure, they scientifically, you know they call it phenotype…but basically, you can change a religious brain to a non-religious brain structure. VMAT2 is apparently the scientific name for what people term the God Gene. At the end of the clip he says that he filed a proposal under the name FunVax to begin experimenting with the VMAT2 gene with the goal of creating a virus, like the flu virus, that will remove or replace this gene from people in the Middle East. Their goal of course was to create peace in the Middle East.

(JL) I have the original proposal from 2005. A quarter of it has been blacked out, but its easy to understand the point of it. It was a classified research proposal. The most important thing it has in it is this flow chart detailing the bench marks for the project. It started with putting a non-religious version of VMAT2 gene into bacteria – a process that is apparently called cloning. It went from there to tests in cell culture and then safety tests in mice then monkeys and then Gitmo detainees.

(JL) I’m trying to spread the word, but at the moment I am AWOL, so it hasn’t been easy.
So, build as big of audience as possible and please if you’re reading this, tell others about it because freedom of choice is being stripped away from us little by little. Today it’s people in the Middle East, but what will stop the government from doing this to us, or altering another gene that they find antagonistic to their goals. We are at a cross roads here, you know? The government has the technology to genetically engineer people. They put whatever gene they want to mess with in a virus and infect whoever who ever they want.

Is this what warfare is going to turn into, mass inoculations that change people’s behavior? God forbid the American public stands up against this, they’ll probably release a virus for submissiveness and we’ll all fall in line like a bunch of sheep.

I need to do what I can and I am willing to risk my life for it. So, please, if you don’t want the government playing God, please, please, please spread the word and hopefully your effort will help save us all.

Vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV) is a virus in the family Rhabdoviridae; the well-known Rabies virus belongs to the same family. VSV can infect insects and mammals.

For two published scientific studies showing that experiments on manipulating VMAT2 (the "God gene") are ongoing, click these links:

1- Selection of novel vesicular stomatitis virus glycoprotein variants from a peptide insertion library for enhanced purification of retroviral and lentiviral vectors.

This work applies a powerful new tool for protein engineering to construct novel viral envelope variants that can greatly improve the safety and use of retroviral and lentiviral vectors for clinical gene therapy.

2- Novel N-1,2-dihydroxypropyl analogs of lobelane inhibit vesicular monoamine transporter-2 function and methamphetamine-evoked dopamine release.

The aim of the current study was to determine the pharmacological effect of replacement of the N-methyl moiety with a chiral N-1,2-dihydroxypropyl (N-1,2-diol) moiety, which enhances water solubility, altering the configuration of the N-1,2-diol moiety and incorporating phenyl ring substituents into the analogs.

To determine VMAT2 selectivity, structure-activity relationships also were generated for inhibition of DA and serotonin transporters. Analogs with the highest potency for inhibiting DA uptake at VMAT2 and at least 10-fold selectivity were evaluated further for ability to inhibit methamphetamine-evoked DA release from superfused striatal slices.

Government report on the fundamentalist vaccine: Quarterly FunVax Review, June 1, 2007:

Cell Culture FunVax Research Group Standards

HCN-1A Cells - Taken from ATTC

Designations: HCN-1A

Depositors: Johns Hopkins University

1. Vesicular stomatitis virus is typically transmitted by insects, however,
as stated in the "Summary of FunVax Objectives" dated 5-25-05,
airborne virus would be the preferred route of infection. A strain
named VSV287 has been designed to spread via air, but more studies
need to be done to conclude its efficiency in both animoa and human

a. Dispersal via air is possible with VSV287, however there
is no accurate data that shows infection efficiency with
b. High atmospheric tests have been done with other viruses,
such as vesicular stomatitus virus and has been shown to
disperse at an acceptable rate with moderate viability,
however no tests have been done on VSV287.
c. The viral genome of VSV287 has been shown to intergrate in
various brain cells at the VMAT2 locus. Endogenous
VMAT2 expression in the brain has been decreased as
shown by ELISA...

Only human trials can determine VS287's effect on religiousity and
spirituality. The results obtained thus far show minimal health effects
none of which are life threatening or debilitating. Primates should be
infected with VSV287 to determine the effects on systems more similar
to humans.

4. Dispersal methods are still being tested High atmospheric dispersal
or dispersal by a ground level moving objects appear to be the most
practical. Tests will be conducted using VSV287. Once initial dispersal
is accomplished infection will be transmitted person to person. The
clinical group will examine the rates of person to person tranmissions...

For a long list of secret government tests in which soldiers, prisoners, and even the general public were unknowingly treated like human guinea pigs:

1986 - A report to Congress reveals that the U.S. Government's current generation of biological agents includes: modified viruses, naturally occurring toxins, and agents that are altered through genetic engineering to change immunological character and prevent treatment by all existing vaccines. (Citation needed)

1987 - The U.S. Department of Defense admits that, despite a treaty banning research and development of biological agents, it continues to conduct such research at 127 facilities and universities around the nation. (Science Magazine, New Internationalist)

1990 - More than 1,500 six-month old African-American and Hispanic babies in Los Angeles are given an experimental measles vaccine that has never been licensed for use in the United States. The CDC later admits that parents were never informed that the vaccine being injected to their children was experimental. (Los Angeles Times, New Scientist)

1994 - U.S. Senator John D. Rockefeller issues a report revealing that for at least 50 years the Department of Defense has used hundreds of thousands of military personnel in human experiments and for intentional exposure to dangerous substances. Materials included mustard and nerve gas, ionizing radiation, psychochemicals, hallucinogens, and drugs used during the Gulf War. (Rockefeller Report)

1994 to 1995 - Dr. Garth Nicolson at the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, TX discovers that many returning Desert Storm veterans are infected with an altered strain of Mycoplasma incognitus, a microbe commonly used in the production of biological weapons. He then uncovers evidence that biological agents used during the Gulf War were manufactured in Houston, TX and Boca Raton, Fl and tested on prisoners in the Texas Department of Corrections. (Journal of the American Medical Association, Capt. Joyce Riley, USAF)

1995 - The U.S. Government admits that it had offered Japanese war criminals and scientists who had performed human medical experiments salaries and immunity from prosecution in exchange for data on biological warfare research. Some of these scientists had tortured to death the humans on which they experimented. (Los Angeles Times, USA Today/Associated Press)


TITLE 50, Chapter 32, Section 1520

§ 1520a. Restrictions on use of human subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents

(a) Prohibited activities

The Secretary of Defense may not conduct (directly or by contract)—

(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or

(2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.

(b) Exceptions

Subject to subsections (c), (d), and (e) of this section, the prohibition in subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a test or experiment carried out for any of the following purposes:

(1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.

(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents.

(3) Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.

Dean Hamer, National Cancer Institute's Gene Structure Regulation Unit, USA, has written a book called 'The God Gene - How Faith is Hard Wired into our Genes'.

Hamer studied 2,000 DNA samples. He interviewed 2,000 people extensively (226 questions in each interview). The questions, among other things, looked at how spiritual a person is and what their level of faith in God is.

He found that the VMAT2 Gene was significantly more common among people who believed in a higher spiritual being. According to his research, whether or not your upbringing is religious has no bearing on how religious you turn out to be - but the presence of the VMAT2 Gene version does.

(1 of 7) Nano Vaccines: Sterilization, Surveillance, Genocide 2

From Dee Nicholson
As an addendum to what Ms. McDowall wrote, I would remind that the reason behind the dismantling of a Canadian marketing board is because of CETA... we will not be allowed any semblance of protectionist policies (such as marketing boards) when we are surgically joined at the hip with the EU, and if the Wheat Board is allowed to stand, it would cause a problem with the "FREE" trade on all our agriculture crops.... and we would be hit with sanctions if we did not agree to do as ordered from our "trading partners".

Make no mistake: with CETA, the most far-reaching trade deal ever undertaken by this nation, we lose our rights to set our own grain prices (the purpose of the Wheat Board, remember, it's a marketing board) and sustain our farmers. Under this agreement, the Monsantos of the world will be allowed to undercut our farmers and drive them out of business by financial attrition.



Dee Nicholson,

From Phil Segrave
What I do is research the facts prior to analyzing and judging.

People have blinders on to the truth. The reason the world is in such dire straights is because of tunnel vision. How can we determine who our real enemy is if we don't have an open mind when it comes to conspiracies?

The point I was trying to make is Caplan is a scholarly writer, intelligent and dangerous man (who works for GSK and supports human cloning research). He uses his talents and professional pedigree to advance the propaganda that mandated vaccines are necessary for the common good. Even if you are in the camp that believes some vaccines can work, the massive weight of evidence is conclusive that the vaccine industry is founded on a science that is based on theory with no independently verified clinical proof which is profit driven and corrupt.

Caplan is a Big Pharma 'spin doctor' whose mission is to set a pseudo-legal precedent to justify the sacrificing of individual sovereignty for 'herd immunity' utilitarism, thus bestowing immense power on a 'qualified minority' who decides what is in the best interest for the majority. That sounds like a good working principle except when the the 'qualified minority' has ulterior motives and/or exercises poor judgment.

Caplan is knowingly serving the interests a ruthless, immensely powerful diabolical cabal with a eugenics agenda. Please read my 'Making the Grade' report posted on and Eileen's site

Are We 'Making the Grade' With Our Children?

(1 of 7) Nano Vaccines: Sterilization, Surveillance, Genocide 2

The WHO Flu Scam 1 [1 of 18]

Thank you for your positive response and the tremendous contribution you and your organization is making to distribution the truth about vaccine efficacy.


From Eileen Dannemann
By Leslie Carol Botha
Janny Stokvis - Researcher and VAERS Analyst
September 19, 2011

Time to get this story straight: - University of Pennsylvania bioethicist, Dr. Art Caplan1.recently committed what SANE Vax views as an unprecedented HIPAA violation by offering a $10,000 reward for ‘proof of Bachmann vaccine claims.’

Forcing a family to disclose their child’s health records publicly, in front of a maniacal witch burning media network out to get Presidential Candidate Michelle Bachmann, is unethical, immoral, unprofessional and unwarranted. Obviously the news of Gardasil contamination and Bachmann’s reference to the vaccine as potentially dangerous has dug a knife deep into the heart of the Pharma industrial beast.

Now, the beast thinks it can raise its ugly head publicly demanding this family sacrifice a child’s privacy to save Bachmann’s political face. Outrageous.
According to Forbes Magazine, ‘University of Pennsylvania bioethicist Art Caplan is so confident that Michele Bachmann’s claim that a young girl was made mentally retarded by injections of the Gardasil vaccine against human papilloma virus is false that he is offering to donate $10,000 to the charity of Bachmann’s choice if she can produce such a patient.
‘Caplan, who has made the offer via Twitter, to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, on the radio stations WTVN and WOR, also proposes that Bachmann should donate $10,000 to the charity of his choice if such a patient can be produced. He says her campaign hasn’t responded. He writes:

‘If she can produce a case in one week starting today verified by three medical experts that she and I pick of a woman who became ‘retarded’ (her words) due to HPV vaccine I will donate that to a charity of her choice.’ 2.

Charity of Bachmann’s choice? Dr. Caplan, you should be writing a check to the victim’s family to cover the medical costs incurred by the contaminated vaccine. In fact, the entire industry better get their checkbooks ready – because families are lining up ready to speak out and be counted.

In addition to Caplan, ‘another bioethicist, Steven Miles of the University of Minnesota, has offered $1,000 if a patient whose brain was damaged by an HPV vaccine can be produced. The bioethicists are making a pretty safe bet, because the odds of finding a reputable medical expert who will say a case of mental disability was caused by Gardasil is close to nil.’ 2.

Define ‘reputable’ – one who is paid to be beholden to Merck? Sirs, you are doing the 23,388 adversely injured adolescents and the 102 families whose daughters and sons have died HPV post-vaccination a disgraceful disservice with your pompous attitudes.
SANE Vax Inc. believes that Caplan and Miles are violating HIPAA’s (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) Patient Privacy Act guaranteeing privacy rights under federal law by focusing the media’s biased pharmaceutical spotlight on innocent families forcing them into the media limelight to disclose their adolescent’s medical history to the public. 3.
All this mother in Florida did was take advantage of the opportunity to let Bachmann know there is a problem with Gardasil. Where is the crime in that? All Bachmann did was publicly report what the mother told her…why should she be raked over the coals...unless of course there is something to hide?
Why not focus on a girl whose mother has already spoken out on the issue to try and find the cause of her brain damage. That is what ‘mental retardation’ is isn’t it?
Hobart Indiana mother Amy Pingel has been very vocal in her efforts to get media attention to the fact that Gardasil can cause serious side effects, including seizures, neurological problems and even paralysis. She believes her daughter is proof.
Her daughter, Zeda was a normal, healthy 13-year-old who loved her family, her friends and her phone. She once was a popular cheerleader and A-B student, who texted and talked tirelessly. Now, she is silent. She is strapped to her wheelchair, her head leaning against a head rest, her eyes wandering, seemingly sightless. She can neither walk, eat, nor speak.4.
Research vs. Rebuttal
If indeed, these bioethicists were ethical, they would be doing the research instead of using their ‘authority’ to refute the claim.

Instead, SANE Vax Inc. has gathered research for them since their arrogance is standing in the way of bioethics.

According to VAERS - the following reports have been listed for HPV, HPV2 & HPV 4 and ‘mental disorders.’ This is an estimated 1 to 10% of the vaccine-injured population reporting.


STAY CONNECTEDNewsletter | RSS | Twitter | YouTube |
This site is owned and operated by © 1999-2018. All Rights Reserved. All content on this site may be copied, without permission, whether reproduced digitally or in print, provided copyright, reference and source information are intact and use is strictly for not-for-profit purposes. Please review our copyright policy for full details.
volunteerDonateWrite For Us
Stay Connected With Our Newsletter