- Vaccine mandates and passports are a prelude to the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Internet of Bodies
- The topic of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is thoroughly documented on government websites and in other official sources
- We might have a better chance at getting through to our conspiracy denialist friends by pointing them in the direction of policy papers that openly talk about the Fourth Industrial Revolution vs. by trying to talk to them about the harms of vaccines
- We may also point them in the direction of the “conspiracy theories” of the past that came true
- While there is no official proof of graphene oxide or nanotechnology in COVID injections, there are plenty of official scholarly papers talking about both in other medical applications, including vaccines
This story is about how to talk to your conspiracy denialist friends about “nanobots in vaccines.” No really, this story is about how to talk to your conspiracy denialist friends about “nanobots in vaccines”!
The Big Picture: From Mandates to the Internet of Bodies
I’ve thought about this quite a bit, and here’s what I am thinking. The bullying and the hoopla around the COVID injections is a prelude, designed to groom us for the notorious Fourth Industrial Revolution and the so called “convergence of biological forms with AI.”
But while the topic of “nanobots in COVID vaccines” is dirty to the ear of any respectable citizen — the plans for the Fourth Industrial Revolutions and convergence of biological life with machines are documented in abundance on official government websites and by respectable NGOs. So there is a chance to follow right in the footsteps of the holy COVID injection and break through!
The entire concept of the Fourth Industrial Revolution is predicated upon “nanobots in everything,” which makes the topic of “nanobots in vaccines” a mere subset of the topic of “nanobots in everything.”
It also makes the current peasant concern about “nanobots in vaccines” a historical bump, a phase during which the population gets used to thinking about nanotech in our bodies in general — be it with peasant concern or with hearty laughter at the crazy conspiracy theorists — before the “stakeholders” actually roll out “nanobots in everything” in broad daylight and make it a part of our reality.
Excuses are plentiful: pandemic surveillance, financial transactions, “fighting cancer and HIV” — or whatever else they come up with to justify the invasion. There is no “theory” in that conspiracy theory, even though they want us to think that there is no conspiracy.
It is important to remember that while different applications are possible, the main point of “nanotech of everything” is efficient asset management and surveillance. We are not all that valuable in a world that is considered overpopulated, so if their tiny devices end up harming us — biologically, politically, or in terms of our liberties and our access to joy — it will be our problem, just like today, vaccine injury is the problem of the vaccine injured.
That’s a fact, not a theory. And if it gets out of control, and this entire thing collapses, then that’s what’s it’s going to be in due time, and we just don’t know it. But I keep hoping … I keep hoping that we can prevent it if more of us say no. The vision for the Fourth Industrial Revolution is so grand that the mandates — as abusive and obscene as they are — are just the very first bite by the aspiring technocrats into our bodily and other freedoms. They are just Step One, and there are hundreds of steps after that, unless we stand tall.
Are They Finally “Giving Us Our Freedoms Back”?
In the recent weeks, the script has seemingly flipped, and even the most COVID-crazy politicians started talking about rolling back the restrictions. It changed so suddenly that it almost feels weird! But something about it is off. It’s insincere. They are doing it in such a wobbly way, without closing the door, while still leaving half the restrictions in place — that I am almost sure that they’ll be back with some other brilliant idea. After all, their most important goal at the moment is to invalidate free will — as under the Fourth Industrial Revolution, the peasants have none of it, and free will is a luxury!
The Internet of Bodies Is Not a Conspiracy Theory
Without further ado, let’s look at the evidence. Let’s talk about the Internet of Bodies at an economic policy — which is something that we can, with some luck, try to discuss with our conspiracy denialist friends without setting off their “conspiracy theory” alarm. The Internet of Bodies (IoB) is a very serious project, supported by the world’s leading politicians, the UN, various NGOs, corporations, and the military.
The Internet of Bodies — a network of bodies, mechanically connected to the internet the way our digital devices are connected today — is a foundational stone of the ambitious Fourth Industrial Revolution. Here is the definition of the Fourth Industrial Revolution — as per Klaus Schwab — on a very serious website, Encyclopedia Britannica:
“The Fourth Industrial Revolution heralds a series of social, political, cultural, and economic upheavals that will unfold over the 21st century. Building on the widespread availability of digital technologies that were the result of the Third Industrial, or Digital, Revolution, the Fourth Industrial Revolution will be driven largely by the convergence of digital, biological, and physical innovations.”
“It’s important to appreciate that the Fourth Industrial Revolution involves a systemic change across many sectors and aspects of human life: the crosscutting impacts of emerging technologies are even more important than the exciting capabilities they represent.
Our ability to edit the building blocks of life has recently been massively expanded by low-cost gene sequencing and techniques such as CRISPR; artificial intelligence is augmenting processes and skill in every industry; neurotechnology is making unprecedented strides in how we can use and influence the brain as the last frontier of human biology; automation is disrupting century-old transport and manufacturing paradigms; and technologies such as blockchain and smart materials are redefining and blurring the boundary between the digital and physical worlds.”
“The result of all this is societal transformation at a global scale. By affecting the incentives, rules, and norms of economic life, it transforms how we communicate, learn, entertain ourselves, and relate to one another and how we understand ourselves as human beings [emphasis mine].
Furthermore, the sense that new technologies are being developed and implemented at an increasingly rapid pace has an impact on human identities, communities, and political structures.”
Here is a broadly worded 2019 agreement between the World Economic Forum and the United Nations that lists the Fourth Industrial Revolution as one of the areas for cooperation (more about it in my interview with Mary Otto-Chang, a former UN employee).
“Collaboration between the UN and the Forum to meet the needs of the Fourth Industrial Revolution [emphasis mine] will seek to advance global analysis, dialogue and standards for digital governance and digital inclusiveness; and promote public-private partnerships to address global reskilling and lifelong learning for the future requirements for work and preparing the world’s 1.8 billion young people for this transition.”
And here is a section on the official UK government website talking about the … you guessed it, the Fourth Industrial Revolution! The UK presentation is called, “Human Augmentation: The Dawn of a New Paradigm.”
Next, here is a section on the Canadian government website talking about the convergence of biological forms with machines, or “biodigital convergence,” which is another way to refer to the Fourth Industrial Revolution:
“Biological and digital systems are converging, and could change the way we work, live, and even evolve as a species. More than a technological change, this biodigital convergence may transform the way we understand ourselves and cause us to redefine what we consider human or natural.”
Next, here is Joe Biden on the 4IR (a World Economic Forum article from 2016 and a Washington Post article from 2020). Next, here is investor.com on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Finally, here is RAND (very serious people) on the Internet of Bodies:
“IoB devices can track, record, and store users’ whereabouts, bodily functions, and what they see, hear, and even think. These devices vary greatly in how they are used — some are freestanding, such as infusion pumps and sensor-equipped hospital beds; others are wearable, such as health trackers and prosthetics; and others are implanted, such as cardiac devices and ingestible digital pills.”
Thus, I can state with the uttermost confidence: Is the 4IR real? FACT-CHECK: TRUE. The idea that we’ll converge with machines and get hooked up to the internet like devices — and that our bodies will intake multiple nano-sized sensors and devices (a.k.a “nanobots”) to monitor, report, and influence our functions, thoughts, and feelings might very well be a very crazy idea — but it is none the less an idea that the people in power are currently quite obsessed with. Their idea, not mine!
For decades, behavioral modification has been a topic of intensive military research and corporate ambition. Many people have written about this subject in-depth — including yours truly — but for the sake of keeping this story on point, I will just mention one thing. For those who want to dig in, here is just one “signature” presentation by the expert in weaponized neuroweapons, James Giordano at Georgetown University’ Medical Center.
See that bit about “manipulation of neural structure and cognitive, emotional, and behavioral function(s)?” His slide, not mine!
Transhumanism, Singularity, and Other Big Words
In March 2019, Fast Company published an article, titled, “Privacy in 2034: A corporation owns your DNA (and maybe your body)“:
“The year is 2034. The world is divided into protected biometric data zones, and every time you go anywhere, your DNA and other biological elements of your body are authenticated across vast databases to confirm your identity (and that you haven’t broken any corporate or legal rules). A new economic and social class system has emerged, where the wealthy can pay to anonymize and protect their data.
Powerful companies mine everyone else’s biodata, while governments create universal genetic databases to keep tabs on citizens. You have no idea where your data really is, who owns it, and who has access to it.”
“It sounds like a hellish dystopia, but it’s not coming from a science fiction author. It’s one overarching trajectories that Amy Webb, a professor of strategic foresight at the NYU Stern School of Business and the founder of the consulting firm Future Today Institute, and her team identified and published in their 12th annual Emerging Tech Trends report …
She laid out this dystopian scenario at the South By Southwest conference in Austin over the weekend. It’s based on one of the biggest societal trends Webb is seeing right now: that privacy is dead.”
Sometimes, in order to get an idea about where the wind is blowing, it helps to look at cultural trends. It does not mean that a particular cultural trend will necessarily fully develop or succeed, it just gives us an idea about what’s “hip,” what’s being financed and supported. Earlier, when talking about the mind of a technocrat, I wrote about Ray Kurzweil and Anthony Levandowski of Google, both of whom are rather extreme in their love of AI.
Another interesting character is the best-selling author who has been lauded by famous people like Obama, and a World Economic Forum collaborator, Yuval Noah Harari.
In his 2021 60 Minutes presentation, he talks about how we are on the verge of becoming a new species due to augmentation and merging with AI, how human beings are going to be intrinsically hackable — and how all the soul and such is out of the window. He talks about this with much confidence and palpable anxiety in his eyes.
My response to him: This is Theranos. Luscious funding of the IoB proves only that human beings can act foolish, not that the underlying premise means “progress.” And yes, it is possible to mess people up in the process of trying to hack them. It sure is possible. But we are of water and spirit, so the transhumanist house of cards will fall — and hopefully not on millions of people!
From Conspiracy Theory to Conspiracy Practice: A Life Cycle
Here’s my conspiracy theory about the life cycle of conspiracy theories. Usually, when there is a nefarious or agenda or a corporate practice that is harmful to the people, the word first gets out in the form of a “crazy conspiracy theory.” Those who notice a problem (the toxicity of Teflon; Vioxx harms; the issue with asbestos, etc.,) try to speak out — and they get initially rejected based on sounding “too weird.” (By the way, if there were no conspiracies, why would there be RICO?)
As it happens, at first, the media denies the existence of any conspiracy or wrongdoing. At the same time, corporate spies and professional infiltrators — some posing as “respectable citizens,” and some, as extra obnoxious and unruly conspiracy theorists — make sure that there is noise but no clarity and no serious debate.
Academics, if they acknowledge it at all, snub the issue with an air of great arrogance — while the people attracted to sensationalism and dogma go for the most dogmatic and sensationalized version of the conspiracy theory — which is then used by conspiracy theory skeptics, academics, agents of the state, and corporate spies to “prove” that the entire thing is ungrounded and ridiculous.
And so it goes! And as long as the talk is harmless to the conspirators or wrongdoers in practical terms and doesn’t get in their way, no one in power cares. Which is why, for example, in the USSR, where people took art and language the seriously, censorship was real — whereas in the “old normal” West, for the most part, people could talk all they wanted as long as they didn’t move the dial. Those who moved the dial though got the same treatment as the Soviet political prisoners.
Which is also why prior to 2020, it was mostly okay to talk about transhumanism with suspicion — but now that the superwealthy folks are pursuing transhumanism in a practical manner, it’s important for them to make sure that bringing it up is perceived by the general public as “crazy” — which will be the case up until the moment the beast is released.
The moment it’s out, it will stop being a “crazy conspiracy theory” and become the “great new idea that will change our lives for the better,” TED talks and all. And it will be a “crazy conspiracy theory” to suggest that it’s bad for us!
Now, the amusing part of the story — the exhibits.
Exhibit A: The Chip
First, let’s look at the mother of all crazy conspiracy theories, “the chip.” Remember “the chip”? The tinfoil-hatted-folk have been whispering about “the chip” for decades, and they were obviously laughed at in the respectable circles. “Yeah sure, they are trying to chip us, that’s right, and you were probably abducted by the aliens?” And so people laughed — but fast-forward to now, and “the chip” is suddenly ready for prime time — but of course, it’s not “that” chip, not the crazy conspiratorial chip, it’s the respectable chip, the good chip, the chip for our good and convenience!
And, funny as it is, we are suddenly hearing that the aliens are probably real — and, in the light of the new memo, it now takes a special tinfoil-hatted conspiracy theorist to suggest that the media is making up the aliens to distract us from the COVID abuses!
And here is Klaus Schwab advertising “the chip” — the respectable chip:
Exhibit B: Apple Slowing Down Older iPhone Models
This one is a very innocent conspiracy theory comparing to the other ones. Remember the one about Apple deliberately slowing down older devices to “incentivize” people to buy newer ones? Well, it turned out, it was true!
Exhibit C: Weather Modification
It could easily be one of the “craziest” conspiracy theories out there, alongside with “the chip.” But lookie here! Scientific American, Insider, EcoWatch, the New York Times, USA Today — all telling us about weather modification and cloud-seeding. Crazy times!
Exhibit D: Vaccine Passports Come Digital Wallets
And here is the Diet ID, the “first electronic health record integration, streamlining diet quality assessment for healthcare providers.” And here is Dichotomy, a project in collaboration with MasterCard to limit our purchases based on our carbon footprint:
And here’s a very helpful digital ID from Thales in the UK:
“Why is Digital ID needed now? Over the last 18 months, the digitalisation of public and private services has accelerated like never before. Due to limitations on physical contact and lockdowns around the globe, citizens – often out of necessity – have had to turn to the digital equivalent of services they previously accessed in person. From internet banking to filling out tax returns online, the pandemic has acted as a catalyst for a wholesale change in consumer behaviour.”
“Even as we start to return to a sense of normality, this digitalisation of services looks set to gather momentum. This is, in part, due to governments around the world asking their citizens to carry digital health passes to prove they are doubly vaccinated or have a negative test before they can access certain services. As a recent example of this, the UK government made proof of ‘full vaccination’ a requirement for entering nightclubs from September and countries like Italy or France are following a similar path.”
“So-called digital ‘vaccination passports’ will play a key role in enabling citizens to access all manner of services and will act as a precursor to the rollout of mobile digital ID.”
Graphene-based Materials and Nano-tech in Vaccines
Hooray, we can finally talk about graphene oxide and “nanobots in vaccines”! An important point for talking to our conspiracy denialist friends though: As we know, at the moment, there are no official records of either graphene-based materials or nanotech specifically in COVID injections. There are indeed reports by independent scientists, and there is a concern — which is still not going to impress our respectable friends!
But it doesn’t matter! Like I mentioned earlier, the Internet of Bodies is on the rise, and it’s bad on its own — and there are official records of graphene oxide and nanotech used in other medical and non-medical applications, including non-COVID vaccines. There is proof! Furthermore, we don’t need proof of conspiracy to discuss a substance that has the potential to become the new glyphosate with an added bonus of being a perfect material for surveillance!
Intranasal Influence Vaccine Using Graphene Oxide From Georgia State University and Emory
For example here is a paper called, “Intranasal vaccination with influenza HA/GO-PEI nanoparticles provides immune protection against homo- and heterologous strains.” It talks about new investigational intranasal influenza vaccines with graphene oxide and states that “two-dimensional (2D) graphene oxide (GO) nanoparticles have great potential as a novel vaccine platform due to their extraordinary attributes.” More commentary:
“Researchers at Georgia State University and Emory University have developed an intranasal influenza vaccine using recombinant hemagglutinin (HA), a protein found on the surface of influenza viruses, as the antigen component of the vaccine … The study, conducted in mice and cell culture, found the nanoparticles significantly enhanced immune responses at mucosal surfaces and throughout the body in mice. The robust immune responses conferred immune protection against influenza virus challenges by homologous (same) virus strains and heterologous (different) virus strains.”
There you have it! Graphene oxide! In a vaccine! No longer a conspiracy theory! We are talking graphene oxide in an intranasal vaccine application, very close to the brain — and it’s known that in the area of biosensing, graphene oxide is used to, in the words of Science Daily, “hear your brain whisper.” And now shall we inquire about toxicity?
Toxicity of Graphene-based Materials
A paper in Particle and Fiber Toxicology, titled, “Toxicity of graphene-family nanoparticles: a general review of the origins and mechanism,” talks about multiple hazardous properties of graphene materials, including a negative impact on the female reproductive system:
“FNs can induce acute and chronic injuries in tissues by penetrating through the blood-air barrier, blood-testis barrier, blood-brain barrier, and blood-placenta barrier etc. and accumulating in the lung, liver, and spleen etc.” “The toxicological mechanisms of GFNs demonstrated in recent studies mainly contain inflammatory response, DNA damage, apoptosis, autophagy and necrosis etc., and those mechanisms can be collected to further explore the complex signalling pathways network regulating the toxicity of GFNs.
It needs to point out that there are several factors which largely influence the toxicity of GFNs, such as the concentration, lateral dimension, surface structure and functionalization etc.” “In the chicken embryo model, pristine graphene flakes decreased the ribonucleic acid level and the rate of deoxyribonucleic acid synthesis, leading to harmful effects on brain tissue development and the atypical ultrastructure was observed in the brain.”
“Pregnant mice had abortions at all dose, and most pregnant mice died when the high dose of rGO was injected during late gestation. Notably, the development of offspring in the high dosage group was delayed during the lactation period.”
Another article titled, “Effects of Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles on the Immune System Biomarkers Produced by RAW 264.7 and Human Whole Blood Cell Cultures,” talks about the impact of graphene oxide on the immune system: “The current study shows that GONPs modulate immune system biomarkers and that these may pose a health risk to individuals exposed to this type of nanoparticle.”
In other words, move fast, surveil, and break things!! And, briefly, on the topic of nanobots, here is a scholarly article, titled: “Aerosolized Nanobots: Parsing Fact from Fiction for Health Security — A Dialectical View.”
“Nanoscalar robotics can be used as both sensors and receiver-delivery devices, and the controllability of these technologies enable their directed activity in biological organisms. Such devices — either operating in tandem as distinct sense-and-engage systems, or as single devices with both sense and delivery modes — could be employed to assess, respond to, or modify molecular and chemical characteristics of a biological target.
As recent studies have indicated, these approaches can be used in clinical care to more precisely monitor tissue, organ, and overall bodily states and to alter the structure and function of biological tissues and systems at a variety of scales, from the subcellular to the systemic and organismic”
And here is from Rice University: “Nanotubes assemble! Rice introduces ‘Teslaphoresis.'”
“These nanotube wires grow and act like nerves, and controlled assembly of nanomaterials from the bottom up may be used as a template for applications in regenerative medicine … There are so many applications where one could utilize strong force fields to control the behavior of matter in both biological and artificial systems.”
And the list goes on!
True, it may be tough to get your conspiracy denialist friends to discuss the topic of “nanobots in vaccines” — but maybe you can interest them in an inquiry into the Internet of Bodies?
About the Author
To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.