Normally I don't like to use video stories or articles for my commentary, but this is a significant story because it's a first. The story came to the attention of Mr. C.S., who was kind enough to share it with us:


What is interesting here is not only is the synthetic-DNA-nanobot technology being used for the first time in a human patient suffering from leukemia, but what is actually said toward the end of the article. But first, the human patient.

Obviously, from the description of the technology being used here, this will constitute a great advance in chemotherapies. Up until now, chemotherapy has been more or less a shotgun approach, a kind of bombardment of the body with the caner-fighting drugs whose effects - as anyone who has ever undergone chemotherapy will attest - can be almost as bad as the disease itself, for healthy as well as cancer cells are subjected to the drug. But with the synthetic DNA nanobot, such drugs can be directedly administered to the unhealthy cells themselves, bypassing the surrounding healthy cells. That, at least, is the theory.

But it is what is said at the end of this article that intrigues, for the commentator goes on to mention wider applications of the technology: use of such nanobots to literally conduct check-ups of the body on a cell-by-cell level. Such uses would be a great leap forward in early cancer detection, for example, and presumably also make earlier treatment more feasible, long before the disease would be detectable by current methods of diagnosis. Conceivably, such technologies could detect potential danger areas for aneurisms, heart valve malfunction, and a host of other problems, and perhaps even be able to do "nano-surgery" on the problem areas without the current anaethsatize and cut methods. Imagine going to your physician for "heart surgery," and simply being told to "roll up your sleeve" for your injection of heart-repairing nanobots.

There are, of course, the dangers, and we all see them. The technology that could be used to repair is also a technology that could be used to kill, quietly, cell-by-cell. Then, too, there are the confident predictions of scientists that the nanobots are "entirely neutral" to the surrounding healthy tissue and therefore pose no threats to human health. Well... we've heard variations of this theme before, mostly in reference to the GMO issue, where long term and genuinely independent scientific tests were never really done, prompting the current wave of studies and increasing global skepticism over the technology. Here too, we should exercise due caution before leaping on to the nano-bot bandwagon. And, while pursuing these types of technologies, we should also openly push and advocate for a full disclosure and testing on the non-pharmacological and non-surgical methods of Dr. Royal Raymond Rife, or Dr. Alain Priore and others who have investigated the electromagnetic dimensions of health.

Caveats notwithstanding, however, we do wish this leukemia-sufferer well, and commend him or her for the willingness to test an as yet untested medical technology... God speed!

See you on the flip side...

Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and "strange stuff". His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into "alternative history and science".


  1. ShiningBrow on February 28, 2015 at 3:48 am

    ” use of such nanobots to literally conduct check-ups of the body on a cell-by-cell level. Such uses would be a great leap forward in early cancer detection, for example, and presumably also make earlier treatment more feasible, long before the disease would be detectable by current methods of diagnosis. ”

    Which would only be possible if we already have these nano-bots in our system in the first place – ie, long before we apparently *need* them. Much like RFID tags implanted in us, barcodes on our skin, etc etc.. So, who’d like to have all these nanobots floating around.. oh, you know… just because……

  2. moxie on February 26, 2015 at 4:03 pm

    This technology will only lead us to the same no guarantees methods of “therapy”. Only now it’s a whole new level of “invasive procedure”. If it’s not profitable, it’s not even subject for approval. So why introduce this technology to the public now? which reminds me to get insured, or sign up for ACA. And about that massive data breach on Anthem, I wonder what they’ll do to increase security of individual personal information. Wouldn’t it have to be technically(if not biologically)personalized?
    If other types of healing and cures were to be disclosed, then that would open up a whole can of worms. They have always led us to believe in a very limited reality and science, and opening other doors would only mean threat to the power structure. and deep inside those layers it’s more than just about money and power..
    Oh, and those EM fields we produce can actually be felt or sensed. Ever have that experience of feeling somebody’s presence at a distance even before actually seeing them? Just a curious thing.

  3. Aridzonan_13 on February 26, 2015 at 12:31 pm

    Ouch.. Where’s Rod Serling when you need him?

  4. Robert Barricklow on February 26, 2015 at 9:17 am

    This “synthetic” avenue is another wrong turn into the Albuquerque Looney Tunes medical wonderland; where this ambulance runs to the scene of the taxi accident with two out-cold bodies, beside a crunched-up taxi…
    and the paramedics put the taxi in the ambulance & speed-off!
    “We’re” going DOWN…
    the-downside of the quantum-rabbit-hole.
    Until “we” get “our” own house[Earth} together[meaning: our moral compass to travel these dangerous technologies(to “our” very soul”), let well enough alone. IF “we’re” going “full speed ahead, damn the torpedoes” – then it’s Kubrick’s “Eyes-Wide-Shut”.

    Who Are These Guys?

    • DanaThomas on February 26, 2015 at 9:28 am

      Who are they? It’s a case of supply meeting demand – when the “Dr. Walter Bishop” types find their generous (and only apparently disinterested) sources of funding.

      • Robert Barricklow on February 26, 2015 at 3:54 pm

        In the case of supply meeting demand – the assumption is that the markets works by an “invisible hand” which by the laws of supply & demand automatically translates market self-maximization into the fulfillment of the common interest. For myself, Dana, this is the metaphysical ruling superstition of our era. It is programmed into students by teachers themselves as an unexamined assumption of their teaching and curriculum. This unexamined assumption, in turn, has opened the door to more total dogma. Professor John McMurtry gets into the nuts & bolts of his theories regarding this phenomenon…

  5. marcos toledo on February 26, 2015 at 9:11 am

    Another two edge sword that can be used against us. These control slave junkie freaks just can’t help themselves. Why can’t these wealth addicts just enjoy their toys and leave the rest us be. I just hope this technology can be used for the betterment of our lives and not to screw us up as usual. Look people if you weren’t so greedy nobody would bother you chill out be happy.

Help the Community Grow

Please understand a donation is a gift and does not confer membership or license to audiobooks. To become a paid member, visit member registration.

Upcoming Events