Genetically modified people: what could go wrong?

Genetically modified people: what could go wrong?

Genes, genes, genes: hype, hype, hype

Notes on Brave New World, against which freedom is the prime option

Freedom to refuse—

by Jon Rappoport

February 21, 2017

(Update: Part-2 here, Part-3 here, )

I’ll get to genetically modified people; but first, the background on the grand gene hype and propaganda operation—

The war against cancer has painted a picture of hope: genetic solutions.

This, despite the fact that there are no successful genetic treatments, across the board, for any form of human cancer.

The focus on genes is a diversion from obvious causes of cancer in the environment: industrial chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, food additives, and even pharmaceuticals.

This futile human gene-fix has a direct parallel in food crops: modify plants so they can grow despite drenching them with toxic pesticides.

However, massive GMO crop failures, reduced nutritive value of such crops, and the rise of super-weeds are three reasons why the gene model fails.

So it is with human cancer: “let’s modify the genes of people and they will be impervious to the environmental assault of chemicals that cause cancer.”

In other words, the fantasy proposes that someday, humans will be able to live in a toxic soup created by mega-corporations, and even thrive, because they have been genetically altered.

There is no reason under the sun to believe this.

“Trust us. Even if environmental toxins trigger gene mutations that bring about cancer, we can just cancel out those mutations through better human engineering.”


This is like saying you can cure diseases caused by germs even though people’s immune systems are severely and chronically compromised.

The entire cancer industry exists to protect the corporations that are manufacturing products that cause cancer.

I’ve made these points during radio interviews, and I make them here again, because major media news outlets are silent; they are part of the cancer industry and are beholden to the cancer-causing corporations that buy huge blocks of advertising.

In the so-called research community, scientists can spin their wheels and obtain grant monies to do experiments with genes and mice and ‘cell lines’ (*) forever and never emerge with results that will save lives. (*) (Note: by the way, did you know there is a huge, general scandal with ‘cell lines’? More on that here.)

These scientists and their corporate masters can herald minor tumor reductions. But nothing changes. The war on cancer is a war on people.

Assuming gene damage can cause cancer, the triggering event can occur as a result of coming into contact with environmental toxins. In other words, the toxic effects on genes will continue apace, no matter how much research is done on the composition and disposition of the genes themselves.

Much cancer research does, in fact, discover toxic causes—and it is in the interest of companies that spew those compounds out into the world to cover up their criminal guilt. What better way to achieve that than by asserting: “cancer is all in the genes.”

Look at the giant biotech companies like Monsanto, Bayer, DuPont, Syngenta. In one way or another, they are all involved in chemical AND genetic research and production.

So they are in a prime position to deflect the chemical destruction they are wreaking by pushing “the frontiers of gene research.”

“It’s all about the genes.”

Hype. Hype. Hype.

Dr. Samuel Epstein, who devoted a major part of his life to the research of environmental toxins, wrote:

“We are losing the war against cancer. The prohibition of new carcinogenic products, reduction of toxins in use, and right-to-know laws – these are among the legislative proposals which could reverse the cancer epidemic.”

But that would be bad for business. The solution? Promote endlessly the notion that genes and only genes are at the root of cancer.

The big picture? The big con? Imagine a world drowning in pollution of all kinds, and top (bought-off) scientists saying: “Don’t worry, when it comes to cancer we’ve got it covered. Tweak this gene, tweak that gene, and poof, cancer never has a chance. Or if you get cancer, we can go in there and re-position crucial genes and knock out the disease. See, you can live in a chemical soup and never feel adverse effects…”

Genes. High-level, high-flying, high-minded, high-tech answers for the problems we face.

What? The science isn’t solid? The propaganda is wall-to-wall? The shills are everywhere? Don’t worry, be happy. The best minds will come up with solutions. Just wait and see. The great discoveries are right around the corner.

And I have condos for sale on Jupiter.

Step right up.

You can see the same kind of gene-hustle when it comes to autism, which many researchers, based on no real evidence, claim is “surely a genetic disease.”

This assertion covers up the fact that happy and healthy children, soon after receiving a vaccination, experience devastating neurological damage, leading to a diagnosis of autism.

But don’t go there, don’t look there, don’t talk about vaccines. No, instead, listen to the ascendant experts, who say it was just a coincidence that a vaccine was given and a child’s life was destroyed. You see, what really happened was: an errant gene response kicked in at the same moment as the shot of vaccine. A grand coincidence. Nothing to do with the vaccine. Certainly not.

In actuality, the dominant paradigm of this world’s power structure is: float cover stories.

Sell big cover stories and keep selling them. Use them to conceal ongoing crimes.

“It’s the genes” is the latest and greatest cover.

Some of the biggest, best-educated liars on the planet deploy it every day.

Here is the next big thing: genes injected, functioning as vaccines. The hype is over the top. Of course, scientists admit that these injected genes will incorporate themselves in the body and alter its genetic makeup permanently.

If you like and trust that idea, I have condos in the core of the sun for sale. Bargain prices.

The reference is the New York Times, 3/9/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“’The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy — called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. — is underway, and several new ones are planned.”

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Here is the punchline: “The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.” Alteration of the human genetic makeup. Not just a “visit.” “Permanent residence.”

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

Let’s take this further. Under the cover of preventing disease (note: all good covert ops float a laudatory goal to conceal their true intent), vaccines are ideal carriers for all sorts of genes that would be permanently incorporated into the human structure.

The enormous tonnage of propaganda about vaccines, and the resultant mandatory laws that enforce vaccination (without fear of liability), create a powerful channel along which re-engineering is eminently possible.

Synthetic genes injected into billions of humans would form a grand experiment to create an altered species.

This grand experiment could be compartmentalized. For example, secretly, genes 1-6 will be injected into Group A in geo-location I. Genes 7-12 will be injected into Group B in location II. And so on.

Vaccine recipients will be subjected to ongoing surveillance to gauge the results. On various pretexts, members of these groups will be brought into clinics for exams and tests, to discover markers that purportedly reveal their bodies’ responses to the genetic alterations.

Are these people stronger or weaker? Do they exhibit signs of illness? Do they report behavioral changes? Through surveillance and testing, all sorts of information can be compiled.

Of course, there is no informed consent. The human guinea pigs have no knowledge of what is being done to them.

And what would be the objectives of this lunatic research program? They would vary. On a simplified level, there would be two. Create weaker and more docile and more obedient and more dependent humans. On the other side, create stronger and healthier and more intelligent and more talented humans. Obviously, the results of the latter experiments would be applied to the “chosen few.” And clearly, some of this research will be carried on inside the military. Secrecy is easier to maintain, and the aim to produce “better soldiers” is a long-standing goal of the Pentagon and its research arm, DARPA.

A global vaccine experiment of the type I’m describing here has another bonus for the planners: those people who fall ill or die can be written off as having suffered from various diseases and disorders which “have nothing to do with vaccines.” This is already SOP (standard operating procedure) for the medical cartel.

The numbers of casualties, in this grand experiment, would be of no concern to the Brave New World shapers. As I’ve documented extensively, the US medical system is already killing 2.25 million people per decade (a conservative estimate), as a result of FDA-approved drugs and mistreatment in hospitals. Major media and government leaders, aware of this fact, have done nothing about it.

Here is a quote from Princeton molecular biologist, Lee Silver, the author of Remaking Eden. It gives you a window into how important geneticists are thinking about an engineered future:

“The GenRich—who account for ten percent of the American population—[will] all carry synthetic genes. All aspects of the economy, the media, the entertainment industry, and the knowledge industry are controlled by members of the GenRich class…

“Naturals [unaltered humans] work as low-paid service providers or as laborers. [Eventually] the GenRich class and the Natural class will become entirely separate species with no ability to crossbreed, and with as much romantic interest in each other as a current human would have for a chimpanzee.

“Many think that it is inherently unfair for some people to have access to technologies that can provide advantages while others, less well-off, are forced to depend on chance alone, [but] American society adheres to the principle that personal liberty and personal fortune are the primary determinants of what individuals are allowed and able to do.

“Indeed, in a society that values individual freedom above all else, it is hard to find any legitimate basis for restricting the use of repro[grammed]-genetics. I will argue [that] the use of reprogenetic technologies is inevitable. [W]hether we like it or not, the global marketplace will reign supreme.”

Here is another gem, from Gregory Stock, former director of the program in Medicine, Technology, and Society at the UCLA School of Medicine:

“Even if half the world’s species were lost [during genetic experiments], enormous diversity would still remain. When those in the distant future look back on this period of history, they will likely see it not as the era when the natural environment was impoverished, but as the age when a plethora of new forms—some biological, some technological, some a combination of the two—burst onto the scene. We best serve ourselves, as well as future generations, by focusing on the short-term consequences of our actions rather than our vague notions about the needs of the distant future.”

The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

Notice that these two well-known scientists are speaking about “ethics.” It’s important to realize that a significant number of such experts have their own extremely peculiar (to say the least) version of what is right and wrong.

With vaccines that permanently alter human genetic makeup on the horizon, and given the corporate and government-agency penchant for secrecy, we are already inhabiting the Brave New World. It’s not a distant prospect.

Every genetic innovation is aimed at bringing us closer to a stimulus-response world, and further away from freedom.

Which is why the defense of freedom becomes ever more vital.

That struggle comes down to who controls, yes, the philosophy and the science. Is each human merely and only a system waiting to be re-engineered, or is he something far, far more, inhabiting a physical form?

We already know what the vast majority of brain researchers and geneticists believe, as well as the governments and corporations and universities and foundations that make important decisions.

Of course, these days, the college faculty department considered to be the least important, the most useless, a mere appendage waiting for those with wisdom to put it out of its misery and kill it off…is the philosophy department.

That leaves us to take up the argument and the resistance.

Not Lee Silver at Princeton or Gregory Stock or Bill Gates or George Soros or David Rockefeller or the Pope or Stephen Hawking or Monsanto or Dow or PBS or FOX or socialists or Communists or liberals or conservatives or some wackadoodle at Harvard or MIT or UCLA.



Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

24 comments on “Genetically modified people: what could go wrong?

  1. thomaspoa says:

    Jon, you make a lot of good points. However, do you really think it’s possible that humans can resist the temptation to experiment with these things? If God himself came down to the earth and warned us against it, we’d still do it. People will do the wrong thing even when they know it’s wrong, and gene manipulation at least holds some conceivable benefits.

    • Michael says:

      What benifits..

    • billy says:

      “Conceivable benefits.” Isn’t that always the sales pitch, though, going all the way back to eating fruit from that tree in Eden…something about the “conceivable benefit” of…what was it…becoming gods?

      • thomaspoa says:

        How many people wouldn’t change something about themselves if they could? Taller, smaller ears, straighter nose, smarter…I don’t know if it’s possible, but it is conceivable. Therefore, it WILL be attempted.

  2. artemisix says:

    If, the theory of DNA being the primary stuff to control life was true, cloning would work. It doesn’t. No clone has proved to be true. This is a flawed science at its core. GMOs are poison, vaccines also, this is a religion, not science at all. I suspect RNA is the real deal…. it changes to adapt , like like, DNA is probably IT’S tool…….

  3. WillieG1951 says:

    What truly frightens me isn’t what they’re telling us, it’s what they do and have already done which they aren’t telling us about…

  4. Dana Doran says:

    Way back in the 80’s I interviewed a 90 year old woman, my aunt. Thinking about cancer, I asked her what people died from when she was a young girl. She said most people, not dying from old age, died from the flu. I asked about cancer. She said she never heard about dying from cancer until the fifties (1950’s). I asked for the next most common cause (not including war), she replied consumption. This was about the same time a spate of kindergarten children, who lived near high tension wires in our neighborhood, developed leukemia. Common sense tells us cancer didn’t exist, now it does.

  5. elliottjab says:

    Thanks Jon – for relating this again. Those of us who’ve been ‘awake’ many years – see all the truth & ‘scientific’ deceptions: it’s very important not to bury these. Pretty easy to do with so much chicanery performed daily – globally.

    J n m – still on the mesa

  6. Michael says:

    Vaccine is genetic manipulation…evryone is damged in that experiment.

    This genetic modification will occupy our world, and we will become much less for it. Science will corrupt the whole thing if not stopped. These mad fuckers are out of control.
    There really has been gene manipulation going on for thousands of years with elitist breeding programs. Royalty and the elite have tried to breed perfection. Now HollyWood is involved with perfect genes producing the next generation of the Gene rich. If that what you call a plastic fake exterior. with a vacant breeze blowing between the ears.
    Generally I would say that we have a fucked definition of what is beautiful. It’s all part of that matrix the idea of beauty.

    I had a fever once…

  7. From Quebec says:


    It isn’t only biblical figures who lived to well-seasoned ages of 900 years or more. Ancient texts from many cultures have listed life spans most modern people find simply and literally unbelievable.

    For example, one explanation is that the ancient Near East understanding of a year could be different than our concept of a year today. Perhaps a year meant an orbit of the moon (a month) instead of an orbit of the sun (12 months).

    But if we make the changes accordingly, while it brings the age of the biblical figure Adam down from 930 to a more reasonable 77 at the time of his death, it also means he would have fathered his son Enoch at the age of 11. And Enoch would have only been 5 years old when he fathered Methuselah.

    Read more:

    • Sunshine says:

      Things changed after the flood, I think. The earth probably wasn’t as protected from the sun. Something changed at that time.

  8. It’s extremely unlikely that genes have anything to do with disease whatsoever. Not just cancer, but any disease. In my opinion genetic diseases simply don’t exist. Familial diseases do of course, but this has nothing to do with genes.

    Genes are nothing but complex molecules and nobody knows how those tiny bunches of chemicals cause anything. Humans have an estimated 20,000 genes (nobody seems to know the exact number). It doesn’t make any sense that scientists could find out which of those 20,000 molecules would be responsible for a certain disease.

    I know that nobody likes to hear this, but most likely genes only determine what species an organism is and the characteristics of the individual within that species. That’s it. Everything else belongs in fairy land. Genetics is for at least 99% “must be” science.

  9. voza0db says:


    Did the Uman Animals ever go right?

  10. Sunshine says:

    Dang! Our time on this earth is so short as it is. Do they really need to mess us up more?

    The whole premise for changing our genes is that humans are defective. We’re not. At least, I’m not. I may not be completely human at this point as I have had vaccines in the past – and I now know they put all kinds of foreign matter in the vaccines – mouse cells, fetal cells (and fetal cells divide and divide, just like cancer cells).

    I’m so triggered right now, I can’t wait for Elon Musk to hook my brain up to a computer so I won’t be “useless.” Not.

  11. Sara says:

    I would argue that they are already doing this with vaccines that are cultured on fetal and animal tissue. DNA fragments are admittedly in these vaccines and have unknown effects on the recipient.

  12. Jon, how can materialist physics reasonably explain the inter-dimensional?

    That surely musters the greatest known oxymoron.

    In fact, “science” understanding of genetics is ill-conceived (as always). Here’s a few excerpts from a recent article of mine:

    “Returning to my pre-Earth historic account, the “culprits” for the destructive attack on Tiamat suffered a significant genetic downgrade geared to limiting powers. On that subject, our science, as always, is reduced to measuring, analysing and “theorising over” symptoms, so the mainstream has no understanding of what motivates changes to DNA. These could be deciphered with correct analysis of the atomic (or quantum) layer. I provide some useful feedback on the subject in my book, “The Beauty of Existence Decoded”. In a sense to destroy a planet or sun (celestial star) is to blind God as both are sub-space vents (planets are termed “encased stars” in my book). Unbeknown to our science, God, ultimately, enables or disables DNA via the quantum membrane. Therefore renegades that cause serious cosmic mischief risk losing all their potential, eternally….

    …It would be interesting to know how many psychics pick anything up from prehistoric terror on Mars. Wounds from that dark past go so deep they are bound to have become entrenched in our DNA. I feel without doubt there is a natural history stretching back to the dawn of time awaiting discovery, perhaps supporting life systems that defy our science-programming as to what it is to live. I do point out in “The Beauty of Existence Decoded” our sciences merely ascertain and measure automated vital signs so, beyond that, we have no scientific idea what perpetuates life or whether it is limited to vital automation (an Ouroboros, we can confirm, is the arbitrary science-standard denoting “life”). The doughnut shaped rock, mentioned earlier, hinted at possibilities of sorts, but it turned out that ambiguous natural inorganic automate was one of the bi-products of “Mars” fakery and most likely “explainable” if full context was ever revealed….”

    Unfortunately, numerous “triggers” are being identified as root causes of cancer, some by way of purposeful misdirection, other arrogant ignorance. My deep discussions on the topic are way off. I anticipate “Coming Clean on Cancer” is at least a month a way. It will revolutionise thought, I guarantee.


  13. When Will It End says:

    The genetically-modified (and/or blackmailed) a-holes at Google, Adroll, etc., are apparently censoring things on the internet, like Facebook (from what I hear). I don’t have Facebook, but if any of you can get the word out, please do!

  14. rabbitnexus says:

    Don’t fall into the trap, cancer is curable. I’ve known many people over my life who were diagnosed with various forms of cancer. They fall into two groups. Those who follow corporate medicine and go through various treatments with Chemo the most common and usually included with anything else. Of this group, though some lasted a little longer than predicted, albeit with drastically reduced quality of life thanks to the debilitating effects of Chemo, all died eventually.

    The second group about the same in number walked away from modern medicine which was offering little hope anyway and sought alternative treatments. I am not exxagerating when I say all of that group found cures! Included in my experience of effective cures for cancers are Essiac (Can-T and other names for it), Cannabis oil and a couple more herbal remedies among them which I don’t know much about. They all found cures, the ones with the medical system all died. It is that simple.

    I recently realised I had developed blocked arteries and was in poor physical shape thinking it was age catching up, but a heart attck brought reality home. I refused the angioplasty and walked out of hospital though, because I didn’t trust them and had heard about a herbal cure for heart disease (and many other things including some cancers) That was Fagnonia Arabica and once I got it I literally cured myself of all symptoms of aschleriosis and hypertension, all my circulation problems dissapeared and I am feeling like I am in my twenties again! It took three weeks to do this! I stpopped all of five medications they had me on and have regained my health to a degree I didn;t think possible. The herb cost me $30 for a kilo on Ebay and it was enough to do several courses, I have done another course every two months since. There is now no longer any sign whatsoever that I ever even had a heart attack. Supposedly incurable diseases are not incurable really. Our bodies have incredible ability to regenerate and heal themselves if the initial stress is removed and the right nutrition is applied. Oh the Dhamasa (common name) also got rid of a small kidney stone I’d had for many years. Basically it is a blood purifier and very effective. I have passed this on to others, including a guy of 73 due for bypass surgery and it did the same for him and others I have passed it on to. Currently awaiting news from someone with cancer who is trying it, she was about to begin chemo but thankfully decided to try this first.

    I pass this on to those who are aware and prepared to take responsibility for their own health. Do NOT TRUST the medical establishment. The doctors swore that there was only their way and that without it I would die. I simply did what they said is impossible. In fact I am so used to it I struggle to treat doctors with any respect anymore. My idiot GP won’t even take appointments with me because I refused the operation and doesn’t want to hear that I am now cured either. Nurses are smart. Many nurses have taken the name of this herb and I know they will do something with it. Doctors even well meaning are locked into a false paradigm. The surgeon who told me this herb wouldn’t work, had never heard of it even. As I said, “you’re a witch doctor then, because without having heard of it how would you know?” The thing is he was genuine in his belief I am sure. No way he figures would I be highly trained and doing this $15,000 operation if there was a simple cheap herbal cure which could reverse the entire process of blocked arteries. Hell they even make it worse by shoving a wire into your arteries in the first place, which is why you need to take blood thinners and beta blockers after that or you’ll die quicker, because blockages on artery walls begin on lesions and THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT CAUSES THE LESIONS IN THE FIRST PLACE. Well a wire should do it I reckon. Whatever you had when you go in, will be worse when you come out if they even do the angiogram.

    Good luck.

  15. rabbitnexus says:

    Fagonia Arabica (Dhamasa)

  16. JEFF says:

    Hi all, changing an individuals genetics so that the individuals progeny has the altered gene is called “gene drive”. This video will start you down the rabbit hole.

  17. gail007 says:

    Be free to refuse and just say no to nonsense!

  18. Mark says:

    Few people question, or have questioned, what’s really behind the war on cancer and the endless calls for cancer or breast cancer awareness. Most people would be much smarter and better informed if they had awareness of what this movement or the war on cancer don’t raise awareness about. Such as…

    ….that the most prominent cancer charities are large self-serving businesses instead of “charities” or that these groups suppress critical information on cancer, such as the known causes of cancer (instead they talk about “risk factors” of cancer) or that many “breast cancer survivors” are victims of harm instead of receivers of benefit, or that they’ve been intentionally misleading the ignorant public with deceptive cancer survival statistics, or that government health bodies such as the NIH are merely a pawns for corporate medicine, etc is a good start to get to the real truth (read the well referenced scholarly afterword of this article on the war on cancer: do a search engine query for “A Mammogram Letter The British Medical Journal Censored” and scroll down to the afterword that addresses the ‘war on cancer’) .

    The recognition that breast cancer awareness was started by these business interests is another piece of the real awareness about the pink ribbon cult and the traditional war on cancer. Or that the orthodox cancer business has been denouncing many good inexpensive alternative therapies (instead they sold you the lie that only their highly profitable/expensive, toxic conventional cancer treatments are relevant).

    So, raising “awareness” about cancer or raising funds for the war on cancer have hardly any other function than to drive more unsuspecting people into getting more expensive and unnecessary tests — and then, often, cancer treatments (chemo and radiation therapy).

    Nobel laureate Linus Pauling was right when he called the war on cancer a fraud.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.