Tag: gmo

Chinese scientists have turned mosquitoes into flying vaccines — that can still bite humans

Researchers from the nation that likely unleashed COVID-19 unto the world have transformed mosquitoes into flying syringes.

Some researchers, including a group at the Bill Gates Foundation-backed Leiden University Medical Center in the Netherlands, have already attempted in recent years to fashion mosquitoes into flying vaccine delivery systems with human targets in mind.

Now, scientists at the state-controlled Chinese Academy of Sciences — an institution that has a strategic partnership with the People’s Liberation Army Academy of Military Sciences — have targeted bats, purportedly designing mosquitoes to instead deliver recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus-based rabies and Nipah vaccines to the flying mammals.

Like rabies, Nipah virus is a potentially deadly virus found in animals. Whereas rabies has nearly a 100% fatality rate in humans once symptoms manifest, the estimated case fatality rate for Nipah virus ranges from 40% to 75%.

Keep reading

GMO Wheat Sprayed With Chemical 166 Times More Toxic Than Glyphosate

A new report from Friends of the Earth raises alarm over the U.S. government’s recent approval of HB4 genetically engineered or GMO wheat, warning that it could pose serious risks to public health, the environment and U.S. farmers’ livelihoods, while offering no proven benefit.

The approval of HB4 wheat marks a critical turning point: after decades of public opposition and trade concerns that kept GMO wheat off U.S. fields, consumers now face the prospect of herbicide-tolerant wheat entering the food system.

However, it is not currently being grown commercially in the U.S.

Friends of the Earth is calling on companies and consumers to reject HB4 GMO wheat before it enters the market.

Developed by the Argentine biotechnology firm Bioceres Crop Solutions, HB4 wheat is engineered to tolerate the toxic herbicide glufosinate ammonium.

Glufosinate is banned in the European Union because it poses risks to human health. It is also linked to negative impacts on soil and ecosystem health.

“GMO wheat poses high risks with no clear benefits. It threatens farmers, consumers, and ecosystems,” said Dana Perls, senior program manager at Friends of the Earth.

“Companies and consumers should reject genetically engineered wheat and support proven, sustainable solutions. Organic farming and traditional breeding protect climate, biodiversity, and food security — without toxic trade-offs.”

The report unpacks the regulatory gaps, health implications, environmental concerns and trade risks at stake.

Key findings include:

We’ve been here before — and it failed

HB4 wheat is not innovation; it is a repetition of a well-documented failure — the chemical-dependent model introduced with Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” crops in the 1990s.

GMO crops have driven massive increases in herbicide use, spawned herbicide-resistant superweeds and trapped farmers on a costly pesticide treadmill.

Glufosinate-tolerant corn and soy are already following the same path. HB4 wheat would extend this failed, toxic system to a global staple food — deepening chemical dependence, increasing costs for farmers and compounding environmental damage.

Keep reading

Bay Area scientist launches new company with sights on gene-edited babies

Last month, as he announced the launch, he said that Preventive has raised almost $30 million from private funding.

The funding is reportedly coming from some heavy hitters in the tech world, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and his husband Oliver Mulherin.

Harrington also said his team included leading experts in the fields of reproductive technology, reproductive medicine and genome-editing.

“Our goal is straightforward,” he wrote, “to determine through rigorous preclinical work whether preventive gene editing can be developed safely to spare families from severe disease.”

Harrington acknowledged the major ethical concerns around the science and the gray areas in the regulatory process, which he said, have opened the field to potentially detrimental outcomes. 

“The combination of limited expert involvement and lack of a clear regulatory pathway has created conditions for fringe groups to take dangerous shortcuts that could harm patients and stifle responsible investigation,” the researchers said, adding, “Given that this technology has the potential to save millions of lives, we do not want this to happen.”

Gene editing can only be used in in vitro fertilization to allow for the first step of genetic testing on an embryo.

“It requires IVF because you have to have the embryo in a dish,” explained Stanford law professor Henry (Hank) Greely, a leading expert on ethical, legal, and social implications in bioscience technologies.

Once a test determines an embryo has the DNA makeup of a genetic disease, for example, like Huntington’s or cystic fibrosis, scientists would then use the DNA editing technique known as Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats, or CRISPR, to make alterations to the DNA.

Keep reading

Tech billionaires back startup probing gene-edited ‘designer babies’ despite US ban: report

A Silicon Valley startup backed by OpenAI’s Sam Altman and Coinbase’s Brian Armstrong is pursuing research that some fear could lead to the birth of a genetically engineered baby — a step that’s illegal under US law and banned in most countries, a report said.

The company, Preventive, says its goal is to end hereditary disease by editing human embryos before birth, a claim that has ignited fierce debate over safety, ethics and the specter of designer children, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Preventive, founded earlier this year by gene-editing scientist Lucas Harrington, has raised $30 million and set up headquarters in San Francisco, where it is conducting research on modifying embryos to prevent hereditary disease.

The company says its mission is to prove the technology can be made safe and transparent before any attempt to create a baby is made.

Altman and Armstrong are among the firm’s early investors, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Altman’s husband, Oliver Mulherin, said he led their investment, calling it an effort to help families avoid genetic illness.

Armstrong, who has publicly promoted embryo editing, posted that he was “excited” to back Preventive and argued it is far easier to correct a genetic defect in an embryo than to treat disease later in life.

But federal law prohibits the Food and Drug Administration from considering applications for human trials involving genetically edited embryos used to start pregnancies.

Keep reading

Frankenbeef: Liberals Cloned Meat Policy Lets “Freak Meat” Hit Shelves Unlabelled

Health Canada just approved cloned cattle and pork—and their offspring—for Canadian grocery shelves, no labels, no warnings, and no pre-market safety review.

Under a quietly updated policy, cloned meat is no longer considered a “novel food.” That means it bypasses the scientific review once required for new or genetically manipulated foods. There’s no rule requiring companies to tell consumers if their steak came from a cloned animal or its progeny. You’ll never know—unless you ask your farmer directly.

Health Canada insists the change is safe, saying cloned animals and their offspring are “no different” from naturally bred livestock. But Canadians have heard that line before—“safe and effective,” “trust the science,” and all the other slogans used to silence dissent during the COVID years.

So here we go again—a massive, uncontrolled experiment where the only test subjects are the people doing the eating. People should be able to make informed decisions about what goes into their bodies, from medicine to meat. 

They’re calling it innovation. We’re calling it Frankenbeef.

Health Canada’s move mirrors the pre–RFK Jr. era FDA stance.

All of this doesn’t make food cheaper. It makes it weirder.

And it makes us all unwitting versions of Laika, the Soviet space dog—strapped in, eyes wide, blasted into a brave new frontier against our will.

If you want out of this latest “trust the science” experiment, there’s only one way:
Get to know your local farmer personally. Buy from people you trust, and distrust bureaucrats who think your dinner plate should double as a science project.

Keep reading

Researchers consider infecting Americans with ticks to make them allergic to red meat

There have been countless examples of liberalism being a mental disorder.

Here is another one:

Two researchers from Western Michigan University have written a paper titled “Beneficial Bloodsucking,” which was published by the journal Bioethics this past July. (No, it isn’t about vampires.)

The paper argues that intentionally spreading alpha-gal syndrome (AGS), a potentially life-threatening allergy to red meat, could be not only morally defensible, but perhaps even necessary, in order to reduce animal suffering and combat climate change.

Here are the authors, Parker Crutchfield and Blake Hereth, in their own words:

Because promoting tickborne AGS prevents something bad from happening, doesn’t violate anyone’s rights, and promotes virtuous action or character, it follows that promoting tickborne AGS is strongly pro tanto (‘to that extent’) morally obligatory.

Say what?

Enlisting genetically engineered ticks to curb the consumption of hamburgers, steaks, and other red meats violates the hell out of everyone’s rights.

It is a “bad” thing in and of itself.

Ticks can carry Lyme disease, as well, which also can be deadly.

Who do they think they are? They have no right to force others to give up red meat … or drive a Prius for that matter, whether it be via overt or covert acts.

As one might expect, there were numerous negative online comments, prompting Crutchfield to characterize the paper as “just a thought experiment and not an endorsement of spreading the allergy-causing ailment.” 

A thought experiment? The hell it was!

The authors actually wrote that promoting tickborne AGS is “morally obligatory.”

Those in the “Earth would be better off if there were nobody here but me” crowd are enough to make the rest of us sick.

Pointy-headed academic asshats who live in a lab and/or bubble have already caused far too much damage.

These two really ticked me off. In fact, I’m seeing red (meat).

Keep reading

PLANDEMIC 2.0: Is BILL GATES behind the latest outbreak of ‘Break-Bone’ Dengue Fever with his GMO mosquitoes?

Sound the Dengue alarms! Panic at the plandemic, part two. But wait, don’t “break your bones” rushing to get an mRNA blood clot, turbo cancer shot or the Dengvaxia jab. The last round of scamdemic madness is killing off millions of people. Let’s take a look at what’s really happening. Oh dang, here come the dangvaxia mandates.

Health officials across the United States are raising alarms as dengue fever, often called “break-bone fever” due to its severe joint and muscle pain, continues to surge nationwide. Hawaii has reported 12 cases so far in 2025, bringing it close to surpassing the state’s 16 cases recorded throughout 2024. The most recent infection involved a resident of Oahu who contracted the virus during international travel to a dengue-endemic region.

  • Hawaii outbreak and national surge: Hawaii has reported 12 dengue fever cases in 2025—nearly matching last year’s total—while the CDC has documented 2,725 cases nationwide across 46 states and territories, with Puerto Rico, Florida, and California hardest hit.
  • Source and spread: The most recent Hawaii case involved an Oahu resident infected during international travel. Dengue is primarily spread by the Aedes aegypti mosquito, which thrives in tropical and subtropical regions.
  • Health risks and treatment: Symptoms include high fever, severe joint pain, rash, and in severe cases, internal bleeding or shock. While supportive care like fluid replacement reduces mortality to below 1%, untreated cases can be fatal.
  • Vaccine and prevention challenges: A WHO-approved vaccine exists but production has been halted by Sanofi Pasteur due to low demand, with remaining doses expected to run out by 2026. Health officials stress mosquito control, repellents, protective clothing, and screened housing as key preventive measures.

Keep reading

GM crops fuel rise in pesticide use despite early promises, study shows

Spread of GM crops has not contributed to chemical reductions or land reclamations, but to increased use of the pesticides they were claimed to curtail. Report: Claire Robinson

GM crops have increased agriculture’s dependence on pesticides rather than reducing it, a study published in April 2025 found.

Drawing on data from four GM crops – Bt cotton, herbicide-tolerant (HT) soybean, HT and/or Bt maize, and HT canola, the researchers – including agricultural development expert Prof Glenn Davis Stone from Washington and Lee University and Bt cotton expert K. R. Kranthi of the International Cotton Advisory Committee – traced the surge in chemical use over three decades.

They found a paradox: while GM seeds were supposed to reduce pesticide use, their introduction caused pesticide use to soar. The researchers explain this outcome using the Jevons paradox, an economic theory that dates back to 1865. British economist William Stanley Jevons argued that efficiency in resource use often leads to more, not less, consumption. The study applies this idea to GM crops, which were claimed to reduce pesticide use, but in reality have made it skyrocket.

The researchers consider the two most prevalent GM seed-pesticide technology regimes: Bt crops and herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops. Both seeds are billed as efficient technologies: HT crops are claimed to facilitate more efficient weed control, and Bt crops are claimed to control insect pests more efficiently.

However, the researchers found that, “Like other technological efficiencies… the increased use of GM crops over the past 30 years has not contributed to input reductions nor to land reclamations, but to the expansion of agricultural land and increased use of the very pesticides these technologies are purported to curtail.”

This is due to the complexity of agricultural systems: “The efficiencies of GM crops not only lower the cost for individual farmers to use, in aggregate, more pesticides; they also make those pesticides ever more essential to the political economy of agriculture through the input-intensive monocultures in which they are embedded. In fact, increases in chemical usage occur throughout these GM crop systems because technological substitutions like GM seeds cannot be separated from their cascading impacts on labour, weed and pest ecology or agricultural decision-making.”

Keep reading

FDA halts Biden-era program of sending Americans’ DNA to China for genetic engineering

The Trump administration is halting companies from conducting clinical trials in China using Americans’ DNA samples in a program authorized by the Biden administration, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

The FDA said an immediate review has begun on new clinical trials that involve sending living cells of U.S. citizens to China and other hostile states for “genetic engineering and subsequent infusion back into U.S. patients — sometimes without their knowledge or consent.”

The agency moved to halt the program based on what it said is mounting evidence that some of the trials were conducted without informing people involved that their biological material was being transferred and manipulated.

The activity “may have exposed Americans’ sensitive genetic data to misuse by foreign governments including adversaries,” the FDA said in a statement Wednesday.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said the unacknowledged transfer of DNA samples has raised questions about the integrity of U.S. biomedical research.

“We are taking action to protect patients, restore public trust and safeguard U.S. biomedical leadership,” Dr. Makary said. “The previous administration turned a blind eye and allowed American DNA to be sent abroad — often without the knowledge or understanding of trial participants,” he said.

The FDA said the suspect transfer of Americans’ biomedical samples was the result of a December 2024 policy by the Biden administration that was put in place by the Justice Department in April.

The Biden rule imposed export controls that limited the transfer of sensitive data to countries of concern. But the Biden administration specifically approved a “sweeping exemption” that allowed U.S. companies to send trial participants’ biological samples, including DNA, for processing overseas in FDA-regulated clinical trials.

Keep reading

The Weaponization of Gene-Edited Mosquitoes

There are several dimensions to the mosquito crisis. The release of gene-edited male mosquitoes, coupled with the development of a dengue and malaria vaccine

But that is but the tip of the iceberg.

According to F. William Engdahl in 2018, the weaponization of insects is on the drawing board of the Pentagon:

There is strong evidence that the Pentagon, through its research and development agency, DARPA, is developing genetically modified insects that would be capable of destroying agriculture crops of a potential enemy.

The claim has been denied by DARPA, but leading biologists have sounded the alarm on what is taking place using new “gene-editing” CRISPR technology to in effect weaponize insects.

It’s like a 21st Century update of the Biblical plague of locusts, only potentially far worse.

Under the DARPA project, Genetic Alteration Agents or viruses will be introduced into the insect population to directly influence the genetic makeup of crops.

DARPA plans to use leaf hoppers, white flies, and aphids to introduce select viruses into crops. Among other dubious claims they say it will help farmers combat ‘climate change’.

What no one can answer, especially as neither the Pentagon nor the US FDA are asking, is how will the genetically engineered viruses in the insects interact with other microorganisms in the environment?

If crops are constantly being inundated by genetically modified viruses, how could this could alter the genetics and immune systems of humans who depend on the crops?

See F. William Engdahl, Why Is the Pentagon “Weaponizing Insects”? October 30, 2018

This posting includes excerpts from Jordan Shachtel, Amie Wek and Jamie White followed by the article of F. William Engdahl.

The World Mosquito Program plans to release five billion mosquitoes into Brazil.

“And the hope is they will help save lives. [Once] you see the reductions in disease transmission, it doesn’t seem like a horror movie any more,” Scott O’Neill, director of the World Mosquito Program” (CBC, April 2023)

Implemented concurrently with the influx of 5 billion friendly mosquitoes, Brazil approved in March 2023 a vaccine against dengue.

Keep reading