Our article “Real-Time Self-Assembly . . . ” (Lee & Broudy, 2024) published in this journal has attracted attention from scholars, commentators, and professional fact-checkers from around the world, most of it featuring generous praise and some of it impassioned pleas for its authors to stick to their own areas of expertise. Our reply to the critics of this study is an attempt to address and accommodate scholarly critique and answer other concerns about our perceived lack of know-how to engage in such research. In this response, we suggest that a reflexive and singular focus on the declared components of the COVID injectables represents a bias of its own, and a lack of due diligence on our critics’ part. The “Nano– Bio–Info–Cogno (NBIC)” era of the 21st century (see Jamali et al., 2018) is an already very well-documented development (Cevallos et al., 2022; The White House, 2022), and our aim is to urge scholars to enlarge the critical lens they use to assess these phenomena. This broadening of perspective has direct bearing on science and scholarship, direct implications for the status of legacy biosciences, and requires inclusion in any explanatory framework, which we discuss briefly in this reply.
Introduction
Professor Ian Akyildiz, pioneer of the Internet of Bio-Nano Things (IoBNT), pointed out in an advanced technology symposium in 2023:
… the Bio-nanoscale machines [behind the IoBNT] are for injecting into the body … and that is going really well with these Covid vaccines. It’s going that direction. These mRNAs are nothing [other] than small scale, nano-scale machines. They are programmed, and they are injected [Akyildiz, 2023; also see Akyildiz et al., 2015].
In the article, “Real-Time Self-Assembly of Stereomicroscopically Visible Artificial Constructions in Incubated Specimens of mRNA Products Mainly from Pfizer and Moderna: A Comprehensive Longitudinal Study”, Lee and Broudy (2024) described the results of an observational and exploratory study of 54 samples of COVID injectable products, viewed under a stereomicroscope. The samples were incubated for up to 630 days and observed for both morphology and behavior.
Various self-assembling structures were found to form over time, some of which showed responsiveness to conditions of incubation, including a marked acceleration in development upon exposure to wireless radiation. In the context of relevant scholarly discussions in the diverse fields of interest, we noted that, “our observations suggest the presence of some kind of nanotechnology in the COVID-19 injectables” (in our abstract on p. 1180). We added that, “both the morphology and behavioral characteristics of these observed phenomena suggest that far from being pure (Finn, 2011 p. 138), these injectables are composed of, hitherto, undisclosed additional engineered components responsive to a range of internal and ambient forms of energy, all of which are traceable to and described throughout the scholarly literature” (p. 1229).
Reactions to the incubation study after publication have been offered by scholars and interested observers — some productive, others not. We are sincerely grateful to Professor Anne Ulrich (2024) for offering her thoughtful and detailed perspective on our efforts and, thus, confine our response to her analysis. As a professional of 35 years in the pharmaceutical industry and professor of organic chemistry, Ulrich has taken time to offer an alternate interpretation of our findings. We are heartened to see she takes no issue with the methods, noting that, “the experiments were carried out diligently and the resulting images are well documented” (p. 1244.7). Ulrich also agrees that the structures we observed to develop over time were formed from self-assembling nanoparticles.
The point of departure between our two interpretations concerns the nature of the nanoparticles from which the incubated structures formed. We proposed that the self-assembling components may be consistent with nanotechnologies relevant to the Internet of Bodies. Ulrich, in contrast argues that they arise from lipid nanoparticles and cholesterol ingredients in the modRNA injectable platforms. Absent compositional analysis, which is forthcoming, neither interpretation can be decisively ruled in or out based solely upon the observational data obtained to date. We remain open to disconfirmation should compositional analysis support Ulrich’s interpretation over ours. However, we maintain that our interpretation fits the extant observational data and appears consistent with the much wider range of relevant scholarly literature and research.
Keep reading
Hellbound and Down 
You must be logged in to post a comment.