- Excerpt
Five years ago, celebrating his Foundation’s partnership with the German “transformative vaccine” developer CureVac, Bill Gates said: “If we can teach the body to create its own natural defenses, we can revolutionize the way we treat and prevent diseases.” Sue Desmond-Hellmann, Chief Executive Officer of Gates’s Foundation chimed in and said that “This collaboration will ensure that one of medicine’s most promising new technologies is applied to the challenge of reaching all people with the affordable, life-saving vaccines they need.” [I] Sounds very promising. But you may wonder what this is all about. Let’s see.
Table of contents
The Wisdom of the Body
In 1932, the renowned American physiologist Walter B. Cannon published The Wisdom of the Body, a book in which he explained that the human body is endowed with the natural power to heal itself, the “vis medicatrix naturae.” The term is the Latin version of the Greek saying “Nature’s innate powers are the healers of diseases” (“nosoon phuseis iatroi”), which is attributed to the Father of Medicine, Hippocrates. Cannon transcribed Hippocrates’s principle into a more modern setting for which he coined the term homeostasis. In The Wisdom of the Body, Cannon wrote: “The ability of living beings to maintain their own constancy has long impressed biologists. The idea that disease is cured by natural powers, by a vis medicatrix naturae, an idea which was held by Hippocrates (460-377 B.C.), implies the existence of agencies which are ready to operate correctively when the normal state of the organism is upset.”
Homeostasis
“The coordinated physiological processes,” wrote Cannon, “which maintain most of the steady states in the organism are so complex and so peculiar to living beings – involving, as they may, the brain and nerves, the heart, lungs, kidneys and spleen, all working cooperatively – that I have suggested a special designation for these states, homeostasis. The word does not imply something set and immobile, a stagnation. It means a condition – a condition which may vary, but which is relatively constant.”
Bill Gates claims to know better
In comes Bill Gates, the 2nd richest man on the planet and one of the world’s foremost philantropists. He firmly disagrees with Hippocrates. In his worldview, “we” must “teach the body to create its own natural defences.” Think about this statement for a while. WE must TEACH the vis medicatrix naturae a lesson, because “we” know better than our body. Gates claims that his and his acolytes’ wisdom is superior to the wisdom of the body. Which is why “we” must “teach” the body so that it will absorb Gates’ superior wisdom and then consider the latter “its own.” We must reprogram nature.
The body’s miraculous healing powers
In the Wisdom of the Body, Cannon wrote: “When we consider the extreme instability of our bodily structure, its readiness for disturbance by the slightest application of external forces and the rapid onset of its decomposition as soon as favoring circumstances are withdrawn, its persistence through many decades seems almost miraculous. The wonder increases when we realize that the system is open, engaging in free exchange with the outer world, and that the structure itself is not permanent but is being continuously broken down by the wear and tear of action, and is continuously built up again by processes of repair.”
Reprogramming the body’s wisdom
It is our current understanding that the body’s wisdom is stored in our genes, our DNA, and that it maintains homeostasis by “expressing” itself so that cells will respond by activating enzymes that construct from amino acids any number of the thousands of compounds required to regulate the endless number of the body’s structures and functions. It gets even more complicated when you realize that, quite miraculously, the body’s DNA is switched on and off by a “field” of wisdom that has been described as epigenetics. The result of this intricate combination of wisdom (epigenetic “software”) and hardware (DNA) is that it constantly produces “messages” that inform the cells how to best respond to challenges. These messages are encoded in what one might consider as “copies” of certain specific, activated, strands of DNA. These copies are called messenger RNA, or, mRNA. When you seek to reprogram the human body’s wisdom, you must try to change its DNA by implanting foreign pieces of DNA. This is called “recombining” innate with foreign DNA. Or, you must construct “foreign” ‒ pharmaceutically / synthetically produced ‒ messenger RNA to take over DNA’s position of “source-point” of the mRNA it produces to communicate with and instruct the cell. This is the kind of take-over promulgated by Gates.
Who is WE ?
According to Gates, “Technologies like mRNA give us confidence to place big bets for the future. We are pleased to partner with CureVac who has been pioneering this technology.” Technology shall now trump the wisdom that our organisms created and stored during millions of years of evolution and surviving the enormous challenges posed by living on planet Earth. As Walter B. Cannon explained, our organisms learned how to maintain internal balance by organizing the multi-millions of biochemical and biophysical reactions that continuously and simultaneously take place in our bodies. Every split of a second, every second of the hour, every hour of the day, every day of the year and every year between birth and death. The complexity is staggering and easily surpasses the capacity of the human mind’s capacity. The fact that the body is capable of maintaining homeostasis in this complexity is even more staggering. Companies like CureVacclaim that their mRNA technology can be implanted into this complexity without any risk of disturbing it. Bill Gates even claims that we will be capable of teaching the human organism to eventually accept man-made mRNA as “its own.” We will, it is promised, all become happy and healthy Genetically Modified Human Organisms. GMHO’s.
Are man-made mRNA’s vaccines ?
No, they’re not. They must be classified as “gene therapy.” Even though mRNA’s don’t become part of the genome (DNA), they consist of synthetically recombined nucleic acids [the building blocks of DNA and RNA] wherefore, at least in the European Union, they fall under the Regulation for Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products. Even though pharmaceutical mRNA’s may “mimic” ínnate mRNA’s, they by-pass our DNA and interfere with our natural mRNA’s in an effort to induce responses whose short- and long-term effects on the totality of the human organism are still unknown and unpredictable. Yet, as “promising vaccines,” they’re being “fast-tracked” through the medicinal product authorization machinery and “public health” systems under the promise that they will help quench “pandemics” such as the Covid-19 one. Still, they have nothing to do with what the average person understands as “vaccine.” Vaccines, as most people understand them, are weakened viruses or bacteria, mostly “harvested” from animals. The first vaccine was developed in 1796 by the British doctor Edward Jenner. It was used to create immunity against smallpox and was collected from cows that had cowpox. The Latin word for cow is vacca [French “vache”], hence the name vaccine. Ironically, CureVac’s company name suggest, though probably unintentionally, that its cures have something to do with cows, which, obviously, they don’t.
Are mRNA gene therapeutics potentially injurious ?
It may very well be that mRNA gene therapeutics hold great promises, but will they be safe in the long run ? If they had to be as safe as foods and food products marketed in the European Union, then, if we would apply the criteria laid down in the EU’s General Food Law, would demand that “in determining whether any [mRNA gene-therapeutic] is injurious to health, regard shall be had:
(a) not only to the probable immediate and/or short-term and/or long-term effects of that [mRNA gene therapeutic] on the health of a person consuming it, but also on subsequent generations;
(b) to the probable cumulative toxic effects;
(c) to the particular health sensitivities of a specific category of consumers where the [mRNA gene therapeutic] is intended for that category of consumers.” [ii]
Moreover, that same law provides that “in specific circumstances where, following an assessment of available information, the possibility of harmful effects on health is identified but scientific uncertainty persists, provisional risk management measures necessary to ensure the high level of health protection chosen in the Community may be adopted, pending further scientific information for a more comprehensive risk assessment. [iii]
“Do no harm,” said Hippocrates
Oh, yes, I know, while the marketing of food products suspected of causing uncertain risks may be prohibited, pharmaceutical products receive marketing authorization even though they produce serious and very certain side effects. In fact, as most users of “mainstream” medicines can ascertain, the majority of medicinal products do have side effects. Which is why Hippocrates would have never used “modern” medicines, because his adage was “nil nocere,” do no harm when treating a disease. His medicines and therapies supported the human body without doing harm. So, if mRNA pharmaceuticals have side effects, which they probably do, then let’s first see what these are before they’re allowed on the market.
Will mRNA products work against viruses ?
Well, if the vaccines widely promoted as preventing influenza may serve as an example, the future of mRNAs gene therapeutics doesn’t look as promising as promised. In 2018, the most prestigeous scientific organization in the world, the Cochrane Institute, published an updated Review of the efficacy of influenza-vaccines by assessing 52 clinical trials including over 80,000 adults. The aim of this Review was to summarise research that looked at the effects of immunising healthy adults with influenza vaccines during influenza seasons. The Cochrane team established that seventy-one (71) healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one (1) of them experiencing influenza. Twenty-nine (29) healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one (1) of the experiencing an influenza-like-illness. This is why so many vaccinated people still get the flu or a flu-like illnesses. [iv]
Why not listen to Hippocrates and our body ?
What if, instead of listening to Bill Gates and the voices of those who serve his vested interests, we would listen to Hippocrates and our body ? Why wouldn’t we try to reach an ever more profound understanding of the vix medicatrix naturae ? Instead of interfering with our body’s inherited natural wisdom, why wouldn’t we invest in safeguarding it. Why wouldn’t we support and assist our own innate healing powers so that they can produce homeostasis and health. Instead of listening to voices that demonize vitamins, botanical extracts, homeopathy and natural therapeutics, why wouldn’t we stimulate their use ? Why not ?
