Biotech's Dark Promise: Involuntary Cannibalism for All

I was reading this this morning, and decided to post it here. This is the first time I have read of 'edibile vaccines', although others on this forum may have. I found the implications of this to be startling.

This is the link:

_http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/biotechs-dark-promise-involuntary-cannabilism-all-1?utm_source=www.GreenMedInfo.com&utm_campaign=ce70c1c483-Greenmedinfo&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_193c8492fb-ce70c1c483-86976777

This is the article:

" Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal." ~ Albert Einstein

Whereas the quote above could easily be dismissed as the 'progress-denying' sentiment of a disgruntled anti-GMO activist, the fact is that it came from a scientist representing the very epitome of Western rationality and accomplishment.

Perhaps Einstein was reflecting on the inevitable existential consequences of the so-called "technological imperative"--whatever can be done, will be done. Fundamentally amoral and irrational economic and political forces drive technology's feverish pace, infusing a certain arbitrary cruelty and disequilibrium into everything it touches.

In our continual drive to 'improve upon Nature' in the name of much-hyped, 'life-saving' biotechnological innovations, the line between humane and inhumane eventually is crossed, and there seems no going back. Biopollution from defective or dangerous GMO genes, for example, is virtually impossible to undo once unreleased into the biosphere; you can't "recall" a defective gene like you can an automobile. Nor can we remove from our bodies the surreptitious viruses (e.g. simian virus #40 (SV40)) that contaminated millions of first-generation polio vaccines. In many ways our moral fiber suffers from the same susceptibilities. Once we have crossed a certain line – be it theft, lying, or worse, etc., – it is difficult, if not impossible to 'go back' and regain our innocence. Such is the human condition. And this is why we must carefully consider the medico-ethical implications of new technologies, whose developments we must first be aware of in order to guide, regulate and sometimes terminate.

The Scientific Community Moves To Embrace Embryo Cloning for Medical Purposes

For example, few are aware that the cloning of human embryos for 'therapeutic purposes' was made legal in the UK in January, 2001 through an amendment to the Human Embryology Act. Not long after, in August 2004, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) approved the first license for cloning human embryos in the UK. Media reports at the time alleged the legal changes would result in the use of cloned human embryos to create "spare body parts."

In an article published in 2000 titled, "Biotech Cannabalism,"[ii] C. Ben Mitchell, PhD reflects on the pro-cloning movement by quoting a proponent's justification: "If you could use tissue from human embryos to save hundreds of lives, there must be a moral imperative to do it." Mitchell disagrees, countering: "[C]reating a human being for the purposes of killing that person for another human being's health, sounds an awfully lot like cannibalism, only worse."

Calling Vaccines From Aborted Fetuses What They Are: Cannibalistic

Whereas cannibalism is considered by most modern societies to be the ultimate expression of uncivilized or barbaric behavior, it is intrinsic to many of the Western world's most prized biotechnological and medical innovations. Probably the most 'taken for granted' example of this is the use of live, aborted fetus cell lines from induced abortions to produce vaccines. Known as diploid cell vaccines (diploid cells have two (di-) sets of chromosomes inherited from human mother and father), they are non-continuous (like cancer cells), and therefore must be continually replaced, i.e. new aborted, live fetal tissue must be harvested periodically. A good portion of the CDC's immunization schedule requires the use of these human fetus-originated vaccines, and these include: rubella, measles, mumps, rabies, polio, smallpox, hepatitis A, chickenpox, and herpes zoster. Additionally, so-called "abortion tainted vaccines" cultivated on transformed fetal cells (293, PER.C6) are in the developmental pipeline, including: "flu, Respiratory Syncytial and parainfluenza viruses, HIV, West Nile virus, Ebola, Marburg and Lassa, hepatitis B and C, foot and mouth disease, Japanese encephalitis, dengue, tuberculosis, anthrax, plague, tetanus and malaria." [iii]

Unfortunately, to millions who find injecting living aborted fetal cells or their biological derivatives into their bodies, or their children's, morally objectionable, an increasingly Draconian biomedical establishment is either pressuring, coercing or mandating this to occur, using the faulty concept of "herd immunity" and concomitant biosafety concerns to override an individual's right to refuse them. And most are completely unaware that aborted cells are used and being injected into their bodies, because the medical ethical principle of informed consent remains just that: a principle, not practiced regularly. Furthermore, beyond the obvious moral/ /religious/philosophical reasons to reject aborted fetal cell derived vaccines, there are real health concerns associated with the introduction of this type of biological material into the human body that are largely considered taboo to discuss.

Biopharming: The End of Choice for Those Who Do Not Want to Ingest Human Proteins

Another way in which the dark specter of cannibalism is resurfacing in our lives is through biotech's intense investment in biopharming technologies. Also known as molecular farming, biopharming involves creating "drug-producing" GMOs by inserting a gene that code for useful pharmaceuticals or biological products (e.g. antibodies, lactoferrin) into host plants, insects or animals that do not naturally express those genes.

Concerns over the unintended, adverse effects of this technology are growing, primarily because once the genes are inserted into laboratory- or field-trialed organisms, their escape into the biosphere is not just possible, but a statistical inevitability. As we have seen with GMO crops, contamination is a default business strategy for biotech stakeholders, whose GM plants pollinate (some say "biorape") organic or wild plants rendering them also GMOs. This means that -- short of using 'terminator technology' which renders the plants incapable of reproduction – foolproof GM containment is impossible. Eventually we will all be exposed to these GMO plants, insects and animals in some form or other.

There is intense work being done today to create biopharmed "edible vaccines," which contain deadly viral or bacterial vectors. Obviously, the biopollution created by inserting these genes into plants traditionally used for human consumption and which could find their way into the human food supply could cause life-threatening health problems. But edible vaccines are only a subset of biopharmed products in the developmental pipeline. There are a broad range of human proteins being 'pharmed' using genetically modified animals expressing human genes as 'bioreactors.'



I am curious about others thoughts on this. Will avoiding GMO's become near impossible in the near future?
 
Interesting article, SovereignDove. Thanks for posting it.

It's a possibility. That's why I buy heritage seeds, organic, and secrete them away in protective packets, in the hope that if the GMO-only scenario does manifest I might be able to grow real food in my garden and I and others might survive for a bit longer - if I still have a garden that is.
 
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a non-GMO item in manufacturing or pharmaceuticals TODAY even, when you consider the refining and processing of natural compounds coupled with the imperatives of perceived agronomic efficiency demanding GMOs. :O

I think the "cannibalism" hook of this article seems extreme. It's not hunting down and butchering people like it was in past eras... if you count the assimilation of the cells/tissues of another as cannibalism, then blood transfusion would also be considered cannibalism.
 
whitecoast said:
I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a non-GMO item in manufacturing or pharmaceuticals TODAY even, when you consider the refining and processing of natural compounds coupled with the imperatives of perceived agronomic efficiency demanding GMOs. :O

I think the "cannibalism" hook of this article seems extreme. It's not hunting down and butchering people like it was in past eras... if you count the assimilation of the cells/tissues of another as cannibalism, then blood transfusion would also be considered cannibalism.

I agree with you that the use of the word 'cannibalism' in the article is a bit off, and misleading considering the information contained in the article.

The Strawman said:
Interesting article, SovereignDove. Thanks for posting it.

It's a possibility. That's why I buy heritage seeds, organic, and secrete them away in protective packets, in the hope that if the GMO-only scenario does manifest I might be able to grow real food in my garden and I and others might survive for a bit longer - if I still have a garden that is.

Growing the organic and heritage seeds in a small greenhouse could be a way to prevent cross-pollination from the GMO plant's pollen carried in the wind if it gets to that point. I was reading an article early last year about this, and it does not seem too difficult or expensive to do. The greenhouses do not have to take up a lot of space either. Several of the examples of these do-it-yourself greenhouses were built using old windows. The last example is a portable greenhouse. If you have the land to grow a garden, all the better (except for the cross-pollination possibility).

Article: _http://www.treehugger.com/lawn-garden/3-easy-diy-greenhouses-under-300.html

As an example from the article:
This greenhouse by Angela Davis of My Rubber Boots uses old wooden windows that you can pick up at the local dump, architectural salvage store, yard sale, or even in your alley.
 
Back
Top Bottom