February 29, 2024 

The Rise Of The BioCyborg: Synthetic Biology And Artificial Chimerism And The Role Of Vaccination And Nanobot Infection In Transforming Human Beings Into Machines

By Ana Maria Mihalcea, MD, PhD and All News Pipeline

In this article, the broad view of what a Cyborg should be considered as, is discussed. I draw attention to the fact that vaccination is considered a modality of becoming a Cyborg, as is nanobot infection. Please also note the incorporated elements from animals are considered a mode in which the human is altered, becoming a chimera, a cross breed infected with genetic materials of animals. 

We are well aware that DNA and plasmids have been found in the C19 vials, as well as self assembly nanotechnology and nanobots. This article is a great overview explaining to people how far advanced the process of the Human 2.0 Cyborg really is. We did not consent to this, but it has been deployed via ongoing warfare against the natural divine human being under the guise of medicine, technology and scientific advancement. 

You can see that the article denotes ownership of the biosensors to the Government agencies that have deployed it, in this case the UK NHS. It is also noted that a fusion with Artificial Intelligence via injection into the cells is possible and ultimately computer generated and created humans could be created, as the CRISPR babies are already the first step. 

The full article linked here also discusses the biohacking with cheap CRISPR technology that allows individuals to deploy this technology against themselves - I would comment that the long term consequences of such actions likely have not been contemplated in depth. The introduction of entirely artificial genes, chromosomes or nucleotides, as happened with the mRNA C19 bioweapons pseuduridine, also converts people into Cyborgs, as already happened to two thirds of the worlds population. 

There are many different types and levels of 'cyborgization'. The incorporated living elements (viral, bacterial, plant, insect, reptile, rodent, avian, mammal), the technological interventions (vaccination, machine prosthesis, genetic engineering, nanobot infection, xenotransplant) and the level of integration (mini, mega, mundane) can all vary, an infinite number of cyborgs, life multiplied by human invention and intervention.

Synthetic biology is essentially the application of engineering principles to biology: “Synthetic biology brings together engineering and molecular biology to model, design, and build synthetic gene circuits and other biomolecular components and uses them to rewire and reprogram organisms for a variety of purposes."

The process of incorporation of the technology in the body is also not straightforward, this is a gendered process of embodiment. There is also an ambivalence in being cyborg. They are not really enhanced in the sense of the addition of a new function, their health is enhanced, it is a question of life or death that drove the decision to incorporate a vital medical implant. The cyborgization is mediated by the medical system and the participants accept it. The hybridity is also a special case of cyborg: 

Besides this infinite gradation of cyborgization, we identified four main types of cyborgs in the literature: the original cyborg (or the “space cyborg”) from Clynes and Kline (1995), the SF cyborg, the everyday cyborg (Haddow et al. 2015) and the concept of the cyborg coming from the seminal work of Haraway (1991). 

In this article, we describe the rise of a new type of cyborg: the biocyborg. Indeed, recently, various scientific and technical advances have emerged. In the context of human enhancement and the cyborg, we think two of them are of particular importance: synthetic biology and gene editing (considered in this study as a sub-field of synthetic biology). Synthetic biology is essentially the application of engineering principles to biology: “Synthetic biology brings together engineer- ing and molecular biology to model, design, and build synthetic gene circuits and other biomolecular components and uses them to rewire and reprogram organisms for a variety of purposes” (May 2015). 

This involves building biological organ- isms from biological components, such as the genetic code, to develop new functions. This technoscience denotes an evolution in the epistemology of biological science. Synthetic biology adopts a constructionist and creationist stance towards biology. The Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)-Cas9 technology allows gene editing with ease and speed. This technology is the result of research in bacteriology and is similar to a genetic scissor allowing the editing by “cut-and-paste” of the genetic code in a very specific manner, for example by giving the possibility of changing a single nucleotide of the DNA sequence.

In this article, we advocate that contemporary biotechnological advances of syn- thetic biology (including gene editing) are transforming the line of forces of bio- politics and are raising a new figure of cyborg: the biocyborg. After having described the different versions of the cyborg in the literature, we describe the technoscience which is at the basis of this cyborg: synthetic biology. We then present the existing biocyborgs and specific niche group of genetic self-exper-imenters. We show why the biocyborg is different in terms of hybridity and embo- diment of the synthetic biology technologies and takes the form of artificial chimerism. We finish by the new form of evolution the biocyborg is developing, and we will conclude. 

Please note in this paragraph in which the medical everyday Cyborg, also known as the patient accepts the biosensors in their body. But who owns the biosensor? The UK NHS. This very much is a discussion that Todd Callender had brought up regarding genetic sequences that are inserted via mRNA technology - since the gene sequences are patented, are those humans now owned? Todd Callender – Marburg & Patented Human Beings – Corona Investigative Committee. 

The everyday cyborg becomes a hybrid of the organic-mechanical. And this hybridity is not extraordinary or monstrous but becomes ordinary and mundane. A person cannot physically touch inside their own body handling the major organs, and indeed the organs themselves may be (or become) alien to the person. In the same way as we do not own our organs most participants asked felt that they did not have ownership of the biosensor. It was felt to belong to the UK NHS […] The biosensor, as a mechanical device, would be controllable by others, by experts, in a way that human organs are not for example. The “everyday cyborg” is therefore this individual willing to live with internal techno-mechanical modifications in order to enhance its health and stay alive. This cyborgization comes with new vulnerabilities as the medical device can stop functioning and needs to be monitored. 

Please note that implanted technology are consumed pharmaceuticals ( pills or injectables that contain biosensors). 

Implanted medical devices are relied upon by medical professionals and patients alike, offering the possibilities of an increase in the length and quality of lives. While a broad understanding of the term “implantable” might include those technologies that are consumed (e.g. pharmaceuticals), such products are not intended to be permanently incorporated as an active medical device which is placed inside the body. An active medical device is an instrument, which, with its software, can be used for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, relying on a power source other than that generated by the body. 

Most of the cyborgs we cited are based on the science of cybernetics (Wiener 2019). This is the science of communication and control in the animal and the machine. For the biocyborg, there is a paradigm shift and it is based on synthetic biology and genetic engineering. 

Although practitioners and observers define synthetic biology in different ways, the dominant strand and our focus in this article is synthetic biology as the appli- cation of the engineering principles to life. 

Synthetic biology is defined as “the design and construction of new biological parts, devices, and systems”, and “there-design of existing, natural biological systems for useful purposes”. 

The aim is not to regulate physiological signals like in cybernetics or not only to restore a function like in prosthetics, the aim is to develop new functions in living organisms. These functions encompass all areas of the bioeconomy, from agriculture to energy and medicine. This (techno)science denotes an evolution in the epistemology of biological science: “Conceptually at least, biology is becom- ing technology. And physically, technology is becoming biology. The two are starting to close on each other, and indeed as we move deeper into genomics and nanotechnology, more than this, they are starting to intermingle”. 

The advocates of synthetic biology adopt a position from which they distinguish this field from traditional genetic engineering: “synthetic biologists position themselves as building an enterprise that will deliver where genetic engineering has failed. This estrangement from established science serves to demarcate synthetic biology and assert its novelty. It also works as a rallying cry and mission statement: synthetic biology will ‘make biology easier to engineer’”. In this article, we consider new developments in genetic engineering as gene editing with CRISPR as sub-part of synthetic biology understood in a broad sense of engineering life. 

Please read this paragraph carefully - artificial intelligence can be biologically encoded and injected into human cells: 

It is now possible to inject complex genetic constructs which implements logical programming, by introducing certain molecular compounds into the cell if, and only if, a certain protein is present on the surface of the cell. It is the biological version of electronic circuits. There is even now a biological implementation of methods from artificial intelligence such as formal neural networks. Artificial intelligence can be potentially biologically encoded and injected in the human cells. 

This is already underway and experimented upon human embryos: 

One of the most recent large-scale project is the Human Genome Project-write (HGP-write). This scientific project aims to build a synthetic human genome from scratch to better understand the complexity of genetic interaction networks, their functions and mechanisms. This is a typical technoscience effort in order to advance basic science while reducing the costs of large genome synthesis technol- ogy. In a nutshell, HGP-write aims to do for DNA synthesis what the Human Genome Project (HGP-read) has done for the advancement of sequencing. Recently, experiments have also been conducted on human embryos aising several ethical problems on the design of CRISPR babies. 

Biology becoming technology expresses the idea that scientists and engineers increasingly look at living organisms in mechanical terms. It concerns the way in which physical and engineering sciences such as nanotechnology and information technology enable progress in the life sciences. Technology becoming biology is driven by the convergence in the opposite direction, whereby insights into biological and cognitive processes in the life sciences inspire and enable progress within the engineering sciences. Both megatrends point to a future in which the distinction between biology as a science of life and engineering as a science of artefacts will gradually disappear. In other words, both trends evoke a future in which we engage in making perfect life”, with “life” conceived of as a phenomenon that can be controlled and constructed. 

The human is transformed into a Cyborg by targeting genetically engineered bacteria in the microbiome - they are considered an implant: 

Besides gene therapy and transplantation, other biocyborgs integrated genetically modified bacteria in their bodies. This bacteria are developed to treat conditions that affect the brain, liver and other organs, and even kill other, harmful microbes. For example, studies have shown that naturally high levels of Lactobacillus in the vagina can help to protect women against HIV. The company Osel is modifying it to carry a human protein that prevents HIV from infecting immune cells. Very recently, another company started clinical trials to treat enteric hyperoxaluria. The disease affects 200,000– 250,000 people in the U.S.A. and tends to first present with kidney stones caused by high levels of oxalate excreted in the urine. The company is also targeting irritable bowel syndrome, ulcerative colitis, and even cancer. Synthetic biology develops technologies for all parts of the body and also for the different organisms of the body. Given the human cells/bacteria ratio in the body of 1:1, the biocyborg can also change large parts of its body with these genetically engineered bacteria when implanted into the gut. 

The technology and the body of the biocyborg share the same physicality, they are both biological, the hybridity of the biocyborg seems therefore closer to chi- merism. One definition of a chimera is an organism that contains two sets of DNA. We know several cases of human chimeras (with transplantation of organs, bone narrow transplant, twin chimerism or blood transfusion , etc.). Synthetic biology can design synthetic circuits that will be uploaded into cells to target the body’s endogenous networks, causing a transition from disease to healthy state for example. More specifically: 

Of particular importance are genetic manipulations that allow for either the stable introduction of large exogenous signaling circuits in the genome or the ability to engineer changes directly in endogenous loci to rewire native signaling. Synthetic DNA of even very large size can now be produced relatively cheaply and landing pads can be used to integrate these larger synthetic constructs into the genome in site-specific ways. Entirely artificial chromosomes can also be used as carriers of exogenous DNA, either alone or in combination with transposon-based technology. In addition, advances in CRISPR based technologies have allowed for unprecedented manipulation of endogenous loci allowing both genetic replacement and nuanced gene control. 

This implantation of a new genetic circuit leads to chimerism, except that the DNA used can be one of the hosts but the new activation and repression links in the circuits program new cell functions (cancer kill switch, biological sensors. Either new DNA is implanted into the cells of the body, either new ways are introduced to express and repress genes of the host, both of them leading to new functions. 

The technology is now restricted to a more abstract level, the information pro- cessing level. In addition, by this share of the same biological materiality, social acceptability could be increased. Indeed, currently, prostheses and artificial limbs are not always fully socially accepted: 

Despite their resemblance to the human body, corpses, zombies, and prosthetic hands elicit a negative emotional reaction from those who watch. More concretely, the cosmesis of a prosthetic limb generates a feeling of disappointment. While this allows the body with prosthesis to come across as capable and potentially “fully human,” when performance is perceived as mimicry, the body with prosthesis is viewed as deceptive and is “blessed” with insistent, guilty, and even stigmatizing looks. Carried in such a way as to be perceived by oneself and others – that is to say assumed – physically capable of achieving material and visible anonymity, cos- metics, when recognized as a lure, can be extremely damaging and hurtful for the person living with a prosthesis. 

With gene editing and synthetic biology, they can be fully integrated into the body and in fact it could not be possible to distinguish with the naked eye an enhanced human from a normal human (for most of the current synthetic biology technologies). 

The ultimate question is that of conceiving life. The next step discussed are computer designed organisms - the researchers state they could be implanted as biosensors. I have shown that this is already done in humans and that that artificial intelligence is self learning and self evolving.

The figure of the biocyborg raises several questions on what evolution is at the age of synthetic biology. Recently, in the field of synthetic developmental biology, computer-designed organisms called biobots or xenobots have been developed . They designed the biological machines with simulations, and the best designs are then constructed by combining together different biological tissues. This work evolves the notion of evolution. Indeed, the entire evolution history of these living machines happened in the computer. They could be implanted into humans to deliver specific molecules, to be used as biosensors or to inactivate cancer cells for example. The difference between artificial and natural evolution vanishes. An organism can be evolved first virtually and then biologically once constructed. This raises deep phi- losophical and biological questions. What does that mean for evolution and the human if part of its body has been first evolved virtually? More speculatively, could we create computer-designed humans one day? The problem gets even more complex when we look at the artificial intelligence methods that have been implemented by synthetic biology. This “bio-artificial intelligence” is developing and allows to implement learning capabilities inside the cells. 

Summary: 

This article discusses many different aspects of how Cyborgs are being created, and many methodologies mentioned have already been deployed, including the C19 bioweapons. 

It is important to understand that the self assembly nanotechnology I and others around the world have been showing in people’s blood is the evidence that this process is well underway. We are in the fight to preserve the divinely created natural human species that is unaltered. Given the risks of shedding, careful consideration needs to be given to the continuity of humanity in personal choices of life and the preservation of one’s original DNA and conscious unadulterated being-ness. Nobody has consented to this, but it is on our doorstep. It is time people wake up and get righteously outraged and proactive in the fight to save our species!  

All donations are greatly appreciated and will absolutely be used to keep us in this fight for the future of America.

Thank you and God Bless. Susan and Stefan.

PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.

One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:



Or https://www.paypal.me/AllNewsPipeLine

OR Donate to ANP via Subscribestar

Donate Via Snail Mail

Checks or money orders made payable to Stefan Stanford or Susan Duclos can be sent to:

P.O. Box 575McHenry, MD. 21541


Anything at all at Amazon purchased through this ANP link will allow ANP to make a bit of revenue, all of which will be used to keep ANP online and to keep a roof over our heads.