A FEW TAKE OUTS FROM THE MANY HOURS OF LECTURES AND NEWS BELOW
Giordano admits there are nanobots that can take over insects and turn them into “biodrones”. But pretty much same thing can be achieved with people, it’s just a matter of complexity.
The brain is a battlefield and the drones for it already exist.
The brain is as hackable as any cheap tablet, if not more, due to lack of protection. They can do that non-invasively, even from the satellite, as we’ve warned you the past two years.
From MK Ultra to breaking the fabric of society, neurotechnology has now almost unlimited capabilities.
Meet Dr. James Giordano, Ph.D., Chief, Neuroethics Studies Prog, Georgetown UMC
Dr. James Giordano is Chief of the Neuroethics Studies Program in the Pellegrino Center for Clinical Bioethics, and a professor in the Department of Neurology, and Graduate Liberal Studies Program at Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA. He is Clark Faculty Fellow of Neurosciences and Ethics at the Human Science Center of Ludwig Maximilians Universität, Munich, Germany, where he previously was JW Fulbright Foundation Visiting Professor. Dr. Giordano is William H. and Ruth Crane Schaefer Distinguished Visiting Professor of Neuroethics at Gallaudet University, Washington, DC; is appointed to the Neuroethics, Legal, and Social Issues Advisory Panel of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), and is a Fellow of the Center for National Preparedness at the University of Pittsburgh, PA.
His ongoing research focuses upon the use of advanced neurotechnologies to explore the neurobiology of pain and other neuropsychiatric spectrum disorders; the neuroscience of moral decision-making, and the neuroethical issues arising from the use of neuroscience and neurotechnology in research, clinical medicine, public life, international relations and policy, and national security and defense (for additional information, see: http://www.neurobioethics.org)
The author of over 200 peer-reviewed papers, and 7 books in neuroscience and neuroethics, Dr. Giordano is Editor-in-Chief of the journal Philosophy, Ethics and Humanities in Medicine; Associate Editor for the journal Neuroethics; and Executive Editor-in-Chief of the book series Advances in Neurotechnology: Ethical, Legal and Social Issues (published by CRC Press). –
NEUROTECHNOLOGY IN NATIONAL DEFENSE – DARPA’S DR. JAMES GIORDANO @ MAD SCIENTIST CONFERENCE 2017
His following lectures are just incremental actualizations to the one before, the backbone is largely similar, but there’s some rewarding gold nuggets to be found in each of them, if you have the patience. And I’m going to complement him with some flashbacks from our own reporting.
This presentation is part of the ‘Brain Science and Effective Leadership Series,’ hosted by the Stockdale Center for Ethical Leadership. Dr. Girordano is with the Georgetown University Departments of Neurology and Biochemistry, working in the Neuroethics Study Program, which is a part of the Program in Military Medical Ethics. He also is a Fellow of the Program in Biosecurity, Technology, and Ethics at the Naval War College. In this invigorating and, at points chilling, talk he discusses various potential uses of neurocognitive science in military and intelligence operations, and sketches ethical issues, and angles of analysis that will arise as both allies and adversaries develop such tools, relating them to existing laws of war and conventions.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Wyss is the ninja institute: it’s everywhere and anywhere, but only other ninjas can detect it. Of course it’s deeply involved with Covid and the jabs too. This piece of their work is over a decade old, but you can easily see how it plays out in the 2020’s.
Wyss Institute Develops New Nanodevice Manufacturing Strategy Using Self-Assembling DNA “Building Blocks”
May 30, 2012
Novel technology could enable new tools for delivering drugs directly to disease sites in the body
Researchers at the Wyss Institute have developed a method for building complex nanostructures out of short synthetic strands of DNA. Called single-stranded tiles (SSTs), these interlocking DNA “building blocks,” akin to Legos®, can be programmed to assemble themselves into precisely designed shapes, such as letters and emoticons. Further development of the technology could enable the creation of new nanoscale devices, such as those that deliver drugs directly to disease sites.
The technology, which is described in today’s online issue of Nature, was developed by a research team led by Wyss core faculty member Peng Yin, Ph.D., who is also an Assistant Professor of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School. Other team members included Wyss Postdoctoral Fellow Bryan Wei, Ph.D., and graduate student Mingjie Dai.
DNA is best known as a keeper of genetic information. But in an emerging field of science known as DNA nanotechnology, it is being explored for use as a material with which to build tiny, programmable structures for diverse applications. To date, most research has focused on the use of a single long biological strand of DNA, which acts as a backbone along which smaller strands bind to its many different segments, to create shapes. This method, called DNA origami, is also being pursued at the Wyss Institute under the leadership of Core Faculty member William Shih, Ph.D. Shih is also an Associate Professor in the Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology at Harvard Medical School and the Department of Cancer Biology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute.
Wyss researchers have built numerals, letters, and a number of other structures using short strands of DNA as building blocks.
In focusing on the use of short strands of synthetic DNA and avoiding the long scaffold strand, Yin’s team developed an alternative building method. Each SST is a single, short strand of DNA. One tile will interlock with another tile, if it has a complementary sequence of DNA. If there are no complementary matches, the blocks do not connect. In this way, a collection of tiles can assemble itself into specific, predetermined shapes through a series of interlocking local connections.
In demonstrating the method, the researchers created just over one hundred different designs, including Chinese characters, numbers, and fonts, using hundreds of tiles for a single structure of 100 nanometers (billionths of a meter) in size. The approach is simple, robust, and versatile.
As synthetically based materials, the SSTs could have some important applications in medicine. SSTs could organize themselves into drug-delivery machines that maintain their structural integrity until they reach specific cell targets, and because they are synthetic, can be made highly biocompatible.
“Use of DNA nanotechnology to create programmable nanodevices is an important focus at the Wyss Institute, because we believe so strongly in its potential to produce a paradigm-shifting approach to development of new diagnostics and therapeutics,” said Wyss Founding Director, Donald Ingber, M.D., Ph.D.
The research was supported by the Office of Naval Research, the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Wyss Institute at Harvard University.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
We gave up on our profit shares from masks, if you want to help us, please use the donation button! We think frequent mask use, even short term use can be bad for you, but if you have no way around them, at least send a message of consciousness. Get it here!
I can’t find the irony because I’m distracted by the facts. The highlights in the text are mine, they are the key.
Flipping a Switch Inside the Head
With new technology, scientists are able to exert wireless control over brain cells of mice with just the push of a button. The first thing they did was make the mice hungry.
By W. Wayt Gibbs, APRIL 1, 2017
READY YOUR TINFOIL HATS—mind control is not as far-fetched an idea as it may seem. In Jeffrey M. Friedman’s laboratory, it happens all the time, though the subjects are mice, not people.
Friedman and his colleagues have demonstrated a radio-operated remote control for the appetite and glucose metabolism of mice—a sophisticated technique to wirelessly alter neurons in the animals’ brains. At the flick of a switch, they are able to make mice hungry—or suppress their appetite—while the mice go about their lives normally. It’s a tool they are using to unravel the neurological basis of eating, and it is likely to have applications for studies of other hard-wired behaviors.
Friedman, Marilyn M. Simpson Professor, has been working on the technique for several years with Sarah Stanley, a former postdoc in his lab who now is assistant professor at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, and collaborators at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Aware of the limitations of existing methods for triggering brain cells in living animals, the group set out to invent a new way. An ideal approach, they reasoned, would be as noninvasive and non-damaging as possible. And it should work quickly and repeatedly.
Although there are other ways to deliver signals to neurons, each has its limitations. In deep-brain stimulation, for example, scientists thread a wire through the brain to place an electrode next to the target cells. But the implant can damage nearby cells and tissues in ways that interfere with normal behavior. Optogenetics, which works similarly but uses fiber optics and a pulse of light rather than electricity, has the same issue. A third strategy—using drugs to activate genetically modified cells bred into mice—is less invasive, but drugs are slow to take effect and wear off.
The solution that Friedman’s group hit upon, referred to as radiogenetics or magnetogenetics, avoids these problems. With their method, published last year in Nature, biologists can turn neurons on or off in a live animal at will—quickly, repeatedly, and without implants—by engineering the cells to make them receptive to radio waves or a magnetic field.
“In effect, we created a perceptual illusion that the animal had a drop in blood sugar.”
“We’ve combined molecules already used in cells for other purposes in a manner that allows an invisible force to take control of an instinct as primal as hunger,” Friedman says.
The method links five very different biological tools, which can look whimsically convoluted, like a Rube Goldberg contraption on a molecular scale. It relies on a green fluorescent protein borrowed from jellyfish, a peculiar antibody derived from camels, squishy bags of iron particles, and the cellular equivalent of a door made from a membrane-piercing protein—all delivered and installed by a genetically engineered virus. The remote control for this contraption is a modified welding tool (though a store-bought magnet also works).
The researchers’ first challenge was to find something in a neuron that could serve as an antenna to detect the incoming radio signal or magnetic field. The logical choice was ferritin, a protein that stores iron in cells in balloon-like particles just a dozen nanometers wide. Iron is essential to cells but can also be toxic, so it is sequestered in ferritin particles until it is needed. Each ferritin particle carries within it thousands of grains of iron that wiggle around in response to a radio signal, and shift and align when immersed in a magnetic field. We all have these particles shimmying around inside our brain cells, but the motions normally have no effect on neurons.
Friedman and Stanley, with equipment they use to send radio waves. Photo by Zachary Veilleux
Friedman’s team realized that they could use a genetically engineered virus to create doorways into a neuron’s outer membrane. If they could then somehow attach each door to a ferritin particle, they reasoned, they might be able to wiggle the ferritin enough to jostle the door open. “The ‘door’ we chose is called TRPV1,” says Stanley. “Once TRPV1 is activated, calcium and sodium ions would next flow into the cell and trigger the neuron to fire.” The bits borrowed from camels and jellyfish provided what the scientists needed to connect the door to the ferritin (see How to outfit a brain sidebar, right).
Once the team had the new control mechanism working, they put it to the test. For Friedman and Stanley, whose goal is to unravel the biological causes of overeating and obesity, the first application was obvious: Try to identify specific neurons involved in appetite. The group modified glucose-sensing neurons—cells that are believed to monitor blood sugar levels in the brain and keep them within normal range—to put them under wireless control. To accomplish this, they inserted the TRPV1 and ferritin genes into a virus and—using yet another genetic trick—injected them into the glucose-sensing neurons. They could then fiddle with the cells to see whether they are involved, as suspected, in coordinating feeding and the release of hormones, such as insulin and glucagon, that keep blood glucose levels in check.
HOW TO OUTFIT A BRAIN FOR RADIO CONTROL Scientists have come up with a clever way to control neurons via radio by cobbling together genes from humans, camels, and jellyfish. They use an engineered virus to install a door into each target neuron’s outer membrane, then jostle the door open using ferritin particles that respond to strong radio signals. Once the door opens, calcium ions pour into the cell and trigger the neuron to fire. 1. To install the radiogenetics system into neurons, the scientists equipped an adenovirus with the various genes needed to make the system work. Then they squirted the modified virus onto the brain cells they wanted to alter. 2. One of the added genes produces TRPV1, a protein that normally helps cells detect heat and motion. Within each neuron, the TRPV1 protein (pink) embeds itself into the cell’s outer membrane. Like a door, it can change shape to open or shut an ion channel. To add a knob to the door, the researchers stitched TRPV1 to a “nanobody” (violet)—an unusually simple variety of antibody found in camels. 3. Iron-filled ferritin particles (green) serve as the system’s sensor. To allow them to grab onto the nanobody doorknob, the researchers tacked on a gene for GFP—a jellyfish protein that glows green under ultraviolet light. By design, the nanobody and GFP stick together tightly. The system is now connected. When exposed to strong radio waves or magnetic fields, the ferritin particles wiggle, the ion channel opens, and calcium ions (red) flow in to activate the cell.
Once the virus had enough time to infect and transform the target neurons, the researchers switched on a radio transmitter tuned to 465 kHz, a little below the band used for AM radio.
The neurons responded. They began to fire, signaling a shortage of glucose even though the animal’s blood sugar levels were normal. And other parts of the body responded just as they would to a real drop in blood sugar: insulin levels fell, the liver started pumping out more glucose, and the animals started eating more. “In effect,” Friedman says, “we created a perceptual illusion that the animal had low blood glucose even though the levels were normal.”
Inspired by these results, the researchers wondered if magnetism, like radio waves, might trigger ferritin to open the cellular doors. It did: When the team put the mice cages close to an MRI machine, or waved a rare-earth magnet over the animals, their glucose-sensing neurons were triggered.
Stimulating appetite is one thing. Could they also suppress it? The group tweaked the TRPV1 gene so it would pass chloride, which acts to inhibit neurons. Now when they inserted the modified TRPV1 into the neurons, the rush of chloride made the neurons behave as if the blood was overloaded with glucose. Insulin production surged in the animals, and they ate less. “This seems to indicate clearly that the brain as well as the pancreas is involved in glucose regulation,” Friedman says.
Friedman and Stanley hope that biologists will be able to use the remote-control system to tackle a range of neural processes other than appetite. And beyond being a basic research tool, the method could potentially lead to novel therapies for brain disorders.
For example, one could imagine using it to treat Parkinson’s disease or essential tremor—conditions that are sometimes treated by deep brain stimulation, via wires implanted into patients’ brains and connected to a battery pack tucked into the chest. Potentially, it would be less invasive to inject the crippled virus into the same spot of the brain and let it permanently modify the cells there, making them responsive to wireless control.
In theory, it might also be possible to make a patient’s own cells receptive to electromagnetic waves by removing them from the body, delivering TRPV1 and ferritin, and then putting the cells back, Friedman says. This would be a protocol not unlike those currently used in stem cell treatments and some cancer immunotherapies, in which patients’ own cells are engineered and reimplanted back into their bodies.
At this point, however, the system’s clinical usefulness is a question of speculation. “We are a long way from using it in humans for medical treatments,” Friedman says. “Much would need to be done before it could even be tested.”
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
The latest piece of evidence to confirm many of the revelations we’ve published for the past year or so. You have to read back to get more of the picture we’re about to sketch here.
We can’t offer informed consent for these experiments conducted on us because we are not offered much information. Only rich people can access some of it at prices most of us can’t dream. Maybe you can, or maybe people start donating enough so we can afford surviving another month and buying this info for the purpose of making it freely available to everyone, as it should be.
What am I talking about is the book pictured in our cover illustration and detailed below, which costs well over 1000$!
More precisely $1185 just for a single license PDF, the hardcover print would cost you about 100 more.
Why is this thing so expensive, you may ask?
THESE INFORMATIONS ARE SO EXPENSIVE EXACTLY TO BE PROHIBITIVE TO THE PLEBS AND OFFER A LEVERAGE OVER THOSE WHO ARE KEPT OUT OF THE LOOP, IN THE DARK
Predictably so, but:
These informations also must to have the highest degree of accuracy in order to sell as expensively!
Superb quality book delivered in a timely fashion with full financial documentation received via email.
Testimonial by Dr Tom Kidd, Associate Professor, University of Nevada
Bonus for us, this book is from May 2020, so it must have been elaborated prior to April 2020. This means it might be outdated by now for investors, but witty investigators like us find an advantage in this:
THE BOOK HAS BEEN ELABORATED WITH BEHIND THE SCENES SCIENCE ON THE INDUSTRIES WHICH, IN TURN MUST HAVE HAD PRE-SCIENCE ON THE PLANDEMIC! There was no publicly available information in March to build such a book, and the industries they talk about must have been prescient, way ahead of the writers. Only the fact that this book existed in May 2020 is single-handedly proving there was a whole lot of awareness in some industries about the pandemic. Corroborated with all other evidence we’ve provided on this website, pandemic pre-planning, ergo pre-science, becomes a certitude.
Until plebs learn the GameStop lesson properly and start associating their financial power to break this classism and this information gatekeeping, we have to be happy with whatever meat we can chew from the bones they throw out. Luckily for you, I can show you how to suck a bone dry and use it to find more. It’s not going to be a full course, but it might become more than most people can load up.
Let’s start with the description (highlights are mine):
“Nanotechnology and nanomaterials can significantly address the many clinical and public healthcare challenges that have arisen from the coronavirus pandemic. This analysis examines in detail how nanotechnology and nanomaterials can help in the fight against this pandemic disease, and ongoing mitigation strategies. Nano-based products are currently being developed and deployed for the containment, diagnosis, and treatment of Covid-19.
Nanotechnology and nanomaterials promise:
Improved and virus disabling air filtration.
Low-cost, scalable detection methods for the detection of viral particles
Enhanced personal protection equipment (PPE) including facemasks.
New antiviral vaccine and drug delivery platforms.
New therapeutic solutions.
Report contents include:
Market analysis of nano-based diagnostic tests for COVID-19 including nanosensors incorporating gold nanoparticles, iron oxide nanoparticles, graphene, quantum dots, carbon quantum dots and carbon nanotubes. Market revenues adjusted to pandemic outcomes. In-depth company profiles. Companies profiled include Abbott Laboratories, Cardea, Ferrotec (USA) Corporation, E25Bio, Grolltex, Inc., Luminex Corporation etc.
Market analysis of antiviral and antimicrobial nanocoatings for surfaces including fabric (mask, gloves, doctor coats, curtains, bed sheet), metal (lifts, doors handle, nobs, railings, public transport), wood (furniture, floors and partition panels), concrete (hospitals, clinics and isolation wards) and plastics (switches, kitchen and home appliances).
Market revenues adjusted to pandemic outcomes. In-depth company profiles. Companies profiled include Advanced Materials-JTJ s.r.o., Bio-Fence, Bio-Gate AG, Covalon Technologies Ltd., EnvisionSQ, GrapheneCA, Integricote, Nano Came Co. Ltd., NanoTouch Materials, LLC, NitroPep and many more.
Market analysis of air-borne virus filtration including photocatalytic Nano-TiO2 filters, nanofiber filers, nanosilver, nanocellulose, graphene and carbon nanotube filtration. Market revenues adjusted to pandemic outcomes. In-depth company profiles. Companies profiled include G6 Materials, Daicel FineChem Ltd., NANOVIA s.r.o., Toray Industries, Inc., Tortech Nano Fibers etc.
Market analysis of nano-based facemask and other PPE products. Market revenues adjusted to pandemic outcomes. In-depth company profiles. Companies profiled include planarTECH LLC, RESPILON Group s. r. o., SITA, Sonovia Ltd. etc.
Nanotherapies and drug delivery vehicles currently being produced and clinical trials of vaccines for COVID-19. Market revenues adjusted to pandemic outcomes. In-depth company profiles. In-depth company profiles. Companies profiled include Arcturus Therapeutics, Inc., Arbutus Biopharma, BlueWillow Biologics, Elastrin Therapeutics Inc., EnGeneIC Ltd. etc.
Key scientific breakthroughs and developments that are underway right now.”
As you can see, the description alone offers enough evidence that embedding a whole range of nanotech in facemasks, tests, drugs and many other product.
You can bet your ass your new fridge connect to the internet and has some antimicrobial nanocoating that later will prove to be worse than DDT or asbestos, but at least it’s not gonna be Covid, right?
“You could put the computational power of the spaceship Voyager onto an object the size of a cell”. And that was back in 2018
Can we dig more clues though?
Sir, yes, sir!
I’m going to do something unusual and seemingly unpractical copying here the whole table of contents, just in case, because almost every chapter and figure title deserves to be a separate post on this website as well, besides the multitude of leads as to what to research.
1 RESEARCH SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY 1.1 Report scope 1.2 Research methodology
2 INTRODUCTION
3 DIAGNOSTIC TESTING 3.1 Nanotechnology and nanomaterials solutions 3.1.1 Current Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 3.1.2 Emerging Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 3.1.3 Nanosensors/nanoparticles (silver nanoclusters, Gold nanoparticles, Iron oxide nanoparticles, Quantum dot barcoding, nanowires, silica nanoparticles) 3.1.4 Carbon nanomaterials for diagnostic testing 3.2 Market revenues 3.2.1 Market estimates adjusted to pandemic demand, forecast to 2025. 3.3 Companies 3.4 Academic research
4 ANTIVIRAL AND ANTIMICROBIAL COATINGS AND SURFACES 4.1 Nanotechnology and nanomaterials solutions 4.1.1 Nanocoatings. 4.1.2 Applications 4.1.3 Anti-viral nanoparticles and nanocoatings 4.1.3.1 Reusable Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) 4.1.3.2 Wipe on coatings 4.1.4 Graphene-based coatings 4.1.4.1 Properties 4.1.4.2 Graphene oxide. 4.1.4.3 Reduced graphene oxide (rGO) 4.1.4.4 Markets and applications 4.1.5 Silicon dioxide/silica nanoparticles (Nano-SiO2) -based coatings 4.1.5.1 Properties. 4.1.5.2 Antimicrobial and antiviral activity 4.1.5.3 Easy-clean and dirt repellent 4.1.6 Nanosilver-based coatings. 4.1.6.1 Properties 4.1.6.2 Antimicrobial and antiviral activity 4.1.6.3 Markets and applications. 4.1.6.4 Commercial activity 4.1.7 Titanium dioxide nanoparticle-based coatings 4.1.7.1 Properties 4.1.7.2 Exterior and construction glass coatings 4.1.7.3 Outdoor air pollution 4.1.7.4 Interior coatings 4.1.7.5 Medical facilities 4.1.7.6 Wastewater Treatment 4.1.7.7 Antimicrobial coating indoor light activation 4.1.8 Zinc oxide nanoparticle-based coatings 4.1.8.1 Properties. 4.1.8.2 Antimicrobial activity 4.1.9 Nanocellullose (cellulose nanofibers and cellulose nanocrystals)-based coatings. 4.1.9.1 Properties 4.1.9.2 Antimicrobial activity 4.1.10 Carbon nanotube-based coatings 4.1.10.1 Properties 4.1.10.2 Antimicrobial activity 4.1.11 Fullerene-based coatings 4.1.11.1 Properties 4.1.11.2 Antimicrobial activity 4.1.12 Chitosan nanoparticle-based coatings 4.1.12.1 Properties 4.1.12.2 Wound dressings 4.1.12.3 Packaging coatings and films 4.1.12.4 Food storage 4.1.13 Copper nanoparticle-based coatings 4.1.13.1 Properties 4.1.13.2 Application in antimicrobial nanocoatings 4.2 Market revenues 4.2.1 Market revenues adjusted to pandemic demand, forecast to 2030. 4.3 Companies 4.4 Academic research
5 AIR-BORNE VIRUS FILTRATION 5.1 Nanotechnology and nanomaterials solutions (nanoparticles titanium dioxide, Polymeric nanofibers, Nanosilver, Nanocellulose, Graphene, Carbon nanotubes) 5.2 Market revenues 5.2.1 Market estimates adjusted to pandemic demand, forecast to 2025 5.3 Companies 5.4 Academic research
6 FACEMASKS AND OTHER PPE 6.1 Nanotechnology and nanomaterials solutions (Polymer nanofibers, Nanocellulose, Nanosilver, Graphene) 6.2 Market revenues 6.2.1 Market estimates adjusted to pandemic demand, forecast to 2025 6.3 Companies 6.4 Academic research
7 DRUG DELIVERY AND THERAPEUTICS 7.1 Nanotechnology and nanomaterials solutions 7.1.1 Products 7.1.2 Nanocarriers 7.1.3 Nanovaccines 7.2 Market revenues 7.2.1 Market estimates adjusted to pandemic demand, forecast to 2025 7.3 Companies 7.4 Academic research
8 REFERENCES
List of Tables Table 1. Current Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 Table 2. Development phases of diagnostic tests Table 3. Emerging Diagnostic Tests for COVID-19 Table 4. Nanoparticles for diagnostic testing-Types of nanoparticles, properties and application Table 5. Gold nanoparticle reagent suppliers list Table 6. Carbon nanomaterials for diagnostic testing-types, properties and applications Table 7. Global revenues for nanotech-based diagnostics and testing, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 8. Academic research in nano-based COVID-19 diagnostics and testing. Table 9: Anti-microbial and antiviral nanocoatings-Nanomaterials used, principles, properties and applications. Table 10. Nanomaterials utilized in antimicrobial and antiviral nanocoatings coatings-benefits and applications. Table 11: Properties of nanocoatings. Table 12: Antimicrobial and antiviral nanocoatings markets and applications Table 13: Nanomaterials used in nanocoatings and applications. Table 14: Graphene properties relevant to application in coatings Table 15. Bactericidal characters of graphene-based materials Table 16. Markets and applications for antimicrobial and antiviral nanocoatings graphene nanocoatings Table 17. Markets and applications for antimicrobial and antiviral nanosilver coatings. Table 18. Commercial activity in antimicrobial nanosilver nanocoatings Table 19. Antibacterial effects of ZnO NPs in different bacterial species. Table 20. Types of carbon-based nanoparticles as antimicrobial agent, their mechanisms of action and characteristics Table 21. Mechanism of chitosan antimicrobial action Table 22. Global revenues for antimicrobial and antiviral nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates. Table 23. Global revenues for Anti-fouling & easy clean nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates. Table 24. Global revenues for self-cleaning (bionic) nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 25. Global revenues for self-cleaning (photocatalytic) nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 26. Antimicrobial, antiviral and antifungal nanocoatings research in academia Table 27. Cellulose nanofibers (CNF) membranes Table 28: Comparison of CNT membranes with other membrane technologies Table 29. Nanomaterials in air-borne virus filtration-properties and applications Table 30. Global revenues for nanotech-based air-borne virus filtration, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 31: Oji Holdings CNF products Table 32. Academic research in nano-based air-borne virus filtration Table 33. Nanomaterials in facemasks and other PPE-properties and applications Table 34. Global revenues for nanotech-based facemasks and PPE, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 35. Academic research in nano-based facemasks and other PPE Table 36. Applications in drug delivery and therapeutics, by nanomaterials type-properties and applications Table 37. Nanotechnology drug products Table 38. List of antigens delivered by using different nanocarriers Table 39. Nanoparticle-based vaccines Table 40. Global revenues for nano-based drug delivery and therapeutics, 2019-2030, billion US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Table 41. Academic research in nano-based drug delivery and therapeutics to address COVD-19
List of Figures Figure 1. Anatomy of COVID-19 Virus Figure 2. Graphene-based sensors for health monitoring Figure 3. Schematic of COVID-19 FET sensor incorporating graphene Figure 4. Global revenues for nanotech-based diagnostics and testing, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 5. Printed graphene biosensors Figure 6. AGILE R100 system Figure 7. nano-screenMAG particles Figure 8. GFET sensors. Figure 9. DNA endonuclease-targeted CRISPR trans reporter (DETECTR) system Figure 10. SGTi-flex COVID-19 IgM/IgG Figure 11. Schematic of anti-viral coating using nano-actives for inactivation of any adhered virus on the surfaces Figure 12: Graphair membrane coating Figure 13: Antimicrobial activity of Graphene oxide (GO) Figure 14. Nano-coated self-cleaning touchscreen Figure 15: Hydrophobic easy-to-clean coating Figure 16 Anti-bacterial mechanism of silver nanoparticle coating. Figure 17: Mechanism of photocatalysis on a surface treated with TiO2 nanoparticles Figure 18: Schematic showing the self-cleaning phenomena on superhydrophilic surface. Figure 19: Titanium dioxide-coated glass (left) and ordinary glass (right). Figure 20: Self-Cleaning mechanism utilizing photooxidation. Figure 21: Schematic of photocatalytic air purifying pavement. Figure 22: Schematic of photocatalytic water purification Figure 23. Schematic of antibacterial activity of ZnO NPs Figure 24: Types of nanocellulose Figure 25. Mechanism of antimicrobial activity of carbon nanotubes Figure 26: Fullerene schematic Figure 27. TEM images of Burkholderia seminalis treated with (a, c) buffer (control) and (b, d) 2.0 mg/mL chitosan; (A: additional layer; B: membrane damage) Figure 28. Global revenues for antimicrobial and antiviral nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 29. Global revenues for anti-fouling and easy-to-clean nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 30. Global revenues for self-cleaning (bionic) nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 31. Global revenues for self-cleaning (photocatalytic) nanocoatings, 2019-2030, US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 32. Lab tests on DSP coatings Figure 33. GrapheneCA anti-bacterial and anti-viral coating Figure 34. Microlyte® Matrix bandage for surgical wounds Figure 35. Self-cleaning nanocoating applied to face masks. Figure 36. NanoSeptic surfaces. Figure 37. NascNanoTechnology personnel shown applying MEDICOAT to airport luggage carts Figure 38. Basic principle of photocatalyst TiO2 Figure 39. Schematic of photocatalytic indoor air purification filter. Figure 40. Global revenues for nanotech-based air-borne virus filtration, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates. Figure 41. Multi-layered cross section of CNF-nw Figure 42: Properties of Asahi Kasei cellulose nanofiber nonwoven fabric Figure 43: CNF nonwoven fabric Figure 44: CNF gel.. Figure 45. CNF clear sheets Figure 46. Graphene anti-smog mask Figure 47. Global revenues for nanotech-based facemasks and PPE, 2019-2030, millions US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates Figure 48. FNM’s nanofiber-based respiratory face mask.. Figure 49. ReSpimask® mask Figure 50. Schematic of different nanoparticles used for intranasal vaccination Figure 51. Global revenues for nano-based drug delivery and therapeutics, 2019-2030, billion US$, adjusted for COVID-19 related demand, conservative and high estimates.
So are you ready for your first “printed graphene bio-sensors”? Just picked a random item from the list above.
So what I’m going to do in the upcoming updates to this article is to follow every lead I got above, and I’m going to investigate every company they report on, as per their list below. You should do it too, independently, and compare your results with mine. It’s both science and investigative journalism, the juiciest combo.
Abbott Laboratories
Advanced Materials-JTJ s.r.o.
Arbutus Biopharma
Arcturus Therapeutics
Bio-Fence
Bio-Gate AG
BlueWillow Biologics
Cardea
Covalon Technologies Ltd.
Daicel FineChem Ltd.
E25Bio
Elastrin Therapeutics Inc.
EnGeneIC Ltd.
EnvisionSQ
Ferrotec (USA) Corporation
G6 Materials
GrapheneCA
Grolltex, Inc.
Integricote
Luminex Corporation
Nano Came Co. Ltd.
NanoTouch Materials, LLC
NANOVIA s.r.o.
NitroPep
RESPILON Group s. r. o.
SITA
Sonovia Ltd.
TECH LLC
Toray Industries
Tortech Nano Fibers
A taste of the future: Luminex, on of the companies listed above, makes PCR tests and stuff like magnetic micro-beads. They’ve just been bought for almost $2B by some Italians who can afford $1000+ books.
BESIDES THE DANGERS OF NANOBOTS, THIS INDUSTRY IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CANCER AND A TOP CO2 PRODUCER
Ian Illuminato of Friends of the Earth says consumers deserve a say in nanotech regulation. JIM THOMAS/ETC GROUP
Nanotechnology was supposed to revolutionize the world, making us healthier and producing cleaner energy. But it’s starting to look more like a nightmare.
Nanomaterials—tiny particles as little as 1/100,000 the width of a human hair—have quietly been used since the 1990s in hundreds of everyday products, everything from food to baby bottles, pills, beer cans, computer keyboards, skin creams, shampoo, and clothes.
But after years of virtually unregulated use, scientists are now starting to say the most commonly used nanoproducts could be harming our health and the environment.
One of the most widespread nanoproducts is titanium dioxide. More than 5,000 tonnes of it are produced worldwide each year for use in food, toothpaste, cosmetics, paint, and paper (as a colouring agent), in medication and vitamin capsules (as a nonmedicinal filler), and in most sunscreens (for its anti-UV properties).
In food, titanium-dioxide nanoparticles are used as a whitener and brightener in confectionary products, cheeses, and sauces. Other nanoparticles are employed in flavourings and “nutritional” additives, and to reduce fat content in “health” foods.
In the journal Cancer Research in 2009, environmental-health professor Robert Schiestl coauthored the first comprehensive study of how titanium-dioxide nanoparticles affect the genes of live animals. Mice in his study suffered DNA and chromosomal damage after drinking water with the nanoparticles for five days.
“It should be removed from food and drugs, and there’s definitely no reason for it in cosmetic products,” said cancer specialist Schiestl, who is also a professor of pathology and radiation oncology at UCLA’s school of medicine.
“The study shows effects [from the nanoparticles] on all kinds of genetic endpoints,” Schiestl told the Georgia Straight in a phone interview from his office. “All those are precursor effects of cancer. It’s a wake-up call to do something.”
After Schiestl’s study came out, he said, he started getting calls from nervous people saying they had discovered titanium dioxide was listed as a nonmedicinal ingredient in their prescription medication. “They wanted to know how to get it out,” he said. “I said, ”˜I don’t know how to get it out.’ ”
Schiestl’s study is cited by groups like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth in their calls for a moratorium on nanomaterials in food and consumer products.
“They were thought to be safe. Our study shows a lot of harm,” Schiestl said.
Nanoparticles can be harmful because they are so tiny they can pass deep into the skin, lungs, and blood. They are made by burning or crushing regular substances like titanium, silver, or iron until they turn into an ultrafine dust, which is used as a coating on, or ingredient in, various products.
Schiestl is now studying two other common nanoparticles, zinc oxide and cadmium oxide, and he has found they also cause DNA and chromosomal damage in mice.
Yet two years after Schiestl’s first study, titanium dioxide and other nanoparticles remain virtually unregulated in Canada and the U.S. Products containing nanoparticles still don’t have to be labelled, and manufacturers don’t have to prove they are safe for health or the environment.
In fact, only a small fraction of the hundreds of nanomaterials on the market have been studied to see if they are safe.
“The public has had little or no say on this. It’s mostly industry guiding government to make sure this material isn’t regulated,” said Ian Illuminato, a nanotech expert with Friends of the Earth, speaking from his home office in Victoria.
“Consumers aren’t given the right to avoid this. We think it’s dangerous and shouldn’t be in contact with the public and the environment,” he said.
Meanwhile, the number of products using nanomaterials worldwide has shot up sixfold in just a couple of years, from 212 in 2006 to more than 1,300 in 2011, according to a report in March by the Washington, D.C.–based Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies.
Those numbers are based on self-reporting by industry, and the real numbers are thought to be much higher. A Canadian government survey in 2009 found 1,600 nanoproducts available here, according to a report in December from the ETC Group, an Ottawa-based nonprofit that studies technology.
Nanotech is worth big money. More than $250 billion of nano-enabled products were produced globally in 2009, according to Lux Research, a Boston-based technology consultancy. That figure is expected to rise 10-fold, to $2.5 trillion, by 2015.
Lux Research estimated in 2006 that one-sixth of manufactured output would be based on nanotechnology by 2014.
Nanotech already appears to be affecting people’s health. In 2009, two Chinese factory workers died and another five were seriously injured in a plant that made paint containing nanoparticles.
The seven young female workers developed lung disease and rashes on their face and arms. Nanoparticles were found deep in the workers’ lungs.
“These cases arouse concern that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs,” wrote Chinese medical researchers in a 2009 study on the incident in the European Respiratory Journal.
When inhaled, some types of nanoparticles have been shown to act like asbestos, inflaming lung tissue and leading to cancer. In 2009, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Cancer Research declared titanium dioxide to be “possibly carcinogenic to humans” after studies found that inhaling it in nanoparticle form caused rats to develop lung cancer and mice to suffer organ damage.
Nanoparticles can also hurt the skin. All those nanoparticles in skin creams and sunscreens may be behind a rise in eczema rates in the developed world, according to a 2009 study in the journal Experimental Biology and Medicine. The study found that titanium-dioxide nanoparticles caused mice to develop eczema. The nanoparticles “can play a significant role in the initiation and/or progression of skin diseases”, the study said.
Schiestl said nanoparticles could also be helping to fuel a rise in the rates of some cancers. He wouldn’t make a link with any specific kind of cancer, but data from the U.S. National Cancer Institute show that kidney and renal-pelvis cancer rates rose 24 percent between 2000 and 2007 in the U.S., while the rates for melanoma of the skin went up 29 percent and thyroid cancer rose 54 percent.
Schiestl said workers who deal with nanoparticles could be the most affected. That concern prompted the International Union of Food, Farm, and Hotel Workers to call in 2007 for a moratorium on commercial uses of nanotechnology in food and agriculture.
But despite all the health risks, we may already have run out of time to determine many of nanotech’s health impacts, Schiestl said.
“Nanomaterial is so ubiquitous that it would be very difficult to do an epidemiological study because there would be no control group of people who don’t use it.”
What happens when nanoparticles get out into the environment in wastewater or when products are thrown out?
Nanosilver is the most common nanomaterial on the market. Its extraordinary antimicrobial properties have earned it a place in a huge variety of products, including baby pacifiers, toothpaste, condoms, clothes, and cutting boards.
Virginia Walker, a biology professor at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, decided to study nanosilver one day after a grad student said her mother had bought a new washing machine that doused clothes with silver nanoparticles to clean them better.
It sounded intriguing, Walker recalled thinking, but what would happen if nanosilver in the laundry water wound up in the environment? “What would it do to the bacterial communities out there?” she wondered.
On a whim, Walker decided to study the question. She figured the nanosilver would probably have no impact on beneficial microbes in the environment because any toxicity would be diluted.
“I did the experiment almost as a lark, not expecting to find anything,” she said by phone. “I hoped I would not find anything.”
In fact, Walker found that nanosilver was “highly toxic” to soil bacteria. It was especially toxic to one kind of nitrogen-fixing bacterium that is important to plant growth.
“If you had anything that was sensitive to nanoparticles, the last thing you would want is to have this microbe affected,” Walker said in a phone interview from her office.
The study prompted Walker to do more studies on nanoparticles. In one study now being reviewed for publication, one of her students found that mice exposed to nanoparticles developed skeletal abnormalities.
“People should have their eyes open. There are so many different nanoparticles, and the consequences of their use could be grave. We know almost nothing about these things,” Walker said.
Other scientists have raised concerns about nanosilver too. Some clothes makers now put it in socks and shirts, promising it will help control body odour. In a 2008 study in the Washington, D.C.–based journal Environmental Science and Technology, researchers took nanosilver-laced socks and washed them in water. They found the socks released up to half of their nanosilver into the water.
“If you start releasing ionic silver, it is detrimental to all aquatic biota. Once the silver ions get into the gills of fish, it’s a pretty efficient killer,” said study coauthor Troy Benn, a graduate student at Arizona State University, in a ScienceDaily.com story in 2008.
“I’ve spoken with a lot of people who don’t necessarily know what nanotechnology is, but they are out there buying products with nanoparticles in them.”
And what about the promise that nanotech could produce cleaner energy? The idea was that nanoparticles could make solar panels more efficient, be used as fuel additives to improve gas mileage, and make lighter cars and planes.
Most of the promised efficiency gains haven’t materialized, according to a 2010 report from Friends of the Earth. And it turns out that making nanomaterial is itself a huge energy guzzler.
A kilogram of carbon nanotubes—a nanoparticle used in cancer treatment and to strengthen sports equipment—requires an estimated 167 barrels of oil to produce, the Friends of the Earth report said.
Carbon nanotubes are “one of the most energy intensive materials known to humankind”, said a 2010 report to a symposium of the U.S.–based Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
That report said many nanoproducts may remain profitable despite their high energy cost only because of enormous government subsidies to the nanotech industry—$1.6 billion from the U.S. government last year.
But despite all this, regulation of nanotech remains glacially slow. The European Parliament voted nearly unanimously to recommend that nanoproducts be banned from food in 2009. But the European Commission rejected that recommendation last year, agreeing only that it may require labels on food containing nanomaterials. It will also require labels on cosmetics containing some nanoingredients starting in 2014.
Canada and the U.S. have yet to go even that far. At Health Canada, which regulates nanotechnology, a web page dealing with nanoproducts hasn’t been amended in four years and contains outdated information.
Health Canada spokesman Stéphane Shank did not return calls.
They used to say small is beautiful. But that was before small got scary. – Straight.com
NO MEANS NO, YES MEANS NO TOO
So yeah, that’s it for now, and if you think this is not enough to prove much, you can’t be more wrong, you’re probably bathing in dangerous or lethal nanotech as you read this, but feel free to return to this link in the coming days and weeks, I will be adding more evidence as I dig it out. I have about 100 leads there, it’s going to be a long process, friends!
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Graphene is the new asbestos. Plus injectable and mandatory. The rest Of the graphene oxide story is here, if you need more background, this post is a result of that investigation
NOTE: A needed clarification solicited by some readers: Yes, we knew of GRAPHENE COATING on masks in May, as seen below, which is horrible enough, even more so since not many followed Canada’s example in banning it. What this article brings new is a confirmation for GRAPHENE OXYDE, which is not very different in properties and health impact, but seems to be specific to these mRNA jabs, and so we complete the new revelations on graphene oxide and vaccines from La Quinta Columna.
In December 2019, a novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was first detected in Wuhan, in China’s Hubei province. On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) acknowledged and characterized the condition as a pandemic owing to the rapid spread of the virus across the globe infecting millions of individuals. Scientists are fighting tirelessly to find out ways to curb the spread of the virus and eradicate it.
SARS-CoV-2 is regarded as highly contagious and spreads rapidly through person-to-person contact. When an infected person sneezes or coughs, their respiratory droplets can easily infect a healthy individual. Besides enforcing social distancing, common citizens are encouraged to wear face masks to prevent droplets from getting through the air and infecting others.
Despite the efficiency of N95, a respiratory protective device, to filter out 95% of particles (≥0.3 μm), surgical facemasks are single-use, expensive, and often ill-fitting, which significantly reduces their effectiveness. Nanoscience researchers have envisioned a new respirator facemask that would be highly efficient, recyclable, customizable, reusable, and have antimicrobial and antiviral properties.
Nanotechnology in the Production of Surgical Masks
Nanoparticles are extensively used for their novel properties in various fields of science and technology.
In the current pandemic situation, scientists have adopted this technology to produce the most efficient masks. Researchers have used a novel electrospinning technology in the production of nanofiber membranes. These nanofiber membranes are designed to have various regulating properties such as fiber diameter, porosity ratio, and many other microstructural factors that could be utilized to produce high-quality face masks. Researchers in Egypt have developed face masks using nanotechnology with the help of the following components:
Polylactic acid
This transparent polymeric material is derived from starch and carbohydrate. It has high elasticity and is biodegradable. Researchers found that electrospun polylactic acid membranes possess high prospects for the production of filters efficient in the isolation of environmental pollutants, such as atmospheric aerosol and submicron particulates dispersed in the air.
Despite its various biomedical applications (implant prostheses, catheters, tissue scaffolds, etc.), these polylactic membranes are brittle. Therefore, applying frequent pressure during their usage could produce cracks that would make them permeable to viral particles. However, this mechanical drawback can be fixed using other supportive nanoparticles that could impart mechanical strength, antimicrobial and antiviral properties, which are important in making face masks effective in the current pandemic situation.
Copper oxide nanoparticles
These nanoparticles have many biomedical applications, for example, infection control, as they can inhibit the growth of microorganisms (fungi, bacteria) and viruses. It has also been reported that SARS-CoV-2 has lower stability on the metallic copper surface than other materials, such as plastic or stainless steel. Therefore, the integration of copper oxide nanoparticles in a nanofibrous polymeric filtration system would significantly prevent microbial adherence onto the membrane.
Graphene oxide nanoparticles
These nanoparticles possess exceptional properties, such as high toughness, superior electrical conductivity, biocompatibility, and antiviral and antibacterial activity. Such nanoparticles could be utilized in the production of masks.
Cellulose acetate
This is a semi-synthetic polymer derived from cellulose. It is used in ultrafiltration because of its biocompatibility, high selectivity, and low cost. It is also used in protective clothing, tissue engineering, and nanocomposite applications.
With the help of the aforesaid components, researchers in Egypt have designed a novel respirator filter mask against SARS-CoV-2. This mask is based on a disposable filter piece composed of the unwoven nanofibers comprising multilayers of a) copper oxide nanoparticles, graphene oxide nanoparticles, and polylactic acid, or b) copper oxide nanoparticles, graphene oxide nanoparticles, and cellulose acetate, with the help of electrospun technology and high-power ultrasonication. These facemasks are reusable, i.e., washable in water and could be sterilized using an ultraviolet lamp (λ = 250 nm).
SOURCE WORKING TO GET CONFIRMATION FROM THESE GUYS TOOSOURCE
Graphene-coated face masks: COVID-19 miracle or another health risk?
As a COVID-19 and medical device researcher, I understand the importance of face masks to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. So I am intrigued that some mask manufacturers have begun adding graphene coatings to their face masks to inactivate the virus. Many viruses, fungi and bacteria are incapacitated by graphene in laboratory studies, including feline coronavirus.
Because SARS CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, can survive on the outer surface of a face mask for days, people who touch the mask and then rub their eyes, nose, or mouth may risk getting COVID-19. So these manufacturers seem to be reasoning that graphene coatings on their reusable and disposable face masks will add some anti-virus protection. But in March, the Quebec provincial government removed these masks from schools and daycare centers after Health Canada, Canada’s national public health agency, warned that inhaling the graphene could lead to asbestos-like lung damage.
Is this move warranted by the facts, or an over-reaction? To answer that question, it can help to know more about what graphene is, how it kills microbes, including the SARS-COV-2 virus, and what scientists know so far about the potential health impacts of breathing in graphene.
How does graphene damage viruses, bacteria and human cells?
Graphene is a thin but strong and conductive two-dimensional sheet of carbon atoms. There are three ways that it can help prevent the spread of microbes:
Microscopic graphene particles have sharp edges that mechanically damage viruses and cells as they pass by them.
Graphene is negatively charged with highly mobile electrons that electrostaticly trap and inactivate some viruses and cells.
Dr Joe Schwarcz explains why Canada banned graphene masks. Doesn’t say why other countries didn’t. When two governments have opposing views on a poison, one is criminally wrong and someone has to pay.
Why graphene may be linked to lung injury
Researchers have been studying the potential negative impacts of inhaling microscopic graphene on mammals. In one 2016 experiment, mice with graphene placed in their lungs experienced localized lung tissue damage, inflammation, formation of granulomas (where the body tries to wall off the graphene), and persistent lung injury, similar to what occurs when humans inhale asbestos. A different study from 2013 found that when human cells were bound to graphene, the cells were damaged.
In order to mimic human lungs, scientists have developed biological models designed to simulate the impact of high concentration aerosolized graphene—graphene in the form of a fine spray or suspension in air—on industrial workers. One such study published in March 2020 found that a lifetime of industrial exposure to graphene induced inflammation and weakened the simulated lungs’ protective barrier.
It’s important to note that these models are not perfect options for studying the dramatically lower levels of graphene inhaled from a face mask, but researchers have used them in the past to learn more about these sorts of exposures. A study from 2016 found that a small portion of aerosolized graphene nanoparticles could move down a simulated mouth and nose passages and penetrate into the lungs. A 2018 study found that brief exposure to a lower amount of aerosolized graphene did not notably damage lung cells in a model.
From my perspective as a researcher, this trio of findings suggest that a little bit of graphene in the lungs is likely OK, but a lot is dangerous.
Although it might seem obvious to compare inhaling graphene to the well-known harms of breathing in asbestos, the two substances behave differently in one key way. The body’s natural system for disposing of foreign particles cannot remove asbestos, which is why long-term exposure to asbestos can lead to the cancer mesothelioma. But in studies using mouse models to measure the impact of high dose lung exposure to graphene, the body’s natural disposal system does remove the graphene, although it occurs very slowly over 30 to 90 days.
The findings of these studies shed light on the possible health impacts of breathing in microscopic graphene in either small or large doses. However, these models don’t reflect the full complexity of human experiences. So the strength of the evidence about either the benefit of wearing a graphene mask, or the harm of inhaling microscopic graphene as a result of wearing it, is very weak.
No obvious benefit but theoretical risk
Graphene is an intriguing scientific advance that may speed up the demise of COVID-19 virus particles on a face mask. In exchange for this unknown level of added protection, there is a theoretical risk that breathing through a graphene-coated mask will liberate graphene particles that make it through the other filter layers on the mask and penetrate into the lung. If inhaled, the body may not remove these particles rapidly enough to prevent lung damage.
The health department in Quebec is erring on the side of caution. Children are at very low risk of COVID-19 mortality or hospitalization, although they may infect others, so the theoretical risk from graphene exposure is too great. However, adults at high immediate risk of harm from contracting COVID-19 may choose to accept a small theoretical risk of long-term lung damage from graphene in exchange for these potential benefits.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
When I first heard of blood clots in vaccinated people, I instantly recalled of a similar problem occurring while the mRNA platform was in study for a cancer therapy, by Moderna, I think, prior to Covid. I couldn’t find that piece of information again, but during the research I discovered something even more revealing.
Blood clots in subjects of Covid gene therapies are very likely caused by defective coatings in magnetic particles used for magnetofection, which leads to cell-clogging.
Silviu “Silview” Costinescu
It has been more than plausibly theorized that the explanation for the magnetism in vaxxers is magnetofection, a method of transfection using magnetic fields.
Magnetofection is a very effective way of transfecting plasmid DNA into a variety of primary cells including primary neurons which are known to be notoriously difficult to transfect and very sensitive to toxicity.
For coincidence theorists, let me just add that the inventor of transfection is one of mRNA jabs inventors, Dr. Robert Malone, who has warned FDA on the dangers of these technologies, according to himself.
Scientifically trained at UC Davis, UC San Diego, and at the Salk Institute Molecular Biology and Virology laboratories, Dr. Robert Malone is an internationally recognized scientist (virology, immunology, molecular biology) and is known as one of the original inventors of mRNA vaccination and DNA Vaccination. His discoveries in mRNA non viral delivery systems are considered the key to the current COVID-19 vaccine strategies. Dr. Malone holds numerous fundamental domestic and foreign patents in the fields of gene delivery, delivery formulations, and vaccines. Dr. Malone has close to 100 peer-reviewed publications and published abstracts and has over 11,477 citations of his peer reviewed publications, as verified by Google Scholar. His google scholar ranking is “outstanding” for impact factors. He has been an invited speaker at over 50 conferences, has chaired numerous conferences and he has sat on or served as chairperson on numerous NIAID and DoD study sections.
Magnetofection basically involves attaching DNA onto a magnetic nanoparticle coated with a cationic polymer like polyethylenimine (PEI) [254,255]. The magnetic nanoparticles are generally made up of a biodegradable substance like iron oxide, and its coating onto the polymeric particle is done by salt-induced colloidal aggregation. These prepared nanoparticles are then localized in the target organ by the application of an external magnetic field, which allows the delivery of attached DNA to the target organ, as shown in Figure 3.5. This method also increases the uptake of DNA into target cells as the contact time between the target organ and magnetic nanoparticles increases. In addition, the magnetic field pulls the magnetic nanoparticles into the target cells, which also helps to increase the uptake of DNA [256,257]. In addition, the standard transfection using viral or nonviral vectors is also increased by the magnetofection.
This is a more powerful method of controlled and targeted delivery for gene therapies, in layman terms.
The problem with it is that it’s been proven to be very dangerous for lab animals and it’s not authorized for human use.
From Dr. Jane Ruby m as well as from Pfizer and Moderna we find out how these particles are packaged into the injectable concocts:
“Stew Peters interviews Dr Jane Ruby who confirms the magnetic effects that Covid vaxxed people have experienced. She says it is a deliberately made substance added to the vaccines. This shows criminal intent. It was added because it is an aggressive delivery system to get it into EVERY cell of your body. The process is called ‘Magnetofection’ and is available in scientific literature such as Pubmed. It concentrates the mRNA into people’s cells and forces your body to make these synthetic mRNA instructions even in places where they shouldn’t be located within the body.
It is a ‘forced delivery system’ and is called by the acronym of SPIONS – Supramagnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles. These particles use a lipid nanoparticle envelope to gain entry into the cells. It is done this way to protect mRNA because mRNA is easily degraded and this is also why the Pfizer vaccines are refrigerated at -70 degrees Fahrenheit as another form of protection.
There is a German company on the internet called ‘Chemicell’ which sells different chemicals which can make these magnetic fields around your molecules. You can buy 200 microgram vials of their product called, ‘Polymag’. These are developed and sold for research purposes only and are not to be used for human diagnostic or as a component of any drug intended for humans.
However at least Pfizer and Moderna are using this substance in their vaccines. Therefore it is vital that anyone thinking of taking a shot, obtain a full ingredient list to have full informed consent and to postpone getting the Covid Jab, as each day brings further information into the public domain. Dr Ruby is asked if this was deliberate by the manufacturers and answers that this substance doesn’t occur naturally. It had to be added into the vaccine.
Many have spoken about the Polyethelene Glycol or PEG which enables the vaccines to get through water based cell membranes as this is lipophilic – attracted to fats – but there are other places in the body where ‘God and Nature’ hadn’t intended these substances to be, but by using this delivery system of supra nanoparticles, you are creating a super delivery system which forces these substances into areas where they are not meant to be.”
. 2019 Nov;13(9):1197-1209. doi: 10.1080/17435390.2019.1650969. Epub 2019 Aug 22.
Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) modulate hERG ion channel activity
Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) are widely used in various biomedical applications, such as diagnostic agents in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), for drug delivery vehicles and in hyperthermia treatment of tumors.
Although the potential benefits of SPIONs are considerable, there is a distinct need to identify any potential cellular damage associated with their use.
Since human ether à go-go-related gene (hERG) channel, a protein involved in the repolarization phase of cardiac action potential, is considered one of the main targets in the drug discovery process, we decided to evaluate the effects of SPIONs on hERG channel activity and to determine whether the oxidation state, the dimensions and the coating of nanoparticles (NPs) can influence the interaction with hERG channel.
Using patch clamp recordings, we found that SPIONs inhibit hERG current and this effect depends on the coating of NPs. In particular, SPIONs with covalent coating aminopropylphosphonic acid (APPA) have a milder effect on hERG activity. We observed that the time-course of hERG channel modulation by SPIONs is biphasic, with a transient increase (∼20% of the amplitude) occurring within the first 1-3 min of perfusion of NPs, followed by a slower inhibition. Moreover, in the presence of SPIONs, deactivation kinetics accelerated and the activation and inactivation I-V curves were right-shifted, similarly to the effect described for the binding of other divalent metal ions (e.g. Cd2+ and Zn2+).
Finally, our data show that a bigger size and the complete oxidation of SPIONs can significantly decrease hERG channel inhibition.
Taken together, these results support the view that Fe2+ ions released from magnetite NPs may represent a cardiac risk factor, since they alter hERG gating and these alterations could compromise the cardiac action potential.
MIT SAYS IT’S NOT JUST SPIONS, BUT ALSO LIONS:
HDT Bio, the biotechnology company in Seattle, has an alternative solution. Working with Deborah Fuller, a microbiologist at the University of Washington, it’s pioneering a different kind of protective bubble for the mRNAs. If it works, it would mean that an mRNA vaccine for covid-19 could be stable in a regular fridge for at least a month, or at room temperature for up to three weeks.
Their method: instead of encasing the mRNA in a lipid nanoparticle, they’ve engineered molecules called lipid inorganic nanoparticles, or LIONs. The inorganic portion of the LION is a positively charged metal particle—so far they’ve been using iron oxide. The positively charged metal would bind to the negatively charged mRNA, which wraps around the LION. The resulting particle is solid, which creates more stability and reduces the reliance on refrigeration.
A real-world study by the CDC backs up the clinical trial data from both mRNA vaccines—although the rise of the UK variant in the US is a cloud on the horizon.
“The cold chain has always been an issue for [the] distribution of vaccines, and it’s only magnified in a pandemic.”
Deborah Fuller
HDT Bio initially developed LIONs to treat liver cancer and tumors in the head and neck, but when the pandemic hit, they pivoted to trying the particles with mRNA vaccines. Early preclinical trials in nonhuman primates showed that the LION, combined with an mRNA vaccine for covid-19, worked as they’d hoped.
Carter of HDT Bio says that in an ideal situation, LIONs could be sent to clinics worldwide in advance, to be stored at room temperature or in a regular refrigerator, before being mixed into vaccine vials at clinics. Alternatively, the two could be premixed at a manufacturing facility. Either way, this method would make doses stable for at least a month in a regular refrigerator.
Fuller says that some scientists have criticized the need for two vials—one for the LION and another for mRNA before they’re mixed together. “But I think the advantages of having an effective product more amenable to worldwide distribution outweighs those negatives,” she says.
HDT Bio is applying for permission to start human clinical trials in the US and is looking to start clinical trials in India this spring. In the US, it faces some unique challenges in FDA regulation, since the LION particles would be considered a drug separate from the vaccine. Regulators in Brazil, China, South Africa, and India—where HDT Bio is hoping to launch its product—don’t consider the LION a drug because it isn’t the active component, says Carter, meaning that there would be one less layer of regulation than in the US.
For now, it’s still very much an early-stage technology, says Michael Mitchell, a bioengineer at the University of Pennsylvania who works on drug delivery systems. He stresses that more research should reveal whether the iron oxide causes any side effects. – MIT Technology Review
Now here’s the bombshell:
This is no secret to experts, but it’s been revealed to me in the video presentation below, made in 2017 by reputed Prof Diana Borca, from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, who uses magnetic nanoparticles to treat diseases. In order to get the magnetic nanoparticles into the right places, scientists like Diana have to figure out what kind of coating the nanoparticles need. Coatings help the nanoparticles get to the cells they want to treat without hurting the healthy cells. And if the coating of the magnetic particles breaks, the result is “CLOGGING”, as Borca explains below. Which can translate as clotting, if in blood. Who knows what they lead to when in other organs, strokes maybe?
So I think the only thing we’re missing from the puzzle is official hard evidence that they used magnetofection or magnetogentic methods.
But if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, only the government needs government papers to confirm it’s a duck
What each and every one of you can do until we find that evidence?
On screens we’re sound. Please help with the statistical and empirical tests!
Please help finding out if there’s a strong data and empirical correlation between blood clots and magnetism. Anyone you know that has been jabbed and experienced blood clots, heart or circulatory problems needs to take the magnet challenge right now! A strong enough correlation indicates causation. If you make such a test, please reach us on our socials and communicate the result, whether positive or negative! Also VAERS is exploding with reports of magnetism, please help analyzing the data to see if it pairs with clotting. Thank you!
Also food for thought: isn’t this also related to the problems these GMO dupes experience during air-travel? I’ll investigate this in a soon coming report.
This chapter highlighted magnetofection, magnetic patterning of cells, and construction of 3D tissue-like structures. Among them, Mag-TE for constructing 3D structures has been extensively studied, and various kinds of other tissues such as retinal pigment epithelial cell sheets,102 MSC sheets,44 and cardiomyocyte sheets,46 have been already generated. Tubular structures consisting of heterotypic layers of endothelial cells, smooth muscle cells, and fibroblasts have also been created.43 In this approach, magnetically labeled cells formed a cell sheet onto which a cylindrical magnet was rolled, which was removed after a tubular structure was formed. If these processes can be scaled up, there is great potential for these techniques in the treatment of a variety of diseases and defects.
In the translational research, toxicology of functional magnetite nanoparticles is an important issue. The main requisite for a cell-labeling technique is to preserve the normal cell behavior. As for biocompatibility of MCLs, no toxic effects against proliferation of several cell types were observed within the range of magnetite concentrations tested (e.g., human keratinocytes,63 < 50 pg-magnetite/cell; HUVECs,41 HAECs,42 human dermal fibroblasts,41 human smooth muscle cells,43 mouse fibroblast cells,43 canine urothelial cells,43 human MSCs,44 and rat MSCs45 < 100 pg/cell). Moreover, MCLs did not compromise MSC differentiation44,45 or electrical connections of cardiomyocytes.46 In addition, an in vivo toxicity of magnetite nanoparticles has been extensively studied. As an MRI contrast agent, ResovistR was first applied clinically for detecting liver cancer, since ResovistR is taken up rapidly by the reticuloendothelial system such as Kupffer cells of the liver compared with the uptake by cancer cells of the liver. In a preliminary study,103 the authors investigated the toxicity of systemically administered MCLs (90 mg, i.p.) in mice; none of the 10 mice injected with MCLs died during the study. Transient accumulation of magnetite was observed in the liver and spleen of the mice, but the magnetite nanoparticles had been cleared from circulation by hepatic Kupffer cells in the spleen by the 10th day after administration.103
In conclusion, magnetic nanoparticles have been developed into “functional” magnetite nanoparticles which are highly promising tools for a wide spectrum of applications in tissue engineering. The proven lack of toxicity of the functional magnetite nanoparticles is expected to provide exciting tools in the near future for clinical tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.View chapter
One of the pioneers using magnetofection for in vitro applications was Lin et al.91 There are various cationic magnetic nanoparticles types that have the capacity to bind nucleotidic material on their surface. With this method, the magnetic nanoparticles are concentrated in the target cells by the influence of an external magnetic field (EMF). Normally, the internalization is accomplished by endocytosis or pinocytosis, so the membrane architecture stays intact. This is an advantage over other physical transfection methods. Other advantages are the low vector dose needed to reach saturation yield and the short incubation time needed to achieve high transfection efficiency. Moreover, with the application of an EMF, cells transfected with magnetic nanoparticles can be used to target the region of interest in vivo.
2.2.1.1 Iron Oxide Nanoparticles
The magnetic nanoparticles most used in magnetofection include the iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs). IONPs are biodegradable and not cytotoxic and can be easily functionalized with PEI, PEG, or PLL. Poly-l-lysine-modified iron oxide nanoparticles (IONP–PLL) are good candidates as DNA and microRNA (miRNA) vectors because they bind and protect nucleic acids and showed high transfection efficiency in vitro. In addition, they are highly biocompatible in vivo.
Chen et al.92 used human vascular endothelial growth factor siRNA bound to superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) and it was capable of hepatocellular carcinoma growth inhibition in nude mice. Moreover, Li et al.93 demonstrated that the intravenous injection of IONP–PLL carrying NM23-H1 (a tumor suppressor gene) plasmid DNA significantly extended the survival time of an experimental pulmonary metastasis mouse model.
Another advantage of this kind of nanoparticles is that they can be used as MRI agents. Chen et al.94 bound siRNA to PEG-PEI SPIONs together to a gastric cancer-associated CD44v6 single-chain variable fragment. This bound permitted both cancer cell’s transfection and their visualization by MRI.
But those complexes might be used for cell therapies as well. Schade et al.95 used iron oxide magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) to bind miRNA and transfect human mesenchymal stem cells. As the binding between the MNPs and PEI took place via biotin-streptavidin conjugation, these particles cannot pass the nuclear barrier, so they are good candidates to deliver miRNA, as it exerts its function in the cytosol. They functionalized the surface nanoparticles with PEI and were able to obtain a better transfection than PEI 72 h after transfection. Moreover, they demonstrated that magnetic polyplexes provided a better long-term effect, also when included inside of the stem cells.View chapter
Another attempt to apply magnetic IONPs is the so-called magnetofection (MF) approach. Key factors enabling this method are IONPs that are coupled to vector DNA and guided by the influence of an external magnetic field. By this means, DNA can be transfected into cells of interest. One possibility to enable enhanced binding capabilities of the negatively charged DNA to magnetic IONP beads is the coating IONPs with a positively charged material such as polyethylenimine. The efficiency of the vectors has hence shown to increase up to several thousand times (Scherer et al., 2002). The above depicted engagement of IONPs in MF has shown to be universally applicable to viral and nonviral vectors. This is mostly because it is very rapid and simple. Furthermore, it is a very attractive approach since it yields saturation level transfection at low-dose in vitro (Krotz et al., 2003). Fernandes and Chari (2016) have demonstrated an approach delivering DNA minicircles (mcDNA) to neural stem cells (NSCs) by means of MF. DNA minicircles are small DNA vectors encoding essential gene expression components but devoid of a bacterial backbone, thereby reducing construct size versus conventional plasmids. This could be shown to be very beneficial for the use of genetically engineered NSC transplant populations in regenerative neurology. The aim was to improve the release of biomolecules in ex vivo gene therapy. It could be demonstrated that MF of DNA minicircles is very safe and provided for sustained gene expression for up to 4 weeks. It is described to have high potential as clinically translatable genetic modification strategy for cell therapy (Fernandes and Chari, 2016). The last in vitro application for magnetic nanoparticles to be presented in this chapter will be tissue repair.View chapter
Two methods rely on the application of a magnetic field for gene transfer. Magnetofection uses magnetic nanoparticles coated with DNA in presence of a magnetic field. The nucleic acid-nanoparticle complexes are driven toward and into the target cells by magnetic force application. Gene transfer is enhanced by magnetofection as DNA-loaded particles are guided and maintained in close contact with the target cells. Cellular uptake through endocytosis is thus increased as well. The process has been mainly applied to cultured cells and has been proven more efficient than other chemical methods in some cases.8 The second method is magnetoporation in which membrane permeability is increased, triggered by the applied magnetic field.9View chapter
For gene therapy applications, magnetic particles are generally used for increasing the transfection efficiencies of cultured cells, a technique known as magnetofection [91–104] in which magnetic particles and nucleic acids are mixed together and then added to the cell culture media. The nucleic acid-bound magnetic particles then move from the media to the cell surface upon the application of an external magnetic force, as shown in Figure 9.1. The principle advantage of this approach is the rapid sedimentation of the gene-therapeutic agent onto the target area, thereby reducing the time and dose of vector to achieve highly efficient transfection, with lower cell cytotoxicity.
In in vivo magentofection, the magnetic field is focused over the target site. This method has the potential not only to enhance transfection efficiency but also to target the therapeutic gene to a specific organ or site, as shown in Figure 9.2.
Generally, magnetic particles carrying therapeutic genes are injected intravenously. As the particles flow through the bloodstream, they are captured at the target site using very strong, high-gradient external magnets. Once they are captured, the magnetic particles carrying the therapeutic gene are taken up by the tissue, followed by release of the gene via enzymatic cleavage of cross-linked molecules or degradation of the polymer matrix. If DNA is embedded inside or within the coating material, the magnetic field must be applied to heat the particles and release the gene from the magnetic carrier [105].View chapter
In an attempt to address the transient damage caused by the invasive methods mentioned above (i.e., hydrodynamic injection and electroporation), magnetofection techniques have been introduced. This technique uses the physical method of a magnetic field to direct the deliver of genetic material to the desired target site. The concept involves attaching DNA to a magnetic nanoparticle usually consisting of a biodegradable substance such as iron oxide and coated with cationic polymer such as PEI (Mulens, Morales, & Barber, 2013). These magnetic nanoparticles are then targeted to the tissue through a magnetic field generated by an external magnet. The magnetic nanoparticles are pulled into the target cells increasing the uptake of DNA. This technique is noninvasive and can precisely target the genetic material to the desired site while increasing gene expression. The drawback to magnetofection is the need to formulate magnetic nanoparticles complexed with naked DNA, as well as the need for strong external magnets.View chapter
Stimulus-guided delivery is a non-invasive and convenient approach for clinical applications. Several methods in this category, including electroporation, ultrasound and magnetofection, have been used to deliver siRNAs to specific tissue sites. Owing to constraints associated with application of external stimuli under in vivo conditions, most such studies have been done in vitro. However, in vivo applications of stimulus-guided delivery of anticancer siRNAs are increasingly being reported.
Electroporation has been studied as a means for facilitating in vivo delivery of anticancer siRNAs. Notably, an electroporation method employing a new type of ‘plate and fork’ type electrode has been applied in vivo in mice (Takei et al., 2008). In this application, a chemically modified form of VEGF-specific siRNA in phosphate-buffered saline was intratumorally administered at three doses of 0.08, 0.17 and 0.33 mg/kg, or intravenously administered at a single dose of 6.6 mg/kg. Then, an electronic pulse was applied to a pair of plate and fork electrodes pre-inserted into PC-3-xenografted tumour tissues. Application of electroporation inhibited tumour growth to a similar degree after 0.17 mg/kg intratumoral and 6.6 mg/kg intravenous doses, in each case producing a 40-fold greater inhibitory effect than a local dose. Notably, the duration of the antitumour effect was maintained for 20 days after a single injection via the local or systemic route.
Magnetically guided in vivo siRNA delivery has been investigated using magnetic crystal-lipid nanostructures (Namiki et al., 2009). In this study, a magnetitenanocrystal was coated with oleic acid and a cationic lipid shell, and complexed to EGFR-specific siRNA. Following intravenous administration to mice, siRNA complexed to the magnetic core-encapsulated cationic lipid shell showed a rank order of tissue distribution of spleen followed by liver and lung. For in vivo magnetofection, titanium nitride-coated magnets were internally implanted under the skin peripheral to tumour lesions or were externally placed onto the skin. Mice were intravenously given a total of eight 0.3 mg/kg doses of siRNA complexed to cationic nanoshells administered every other day. Both internal and external applications of a magnetic field reduced tumour (MKN-74 or NUGC-4) volume by 50% compared with the control group 28 days after the initiation of treatment.
Ultrasound-guided siRNA delivery has also been used to increase the in vivo delivery of siRNAs. Ultrasound can produce cavitation, thereby resulting in transient disruptions in cell membranes within tissues (Vandenbroucke et al., 2008). Few studies have addressed the in vivo antitumour effects of ultrasound-guided anticancer siRNAs. To date, most such studies have evaluated the feasibility of the method using siRNAs specific for reporter genes, such as enhanced green fluorescent protein (Negishi et al., 2008). In this latter study, PEG-modified cationic lipid nanobubbles entrapping the ultrasound imaging gas perfluoropropane were complexed with enhanced green fluorescent protein-specific siRNA and intramuscularly administered at a dose of 0.15 mg/kg to mice transfected 1 day prior with enhanced green fluorescent protein-encoding plasmid DNA. Three days after siRNA injection and ultrasound application, fluorescent protein levels at the injection sites were reduced.
Although the feasibility of in vivo applications of stimulus-guided delivery of anticancer siRNA has been demonstrated and positive results have been reported, the ultimate success of these delivery methods may depend on the development of devices capable of providing a sufficient stimulus to tumour tissues deep within the body. Moreover, for in vivosystemic administration, delivery systems that carry both external stimulus-responsive agents and siRNA must meet more general requirements, such as in vivo stability, low toxicity and enhanced tumour tissue accumulation. With the concurrent progress in medical device bioengineering and siRNA delivery technologies, it can be expected that stimulus-guided strategies will be used in more diverse in vivo applications to facilitate anticancer siRNA delivery.View chapter
Various physical methods of gene delivery have been developed, and each one has its own merits and demerits. EP is particularly important for introducing DNA to superficial areas, but to deliver DNA to particular organs, surgery is required. To overcome this problem and to enhance the introduction of gene vectors into cells [254], the new means of physical gene delivery is magnetofection, which delivers DNA to the target organ, using the magnetic field. Magnetofection basically involves attaching DNA onto a magnetic nanoparticle coated with a cationic polymer like polyethylenimine (PEI) [254,255]. The magnetic nanoparticles are generally made up of a biodegradable substance like iron oxide, and its coating onto the polymeric particle is done by salt-induced colloidal aggregation. These prepared nanoparticles are then localized in the target organ by the application of an external magnetic field, which allows the delivery of attached DNA to the target organ, as shown in Figure 3.5. This method also increases the uptake of DNA into target cells as the contact time between the target organ and magnetic nanoparticles increases. In addition, the magnetic field pulls the magnetic nanoparticles into the target cells, which also helps to increase the uptake of DNA [256,257]. In addition, the standard transfection using viral or nonviral vectors is also increased by the magnetofection.
The magnetofection has some drawbacks: a particle size below 50 nm renders it not suitable for magnetic targeting and too large a particle size (more than 5 μm) retards the entry of magnetic nanoparticles inside the blood capillaries. The blood flow rate also affects the transfection efficacy of this method; for example, the flow rate of around 20 cm/s in the human aorta makes the transfection tricky. The external magnetic flux density and gradient decreases at a distance from the magnetic pole, which also affects the transfection efficacy.
Primary endothelial cells are effectively transfected by magnetofection [254,258]. In addition, magnetofection is effective for in vitro and in vivo delivery of DNA to target cells like those in the GI tract and blood vessels [254], and for antisense ODNs delivery [259]. Other applications include advances in ex vivo tissue engineering, development of tumor vaccines, localized therapy for cancer, and cardiovascular therapy [260]. Significant enhancement in reporter gene expression in a short time has been observed in the ex vivo porcine airway model; this may be attributed to an increase in contact time with mucociliary cells, thereby reducing their clearance from the target site [261]. A study carried out using magnetic albumin microspheres with entrapped doxorubicin in the rat model for tumors resulted in a high level of tumor remission in animals compared to animals treated with free doxorubicin, placebo microspheres, or nonlocalized doxorubicin microspheres, which resulted in considerable enlargement in tumor size associated with metastases and subsequent death [262,263]. The magnetic nanoparticles with doxorubicin are also under clinical trial [264]. Magnetofection has been widely used for viral and nonviral vectors and also for the delivery of DNA, nucleic acids, and siRNA [260,265,266].
In conclusion, magnetofection is an efficient system for gene delivery and has the potential to bring in vitro and in vivo transgene transfection in the target organ. The limitations of this delivery system are overcome by the application of proper formulations and novel magnetic field skills.View chapter
Nonviral vectors group a heterogeneous variety of elements that can be classified as naked DNA or RNA, liposome-DNA complexes (lipoplexes), and polymer-DNA complexes (polyplexes). Since the beginning of the gene therapy field, nonviral vectors have received significant attention due to their reduced pathogenicity, lower immunotoxicity, and low cost and ease of production over viral approaches. To date, a myriad of delivery systems grouped as physical methods and chemical carriers have been reported. Physical methods such as direct injection, ballistic DNA, electroporation, sonoporation, photoporation, magnetofection, hydroporation, and mechanical massage, employ physical force to cross the cell membrane barrier. Chemical carriers such as (1) inorganic particles (calcium phosphate, silica, gold, but also magnetic nanoparticles, fullerenes, carbon nanotubes, quantum dots, and supramolecular systems); (2) lipid-based (cationic lipids, lipid-nano emulsions, solid lipid nanoparticles); (3) peptide-based; and (4) polymer-based (i.e., polyethylenimine, chitosan, dendrimers, and polymethacrylate) form small size complexes with nucleic acids to help them cross the cell membrane efficiently (see ref [29] for extensive review). However, despite the large number of different nonviral vectors still, there is poor transduction efficiency of the target cells as well as low and transient transgene expression. Due to it, nonviral vectors account for less than 25% of the clinical assays, mainly for cancer and cardiovascular diseases, being naked/plasmid DNA (452 clinical assays) and lipofection (119 clinical assays) the systems more frequently used, while all the rest of the nonviral vector account only for 3% of the assays.View chapter
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
No more device batteries? Researchers at Georgia Institute of Technology’s ATHENA lab discuss an innovative way to tap into the over-capacity of 5G networks, turning them into “a wireless power grid” for powering Internet of Things (IoT) devices. The breakthrough leverages a Rotman lens-based rectifying antenna capable of millimeter-wave harvesting at 28 GHz. The innovation could help eliminate the world’s reliance on batteries for charging devices by providing an alternative using excess 5G capacity. – Georgia Tech, March 2021
We Could Really Have a Wireless Power Grid That Runs on 5G
This tech might make us say goodbye to batteries for good.
POPULAR MECHANICSAPR 30, 2021COURTESY OF CHRISTOPHER MOORE / GEORGIA TECH
Researchers at Georgia Tech have come up with a concept for a wireless power grid that runs on 5G’s mm-wave frequencies.
Because 5G base stations beam data through densely packed electromagnetic waves, the scientists have designed a device to capture that energy.
The star of the show is a specialized Rotman lens that can collect 5G’s electromagnetic energy from all directions.
If you’ve ever owned a Tile tracker—a square, white Bluetooth beacon that connects to your phone to help keep tabs on your wallet, keys, or whatever else you’re prone to losing—you’re familiar with low-power Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices.
Just like other small IoT devices, from voice assistants to tiny chemical sensors that can detect gas leaks, Tile trackers require a power source. It’s not realistic to hook these gadgets up to a wall outlet, and having to constantly change batteries is a waste of time that’s ultimately bad for the environment.
But what if you could wirelessly charge those devices with a power source that’s already all around you? Researchers at Georgia Tech have dreamed up this kind of “wireless power grid” with a small device that harvests the electromagnetic energy that 5G base stations routinely emit.
Just like the 3G and 4G cell phone towers that came before, 5G base stations radiate electromagnetic energy. At the moment, we’re only harnessing these precious bands of energy to transfer data (which helps you download your favorite Netflix series at lightning speeds).This content is imported from YouTube. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
With some crafty engineering, it’s possible to use 5G’s waves of energy as a form of wireless power, says Manos Tentzeris, Ph.D., a professor of flexible electronics at Georgia Tech. He leads the university’s ATHENA research group, where his team has fabricated a specialized Rotman lens “rectenna” that makes this energy collection possible.
If the idea takes off, this tiny device—which is really a small, high-tech sticker—can use the wireless power grid to charge up far more devices than just your Tile tracker. Your cell phone providers could start beaming out electricity to power all kinds of small electronics, from delivery drones to tracking tags for pallets in a “smart warehouse.” The possibilities are truly endless.
“If you’re talking about real-world implementation of all of these ambitious projects, such as IoT, smart cities, or digital twins … you need to have wireless sensors everywhere,” Tentzeris tells Pop Mech. “But currently, all of them need to have batteries.”
But Wait, How Does 5G Create Power?
Let’s start out with the basics: 5G technically is energy.
5G can seem like a black box to those of us who aren’t electrical engineers, but the premise hinges on something we can all understand: electromagnetic energy. Consider the visible spectrum, or all of the light you can see. It exists along the larger electromagnetic spectrum, but it’s really just a blip.
In the graphic below, you can see the visible spectrum is just between ultraviolet and infrared light, or between 400 and 700 nanometers. As energy increases along the electromagnetic spectrum, the waves become shorter and shorter—notice gamma rays are far more powerful, and have more densely packed waves than FM radio, for example. Human eyes can’t detect these waves of energy.
PRINCIPLES OF STRUCTURAL CHEMISTRY
5G is also invisible and operates at a higher frequency than other communication standards we’re used to, like 3G or 4G. Those networks work at frequencies between about 1 to 6 gigahertz, while experts say 5G sits closer to the band between 24 and 90 gigahertz.
Because 5G waves function at a higher frequency, they’re more powerful, but also shorter in length. This is the primary reason why new infrastructure (like small 5G cells installed on utility poles) is required for 5G deployment: the waves have different characteristics. Shorter waves, for example, will see more interference from objects like trees and skyscrapers, and even droplets of rain or flakes of snow.
But don’t think of a city’s constellation of 5G base stations as wasteful. Old standards, like 3G and 4G, are known for indiscriminately emitting power from massive service towers in all directions, beaming significant amounts of untapped energy. 5G base stations are much more efficient, says Jimmy Hester, Ph.D., a Georgia Tech alum who serves as senior lab advisor to the ATHENA group.
“Because they operate at high frequencies, [5G base stations] are much better able to focalize [power]. So there’s less waste in a sense,” Hester tells Pop Mech. “What we’re talking about is more of an intentional energization of the devices, themselves, by focalizing the beam towards the device in order to turn it on and power it.”
A ‘Tarantula’ Lens Takes Shape
The Rotman lens, pictured at the far right, can collect energy from multiple directions. IMAGE COURTESY OF GEORGIA TECH’S ATHENA GROUP
There’s a drawback to this efficient focalization: 5G base stations transmit energy in a limited field of view. Think of it like a beam of energy moving in one direction, rather than a circle of energy emanating from a tower. The researchers call it a “pencil beam.” How could a small device precisely snatch up energy from all of these scattered base stations, especially when you can’t see the direction in which the waves are traveling?
Enter the Rotman lens, the key technology behind the team’s breakthrough energy-harvesting device. You can see Rotman lenses at work in military applications, like radar surveillance systems meant to identify targets in all directions without having to actually move the antenna. This isn’t the prototypical lens you’re used to seeing in a pair of glasses or in a microscope. It’s a flexible lens with metal backing, the team explains in a new research paper published in Scientific Reports.
“THE LENS IS LIKE A TARANTULA…[IT] CAN LOOK IN SIX DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.”
“The same way the lens in your camera collects all of the [light] waves from any direction, and combines it to one point…to create an image, that’s exactly how [this] lens works,” Aline Eid, a Ph.D. student and senior researcher at the ATHENA lab, tells Pop Mech. “The lens is like a tarantula … because a tarantula has six eyes, and our system can also look in six different directions.”
The Rotman lens increases the energy collecting device’s field of view from the “pencil beam” of about 20 degrees to more than 120 degrees, Eid says, making it easier to collect millimeter-wave energy in the 28-gigahertz band. So even if you slapped the sticker onto a moving drone, you could still reliably collect energy from 5G base stations all over a city.
“If you stick these devices on a window, or if you stick these devices on a light pole, or in the middle of an orchard, you’re not going to know the map of the strongest-power base stations,” Tentzeris explains. “We had to make our harvesting devices direction agnostic.”
Your Cell Phone Plan, Reimagined
COURTESY OF CHRISTOPHER MOORE / GEORGIA TECH
Tentzeris says he and his colleagues are looking for funding and eager to work with telecom companies. It makes sense: these companies could integrate the rectenna stickers around cities to augment the 5G networks they’re already building out. The end result could be a sort of new-age cell phone plan.
“In the beginning of the 2000s, companies moved from voice to data. Now, using this technology, they can add power to data/communication as well,” Tentzeris says.
Right now, the rectenna stickers can’t collect a huge amount of power—just about 6 microwatts of electricity, or enough to power some small IoT devices, from 180 meters away. But in lab tests, the device is still able to gather about 21 times more energy than similar devices in development.This content is imported from {embed-name}. You may be able to find the same content in another format, or you may be able to find more information, at their web site.
Plus, accessibility is on the team’s side, since the system is fully printable. Tentzeris says it only costs a few cents to produce one unit through additive manufacturing. With that in mind, he says it’s possible to embed the rectenna sticker into a wearable or even stitch it into clothing.
“Scalability was very important, you’re talking about billions of devices,” Tentzeris says. “You could have a great prototype working in the lab, but when somebody asks, ‘Can everybody use it?’ you need to be able to say yes.” – POPULAR MECHANICS 2021
This is antiquated stuff by 2021 standards, but gives you an idea. Initially, much of the nanotech was powered by the body electricity, so it had very limited capabilities. 5G could power true robots.
ATHENA (Agile Technologies for High-performance Electromagnetic Novel Applications)
The ATHENA (Agile Technologies for High-performance Electromagnetic Novel Applications) group at Georgia Tech, led by Dr. Manos Tentzeris, explores advances and development of novel technologies for electromagnetic, wireless, RF and mm-wave applications in the telecom, defense, space, automotive and sensing areas.
In detail, the research activities of the 15-member group include Highly Integrated 3D RF Front-Ends for Convergent (Telecommunication,Computing and Entertainment) Applications, 3D Multilayer Packaging for RF and Wireless modules, Microwave MEM’s, SOP-integrated antennas (ultrawideband, multiband, ultracompact) and antenna arrays using ceramic and conformal organic materials and Adaptive Numerical Electromagnetics (FDTD, MultiResolution Algorithms).
The group includes the RFID/Sensors subgroup which focuses on the development of paper-based RFID’s and RFID-enabled “rugged” sensors with printed batteries and power-scavenging devices operating in a variety of frequency bands [13.56 MHz-60 GHz]. In addition, members of the group deal with Bio/RF applications (e.g. breast tumor detection), micromachining (e.g elevated patch antennas) and the development of novel electromagnetic simulator technologies and its applications to the design and optimization of modern RF/Microwave systems.
The numerical activity of the group primarily includes the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) and multiresolution time-domain (MRTD) simulation techniques. It also covers hybrid numerical simulators capable of modeling multiple physical effects, such as electromagnetics and mechanical motion in MEMS devices and the combined effect of thermal, semiconductor electron transport, and electromagnetics for RF modules containing solid state devices.
The group maintains a 32 processor Linux Beowulf cluster to run its optimized parallel electromagnetic codes. In addition, the group uses these codes to develop novel microwave devices and ultracompact multiband antennas in a number of substrates and utilizes multilayer technology to miniaturize the size and maximize performance. Examples of target applications include cellular telephony (3G/4G), WiFi, WiMAX, Zigbee and Bluetooth, RFID ISO/EPC_Gen2, LMDS, radar, space applications, millimeter-wave sensors and surveillance devices and emerging standards for frequencies from 800MHz to 100GHz.
The activities are sponsored by NSF, NASA, DARPA and a variety of US and international corporations. – ATHENA
Smart implants designed for monitoring conditions inside the body, delivering drug doses, or otherwise treating diseases are clearly the future of medicine. But, just like a satellite is a useless hunk of metal in space without the right communication channels, it’s important that we can talk to these implants. Such communication is essential, regardless of whether we want to relay information and power to these devices or receive data in return.
Fortunately, researchers from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Brigham and Women’s Hospital may have found a way to help. Scientists at these institutes have developed a new method to power and communicate with implants deep inside the human body.
“IVN (in-vivo networking) is a new system that can wirelessly power up and communicate with tiny devices implanted or injected in deep tissues,” Fadel Adib, an assistant professor in MIT’s Media Lab, told Digital Trends. “The implants are powered by radio frequency waves, which are safe for humans. In tests in animals, we showed that the waves can power devices located 10 centimeters deep in tissue, from a distance of one meter.”
These same demonstration using pigs showed that it is possible to extend this one-meter range up to 38 meters (125 feet), provided that the sensors are located very close to the skin’s surface. These sensors can be extremely small, due to their lack of an onboard battery. This is different from current implants, such as pacemakers, which have to power themselves since external power sources are not yet available. For their demo, the scientists used a prototype sensor approximately the size of a single grain of rice. This could be further shrunk down in the future, they said.
“The incorporation of [this] system in ingestible or implantable device could facilitate the delivery of drugs in different areas of the gastrointestinal tracts,” Giovanni Traverso, an assistant professor at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, told us. “Moreover, it could aid in sensing of a range of signals for diagnosis, and communicating those externally to facilitate the clinical management of chronic diseases.”
The IVN system is due to be shown off at the Association for Computing Machinery Special Interest Group on Data Communication (SIGCOMM) conference in August.
Buh-bye, Human race, you’ve just been assimilated by the Borg!
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Imagine that the brutal experiments at Auschwitz were better concealed and the prisoners were drugged and brainwashed to believe that’s the best world out there for them. Then find out that the management has never stopped winning, expanding and perfecting their business model, up to today’s Great Reset.
Founded in Binghamton, New York, in 1901, Ansco was a manufacturer of photographic products and film. Ansco was originally founded through the merger of E. Anthony & Company and Scovill Manufacturing. In 1928, Ansco merged with Agfa to form Agfa-Ansco. The new corporation was a division of General Aniline and Film (GAF) Corporation, which was controlled by the German chemical cartel IG Farben. After Germany declared war on the United States in 1941, the United States Government seized the assets of GAF, including Agfa-Ansco. In 1943, the company removed “Agfa” from its name, once again becoming Ansco. The United States Justice Department oversaw Ansco’s operation until 1965, when government-held stock in GAF was sold to the public. In 1977, GAF eliminated its line of consumer photography products, including those manufactured by Ansco at the Binghamton facility. GAF also sold the Ansco trademark to Haking Enterprises. GAF continued to manufacture film at the Binghamton plant for industrial and medical use until 1981, when it sold the plant to Anitec Image Corporation. Over the next two decades, the former Ansco facility was sold several times, and in 2000, it was demolished.
Prior to the late 1970s, dozens of asbestos-containing materials were utilized in the construction and maintenance of buildings at Ansco’s Binghamton facility, including fireproof insulation, pipe covering and insulating cement. Inhaling dust from the application and removal of asbestos-containing materials placed workers at risk for developing an asbestos-related disease, such as mesothelioma or lung cancer.
Fireproof insulation was applied to structural steel during the construction of buildings at Ansco. Fireproofing materials were manufactured as a dry mixture of asbestos, linen and cement, packaged in fifty-pound paper bags. The dry mixture was mixed with water and sprayed onto the structural steel using a hose. Pouring, mixing and spraying fireproof insulation created clouds of asbestos-containing dust. After the fireproofing material was applied, it was typical for tradesmen, such as electricians or pipefitters, to scrape the fireproofing material from structural steel in order to install pipes and conduits. When the fireproof insulation was disturbed, asbestos fibers and dust became airborne.
Workers applied asbestos-containing pipe covering to pipes at the Binghamton Ansco facility. Pipe covering was applied to numerous piping systems in order to maintain stable internal temperatures and to protect pipes from damage. When pipe covering was applied, asbestos fibers were emitted. Insulating cement was also applied to pumps, valves and other equipment. It was manufactured as a powder and mixed with water to prepare it for application. Mixing insulating cement caused asbestos-containing dust to become airborne.
What’s Bayer been up to lately? We find out from their website:
The Bio Revolution is redefining innovation in the life sciences. How this might be a game changer.
The life sciences have made great advances in the past years. Biology, life sciences and the megatrend of digitization are growing closer together, enabling new inventions that impact our daily lives in a scope that we speak of a Bio Revolution. This revolution is reinforced by rapid increases in computing power and the emergence of new capabilities in AI, automation, and data analytics. These trends are further accelerating the pace of innovation and the potential for higher R&D productivity in the life sciences.
All this has led to new ways to understand and explore biology. The range of life forms on earth is incredibly complex and diverse. However, the methods to analyze them can be remarkably similar. Technologies and methods are transcending disciplinary boundaries even faster.
The implications across the life sciences can be enormous:
For human health, for example, a deeper understanding of the relationship between genetics and disease has led to the emergence of precision medicine, which can potentially be more effective than the one-size-fits-all therapies of the past. In the future, new technologies could help the healthcare industry not only treat, but cure or even prevent diseases. New gene and cell therapies, for example, aim to cure genetic diseases, potentially enabling sustainable organ replacement or reversing autoimmune diseases.
The Bio Revolution has the potential to help address some of the most critical global challenges, from climate change to pandemics, chronic diseases, and worldwide food security. Experts estimate that a significant portion of the economic impact of biological applications will be in health care, agriculture, and consumer products.3 Already today, the Bio Revolution with its convergence of science and technology has created an explosion of research projects in science and business. Each year, the amount of Intellectual Property related to the Bio Revolution is increasing.4 This can be seen, for example, by the number of patents in CrispR or plant biotech. In short: the revolution is gaining momentum and holds a great promise for health and food alike.
Total number of CRISPR patent applications worldwide per year from 1984 to 2018.
Fueled by digitalization, growing connectivity, and falling costs, important advances in biotechnology are intertwined with more systemic shift in how bio-innovation is undertaken and who is involved. Microbiome technologies, advanced genomics, gene editing and synthetic biology are among key enabling technologies that have the potential to change the face of bio-innovation. This broader redefinition of bio-innovation creates new prospects to help address important nutrition, environmental and development needs.
World Economic Forum, Bio-Innovation Dialogue Initiative
As a leading life science company, Bayer is aligned with the long-term market trends in health and nutrition and offers innovative and sustainable solutions to tackle some of the key challenges for humanity. Bayer brings to the table an extensive knowledge of human and plant science, supported by its expertise in regulatory processes and an impressive global footprint to ultimately bring innovations from labs to market. https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EYE1gya7XiM?autoplay=1&start=0&rel=0
The Bio Revolution marks the beginning of a new era: Innovations enabled by the convergence of biology and technology have the potential to significantly improve our lives, our nutrition, and our health.
Did you know that Bayer is at the forefront of the wave of innovation coming from the Bio Revolution?
The Bio Revolution is expected to transform healthcare and agriculture over the next decades – but the revolution is already happening now. With its newly established cell and gene therapy platform in Pharmaceuticals and innovative gene-editing tools such as CRISPR, Bayer operates at the core of the Bio Revolution and has tremendous opportunities to improve health and nutrition.
In Pharma, Bayer’s new Cell & Gene Therapy (CGT) platform steers our strategy in the area and orchestrates our activities along the value chain providing an innovation ecosystem for the companies – including BlueRock Therapeutics and Asklepios BioPharmaceutical (AskBio), which are fully owned by Bayer but operate autonomously. These therapies hold the potential to significantly impact patients’ lives by moving from treating symptoms to potentially curative approaches.
Bayer’s development portfolio of cell and gene therapies already comprises eight advanced assets in different stages of clinical development. These are applicable in multiple therapeutic areas with high unmet need, such as neurodegenerative, neuromuscular and cardiovascular indications, with programs in Pompe disease, Parkinson’s disease, hemophilia A, and congestive heart failure. With over 15 preclinical assets in the cell and gene therapy field, the pipeline is expected to grow steadily year by year.
Yet Bayer is not only using biotechnology to advance health – the promise for agriculture is just as inspiring. In the Crop Science Division, for example, tools like CRISPR can make changes to plant DNA with more precision than ever before and make plants more weather- or disease-resistant, enabling farmers to grow more or better-quality products under changing conditions.
Advancing genetic solutions for a sustainable future (1)PreviousNext
Did you know that Leaps by Bayer invests into potentially disruptive technologies to tackle some of the largest, unsolved challenges in the life sciences?
With Leaps by Bayer – our impact investment approach utilizing venture capital – we are constantly scanning for additional potential breakthroughs that hold promise to either cure or treat people from diseases or help feed a growing population with less impact on the environment.
$1 Billion
Since 2015, Leaps by Bayer has invested over $1 billion in ventures that tackle fundamental breakthroughs and shift core paradigms in our industries.
Leaps by Bayer has an investment focus on potentially disruptive solutions in the fields of healthcare and agriculture. The Leaps investment approach is remarkable: It aims to invest into or build up new innovative companies. Bayer supports those companies by enabling the exchange of proprietary assets, which can include sharing own patents or providing access to the Bayer network’s technical capabilities and 150 years of expertise. The companies remain autonomous with respect to decision making, while Leaps facilitates and supports them in a so-called active incubation process. Experienced team members actively engage in the young companies’ development by providing resources and helping them to steer the initial strategic direction. Today, the investment portfolio includes more than 35 companies advancing potential breakthrough technologies.
Leaps is our way of thinking big.
Werner Baumann, CEO of Bayer AG
Many Leaps ventures have made significant progress towards unlocking the potential of new technology platforms with a promising and transformative potential. BlueRock Therapeutics, for example, started as a Leaps investment and is now an integral part of Bayer’s CGT platform and just received clearance to proceed with a phase I trial in Parkinson’s disease.
Other companies, like the biopharmaceutical player Triumvira, are specialized on next generation immuno-oncology treatments. Triumvira focuses on novel T-cell therapies that aim to be safer and more efficacious than current cell therapy cancer treatments. Treating, curing and preventing cancer is one of the focus areas of Leaps by Bayer, since this group of diseases still represents one of today’s biggest health challenges with limited curative or preventative therapies available.
We face a huge disease burden, and the way we produce food isn’t sustainable for the planet. I believe the Bio Revolution can help us overcome these issues.
Jürgen Eckhardt, Head of Leaps by Bayer
Leaps is also investing in the development of sustainable biotechnological solutions in the field of agriculture. One of the ventures in this field is Joyn Bio, a company that aims to significantly reduce the environmental impact of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers through a technology that fixes nitrogen into the soil. Nitrogen is one of the most important nutrients essential for every plant to grow, however, its use and production as a fertilizer is estimated to contribute 3-5% to all global greenhouse gas emissions. Joyn Bio is working on an engineered microbe that enables cereal crops like corn, wheat, and rice to convert nitrogen from the air into a form they can use to grow. This technology may have the potential to help farmers use nitrogen in new ways, and as a result, reduce agriculture’s environmental footprint.
The Leaps by Bayer investment portfolio includes more than 35 companies.
At least that’s what Bayer says. All I know is that they’re still running the show.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
We gave up on our profit shares from masks, if you want to help us, please use the donation button! We think frequent mask use, even short term use can be bad for you, but if you have no way around them, at least send a message of consciousness. Get it here!
Initially I didn’t pay much attention to these reports because first ones were pretty vague and seemed unsubstantiated. They kind of were. But then they started to become more and more detailed, coherent and very specific. My own research on #biohacking started to intersect more often, to the point where today they almost coincide.
Video by Tim Truth
To better understand where I’m coming from, your journey needs to start here:
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif., July 12, 2016 /PRNewswire/ — Profusa, Inc., a leading developer of tissue-integrated biosensors, today announced that it was awarded a $7.5 million dollar grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the U.S. Army Research Office (ARO) to develop implantable biosensors for the simultaneous, continuous monitoring of multiple body chemistries. Aimed at providing real-time monitoring of a combat soldier’s health status to improve mission efficiency, the award supports further development of the company’s biosensor technology for real-time detection of the body’s chemical constituents. DARPA and ARO are agencies of the U.S. Department of Defense focused on the developing emerging technologies for use by the military.
“Profusa’s vision is to replace a point-in-time chemistry panel that measures multiple biomarkers, such as oxygen, glucose, lactate, urea, and ions with a biosensor that provides a continuous stream of wireless data,” said Ben Hwang, Ph.D., Profusa’s chairman and chief executive officer. “DARPA’s mission is to make pivotal investments in breakthrough technologies for national security. We are gratified to be awarded this grant to accelerate the development of our novel tissue-integrating sensors for application to soldier health and peak performance.”
Tissue-integrating Biosensors for Multiple Biomarkers Supported by DARPA, ARO and the National Institutes of Health, Profusa’s technology and unique bioengineering approach overcomes the largest hurdle in long-term use of biosensors in the body: the foreign body response. Placed just under the skin with a specially designed injector, each tiny biosensor is a flexible fiber, 2 mm-to-5 mm long and 200-500 microns in diameter. Rather than being isolated from the body, Profusa’s biosensors work fully integrated within the body’s tissue — without any metal device or electronics — overcoming the effects of the foreign body response for more than one year.
Each biosensor is comprised of a bioengineered “smart hydrogel” (similar to contact lens material) forming a porous, tissue-integrating scaffold that induces capillary and cellular in-growth from surrounding tissue. A unique property of the smart gel is its ability to luminesce upon exposure to light in proportion to the concentration of a chemical such as oxygen, glucose or other biomarker.
“Long-lasting, implantable biosensors that provide continuous measurement of multiple body chemistries will enable monitoring of a soldier’s metabolic and dehydration status, ion panels, blood gases, and other key physiological biomarkers,” said Natalie Wisniewski, Ph.D., the principal investigator leading the grant work and Profusa’s co-founder and chief technology officer. “Our ongoing program with DARPA builds on Profusa’s tissue-integrating sensor that overcomes the foreign body response and serves as a technology platform for the detection of multiple analytes.”
Lumee Oxygen Sensing System™ Profusa’s first medical product, the Lumee Oxygen Sensing System, is a single-biomarker sensor designed to measure oxygen. In contrast to blood oxygen reported by other devices, the system incorporates the only technology that can monitor local tissue oxygen. When applied to the treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD), it prompts the clinician to provide therapeutic action to ensure tissue oxygen levels persist throughout the treatment and healing process.
Pending CE Mark, the Lumee system is slated to be available in Europe in 2016 for use by vascular surgeons, wound-healing specialists and other licensed healthcare providers who may benefit in monitoring local tissue oxygen. PAD affects 202 million people worldwide, 27 million of whom live in Europe and North America, with an annual economic burden of more than $74 billion in the U.S. alone.
Profusa, Inc. Profusa, Inc., based in South San Francisco, Calif., is leading the development of novel tissue-integrated sensors that empowers an individual with the ability to monitor their unique body chemistry in unprecedented ways to transform the management of personal health and disease. Overcoming the body’s response to foreign material for long-term use, its technology promises to be the foundational platform of real-time biochemical detection through the development of tiny bioengineered sensors that become one with the body to detect and continuously transmit actionable, medical-grade data for personal and medical use. See http://www.profusa.com for more information.
The research is based upon work supported by DARPA, the Biological Technologies Office (BTO), and ARO grant [W911NF-16-1-0341]. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of DARPA, BTO, the ARO, or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Governmental purposes notwithstanding any copyright annotation thereon.
So I can’t say with 100% certainty that what DARPA did and what people found are one and the same thing, but this hits close enough, if this is possible, that is possible, and altogether give 200% x reasons to freak out.
I will keep adding resources and details here, but my point is made.
To be continued? Our work and existence, as media and people, is funded solely by our most generous supporters. But we’re not really covering our costs so far, and we’re in dire needs to upgrade our equipment, especially for video production. Help SILVIEW.media survive and grow, please donate here, anything helps. Thank you!
! Articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Sometimes my memes are 3D. And you can own them. Or send them to someone. You can even eat some of them. CLICK HERE
COURTESY OF CHRISTOPHER MOORE / GEORGIA TECH
Fueled by digitalization, growing connectivity, and falling costs, important advances in biotechnology are intertwined with more systemic shift in how bio-innovation is undertaken and who is involved. Microbiome technologies, advanced genomics, gene editing and synthetic biology are among key enabling technologies that have the potential to change the face of bio-innovation. This broader redefinition of bio-innovation creates new prospects to help address important nutrition, environmental and development needs.
SILVIEW.media 