Gene editing in people

Posted on by

We live in interesting times:

Edits to a cholesterol gene could stop the biggest killer on earth

A volunteer in New Zealand has become the first person to undergo DNA editing in order to lower their blood cholesterol, a step that may foreshadow wide use of the technology to prevent heart attacks.

The experiment, part of a clinical trial by the US biotechnology company Verve Therapeutics, involved injecting a version of the gene-editing tool CRISPR in order to modify a single letter of DNA in the patient’s liver cells.

According to the company, that tiny edit should be enough to permanently lower a person’s levels of “bad” LDL cholesterol, the fatty molecule that causes arteries to clog and harden with time.

The patient in New Zealand had an inherited risk for extra-high cholesterol and was already suffering from heart disease. However, the company believes the same technique could eventually be used on millions of people in order to prevent cardiovascular disease.

…

the technology is substantially similar to mRNA vaccines for covid-19. Just like the vaccines, the treatment consists of genetic instructions wrapped in a nanoparticle, which ferries everything into a cell.

While the vaccine instructs cells to make a component of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the particles in Verve’s treatment carry RNA directions for a cell to assemble and aim a base-editing protein, which then modifies that cell’s copy of PCSK9, introducing the tiny mistake. 

That is both very cool and very scary at the same time.

What else will they have “treatments” for which are a single injection and make irreversible changes to your genes? Homosexuality? ADHD? Excessive aggression? Authority defiance disorder?

At what point will such treatment become mandatory or even given by a black ops team. They pull you into a van for a few seconds and give you another drug that causes you to not remember it even happened?

Share

32 thoughts on “Gene editing in people”

  1. The first problem that I see is that both types of cholesterol are needed in the body. When they prescribed the drugs that affect the “bad” type, it doesn’t go too well, and the med profession STILL pushes that crap. More and more I see less and less brains in that profession. Question EVERYTHING they do.

    • As I understand it the ‘bad’ cholesterol is produced by the body from excess carbs. Since I have eating keto for over 5 years my ‘bad’ cholesterol is well below the limits.

      And note that cholesterol is needed by the body for repairs.

      Statins are a solution looking for a problem. and yet one of the most popular drugs.

      A DNA solution is questionable when researchers don’t even understand the source of the bad cholesterol. Likewise, mRNA is a solution that is looking for a problem. I am running the other way. As far as I am concerned such pushes toward public health is just BS.

  2. The most interesting threat from CRISPR is editing a gene that makes you dependent on a drug to survive. Think Roundup Ready for people.

  3. gene-editing vaxes are already required to be a teacher or government worker in WA state. The mRNA in the covid “vaccine” is persistent for much longer than natural mRNA, at LEAST 12 weeks has been documented, creating inflammatory and toxic spike proteins. Cancer rates are skyrocketing. Death by “suddenly” and “unexpectedly” is way up. Birth rates in some nations are plummeting 9 months after the vax rollout for people of childbearing age (down 27% in Taiwan, for example). Disability claims jumped 3 million (10%) after it was rolled out. Life insurance companies are reporting a many-sigma increase in working-age policies being paid off, varying from an increase by 40% to more than 160% increase.

    Yes, because of the people involved in creating the technology, I’m more afraid of it than excited by it.

  4. Rolf should not lie, especially when the article makes a clear difference between using RNA technology to make a DNA editing protein, vs. the insanity he and other anti-vaxxers increasingly descend into as those of us who got mRNA vaccines fail to die as they’ve confidently predicted since 2020.

    I think our host’s concern is overblown for the time being, there’s issues of scale that come into play. Here they’re in the long term hoping to be able to edit enough cells in someone’s liver (that might not be practical today, this could be an attempt at a proof of concept, I only glanced at the article). That’s very different than trying to edit “all” or “enough” of the cells in your brain … when to start with we have a very limited understanding of how it works.

    For example, are those undesirable traits emergent from how your brain gets built starting at conception? OK, there you hit the babies.

    At what point will such treatment become mandatory or even given by a black ops team.

    Kinda surprised to see such worries on a RKBA blog, do you only own guns to hit targets that blow up dramatically?

    The black ops concern would require all of the above problems to be solved and with a system that requires only one or a very few treatments, and I think we’d notice if too many thought leaders started the equivalent of “growing in office” and changed their political positions. And if done to politicians how would we ever tell??

    • I’m quite well aware that the technology discussed in the article is not exactly the same as the mRNA tech used in the covid gene therapy shot. However, there is a lot of overlap in the people and concepts and mechanisms.
      Please feel free to point out how every study, doctor, and story here is wrong:
      https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague/
      https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague2/
      https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague3/
      https://www.thestarscameback.com/plague4/
      A couple thousand links, one of which is a link to over a thousand studies, one of which is to a list of more than 70 items, etc. Are some sources a little sketchy? Sure. But there are also MD, PhD, NEJM, NIH, WHO, whistleblowers, personal experiences, etc.

      I really don’t want all the vaxxed to die, I like a number of them (the host of this website is among them, as well as family members). But just because all the vaxxed are not dead yet doesn’t mean many of them won’t expire well before their otherwise scheduled time. My current “best guess” if I had to put a number on it is that about 10% of the vaxxed will die or have major disability or sickness (lots of cardiovascular, neurological, cancers and autoimmune, mostly) within 3-5 years. Could be as high as 10% chance for each dose of the vax as its toxicity is dose-dependent and cumulative, so a double-vaxxed and 2x boosted would face a 40% chance of debilitation or death. Time will tell.

      • A couple thousand links, one of which is a link to over a thousand studies, one of which is to a list of more than 70 items, etc.

        And yet you can’t point us to the specific ones that are technically relevant to this different use of mRNA technology. You do not care how much you might waste our time, or do not have any understanding of the science. Or perhaps both, the former because your self-appointed mission of denouncing mRNA COVID vaccines is more important than things like the topic the OP, I and others are discussing, which you cannot contribute to.

        I really don’t want all the vaxxed to die

        I flatly don’t believe you, only our deaths will validate your opinions about the vaccines to which you attach great importance. Your use of “really” shows that.

        • I hear people like yourself talking, and they sound to me like the guy who claims Russian Roulette is totally safe because it hasn’t killed anyone he personally knows in the last game he played.

          I know some have claimed all will die in 2-3 years. I have not, though I do have links to them. I don’t know how many will die or be disabled, and my best guess is above. But the fact that governments are reporting a crashing birth rate in high-vax-rate countries, people in the death biz are claiming business is booming, and some of the available government all-cause mortality figures are up much more for the vaxxed than the unvaxxed indicates that SOMETHING is going badly wrong with the vax. And all these technologies are related, if not exactly the same. The medical community is playing with something they do not understand nearly as well as they claim to, and the risks of their being wrong are FAR greater than the rewards if they are right.

        • I hear people like yourself talking, and they sound to me like the guy who claims Russian Roulette is totally safe because it hasn’t killed anyone he personally knows in the last game he played.

          I know some have claimed all will die in 2-3 years. I have not, though I do have links to them. I don’t know how many will die or be disabled, and my best guess is above. But the fact that governments are reporting a crashing birth rate in high-vax-rate countries, people in the death biz are claiming business is booming, and some of the available government all-cause mortality figures are up much more for the vaxxed than the unvaxxed indicates that SOMETHING is going badly wrong with the vax. And all these technologies are related, if not exactly the same. The medical community is playing with something they do not understand nearly as well as they claim to, and the risks of their being wrong are FAR greater than the rewards if they are right.

          FWIW, the reason I have the Plague Pages is so if it turns out to be anywhere near as bad as some suspect, there is no ground for anyone to honestly say “but we could not have known! We are not guilty! it was an unfortunate accident!” so they may be tried and executed for their crimes against humanity. Pleading ignorance will not work. If it turns out to be nothing but a few million dead and disabled, and I’m just seeing ghosts and grifters, then the world is OK and my children don’t have to deal with a societal collapse, and I’m good with that.

          • And destroyed the Georgia guide stones so one could point to the fact it was an actual plan?
            (Nothing like carving your stupidity in stone for the whole world to read?)

      • We’re talking about using mRNA technology to make a gene editing protein inside of cells which will edit their DNA vs. making a stabilized COVID spike protein which will make permanent changes to the recipient’s immune system

        mRNA COVID vaccines are completely irrelevant unless you can show some pathological commonality between these two uses. Your reply of pointing at claims about the vaccines is entirely irrelevant absent that.

          • The reference you provide points out the infection probably alters DNA. But it doesn’t give evidence that vaccination does this.

          • The reference you provide points out the infection probably alters DNA.

            I read the preprint as at most suggesting it was one possiblity for continued positive RT-PCR results from patients who are ostensibly recovered and are believed to be non-infectious (you are invited to imagine how small the intersection is of people who believe RT-PCR can be a qualitatively valid test and anti-vaxxers…). Of course there are much simpler explanations starting with “their bodies didn’t actually clear it.”

            But it doesn’t give evidence that vaccination does this.

            But it does investigate the LINE-1 known mechanism whereby RNA can get incorporated into DNA without retrovirus reverse transcriptase. There’s a great deal of wild stuff that happens to increase genetic diversity while still allowing useful reproduction of organisms and preventing them from dissolving into a puddle of goo. Because these can result in greater chances of survival for an organism and its descendants; see chromosomal crossover during meiosis for a blatant extreme.

            Why this is not going to generally be a problem for mRNA vaccine recipients completely escapes people like Rolf who don’t understand the most basic concept of our adaptive immune systems. Else they’d be wondering about immune system responses to this gene editing protein created by injected mRNA instead of spamming us with links to papers they don’t understand assuming they drilled down to the paper itself. Since they don’t understand what they’re repeating including such implications they have nothing to contribute to the discussion we’re actually having.

            Here you’d have to think about numbers, thus infections with self-replicating viruses and thus millions to billions more raw chances are very relevant, as well as the previously mentioned immune system possibilities just to start with off the top of my head. How those play out is what you learn for real in animal and human testing and iteration after failures. It took three and a half decades and hard work by hundreds of others to go from Robert Malone’s 1987 proof of concept to working mRNA vaccines.

    • Just a couple of quick questions.
      Have you read “Dissolving Illusions: Disease, Vaccines, and The Forgotten History,” by Suzanne Humphries MD and Roman Bystrianyk?
      Are you familiar with the work of Frederick Klenner?
      Speculate: What do you expect would happen if the mRNA gene therapy critics are right, and 10% or more of the jabbed are disabled or dead in the next 3-5 years, or major fertility problems in the jabbed develop? That is, what’s the downside risk in this attempt to halt a disease with a 99+% survival rate?

      • This topic is not a debate on COVID-19 mRNA vaccines which you dishonestly refer to as gene therapy, not recognizing that what we’re discussing is the real, edit your DNA type. There are and have been more than enough of those to go around in other forums.

        [If] 10% or more of the jabbed are disabled or dead in the next 3-5 years, or major fertility problems in the jabbed develop? That is, what’s the downside risk in this attempt to halt a disease with a 99+% survival rate?

        I think that’s enough of your fundamental dishonesty, here you are comparing morbidity and mortality to mortality. No more replies from me unless you reply on the actual subject.

        • In other words, you are happy to mischaracterize what I say, put words in my mouth, sidestep a current relevant and closely RELATED if not directly contingent issue, then huff off without an answer, like a pro troll would.

          The same technology used to deliver the mRNA (the LNPs holding snippets of amino acids arranged to deliver some genetic programming) can deliver similar items for the express purpose of altering DNA. They had to change the definition of “vaccine” for this product (the C19 mRNA jab) to meet the definition; it is a gene therapy every bit as much as it is a vaccine because it teaches your cells how to make a protein (the toxic spike protein) exactly the same as genes do, though by starting with the mRNA template that would normally be made by the DNA.

          So congratulations, boomer, on your avoiding any consideration of the possible downside risks. According to Pfizer’s own data, in their 46k initial human jab-ees, 42k reported adverse effects, and 1,223 died (that’s about 2.5%). In VAERS, more than half of ALL deaths reported in the last three decades belong to the C19 jab. One life insurance company reported a more than 160% increase in working-age payouts. All the C19 jab makers deliberately destroyed their control groups by vaccinating them so comparative data was ruined. Playing with mRNA and DNA injections is something that the medical community either doesn’t understand, or they are downright evil bastards.

          And I really would recommend that book, and reading up on the work of Klenner, no matter what you may think of me.

  5. Denninger proved the whole statin thing was bunk from the start. Even the study used was all cherry picked data to justify their creation.
    As for altering genes. That’s insane. And as we can see. The first thing it was used for in a large scale were vaccines that are killing people. (And not stopping virus.)
    As for homosexual behavior. That is a product of imagination. Not genetics.
    How could it survive passed one generation? (Only in females with rape involved?)
    The only way it could be genetic, is as a reoccurring mistake.
    But I would point to the explosion in “trans-gender children”, as empirical proof. We never saw this in history before. Because we never had heterosexual mommy’s imaginations running wild like this before.
    Think they will blame the high suicide rate in that group on genetics also?

    • Some gays really are born that way, but I’ve come to believe that most of them are “recruited” by being molested and abused as young children, and it’s a psychological protection mechanism. That’s why things like drag queen story time is so important to the gay and trans activists- make people as unhappy as possible with “normal” in order to recruit the young into their ranks. Not all gays are pedos, but those who are not often effectively covering for those who are; one of the sicker ingroup preferences we are forced to tolerate to avoid complicating the employment picture.

      • “Some gays really are born that way.” How?
        Well maybe if your a possum?

        • That is, they are born with a present-at-birth defect that makes them homosexual in later life as their bodies and mental programming matures, it’s not the result of childhood trauma or chemical imbalance or anything like that. I don’t know what the numbers are as far as percentages go; I’ve not researched it intensively, but in what I have seen there has been a wide range of estimated on how much is “nature” (inborn) to “nurture” (grooming, abuse, trauma, molestation, etc.) ranging from 90:10 one way to 10:90 the other (not quotes, there, just vague recollections of approximates).

          • Rolf, what present at birth defect would MAKE you have poop-dick sex?
            Just because one feels the “need”, to get off. Does not force one to do such.
            You’re forcing yourself to do such.
            Unless your a Possum. Then it’s nature and genetics.

        • IIRC, researchers not too many years ago took a look at the rest of the animal kingdom and were surprised to discover that they could document same sex attraction in quite a few groups. Dolphins/Porpoises was noted, and ducks also. I don’t recall any others offhand, and haven’t looked or stumbled over further data since. I’m guessing that this would indicate some sort of gene involvement.

  6. What is the argument against CRISPR stating the technology is “irreversible”?

    Any DNA strand that can be altered n some particular via CRISPR is automatically able to be reversed by simply changing the DNA sequence back to it’s original structure. Comparing CRISPR to the Covid-19 “vaccine” is disingenuous at best, and arguably a deliberate lie.

    • Is this still true for modified DNA sequences in the wild (released in the body) and the resulting changes?

      • Eexogenous as in outside of cells nucleic acids are for obvious reasons considered to be a bad thing, most likely came from damaged/dead cells but very possibly from viruses, and our bodies have mechanisms to degrade them ASAP.

        That’s part of what made developing mRNA vaccines difficult, enough (fragile, this isn’t DNA) strands have to be protected until they get inside cells where they aren’t particularly different than all the other mRNA strands doing cells’ normal protein synthesis (there are some tricks used to maximize their production of proteins before they undergo normal recycling; anyone know how long that takes?).

        One question to ask is for which cells is the targeted protein relevant, where is cholesterol synthesized outside of the liver? Or turn the question around, how many cells that don’t normally do that would are required for it to be problematic? Lots of fats in our bodies, they are a very necessary ingredient for life.

        It is however a tortuous path to go from one cell to another especially if they aren’t in direct contact. So I’d guess numbers would be very small, but we and very likely the researchers today need the starting numbers to get anywhere. We might start with estimates of the number of liver cells that need to be edited to Do The Right Thing instead of give these people cardiovascular disease. As well as note you’re willing to take more risks for the diseased.

  7. Oh, and directly to the question in the article in a general, not technology sense: considering how totally biased and lousy current mainstream science is WRT the whole issue of cholesterol, different types, ratios, and all the rest, I don’t care HOW far off my numbers are from what they are telling me they “should” be, I forbid them from making any permanent changes to my DNA to “manage” it. The current food pyramid is a joke, and a lot of nutrition advice the doctors give is marginal at best. The fact that HFCS and trans-fats have not been banned and are listed as GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) tell you they are not actually interested in your health. I know people who are old and healthy as a horse, in part because they ignore their doc’s advice to take drugs or change eating habits to “get their cholesterol under control.”

    • Karl Denninger showed the studies that most coronary artery problems was older people with certain genetics. That makes the junction of the artery and heart muscle brittle. (It moves constantly). And as it weakens, the body compensates for the weak spot by building up fat at the junction. Like a pipe liner.
      What Statins were truly about?
      Pay for a cherry picked study.
      Put out a drug.
      Make billions over the years.
      Get sued for side effects.
      Pay out a small portion as fines and damages.
      Pocket the rest.
      Basically, if the penalty for robbing a bank was you had to pay 10% back? That’s how big pharma works.
      And the mRNA vaccines will be no different.

    • As you posted Rolf. Dr. Martin proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Well over a year ago.
      There was nothing new or “novel” about corona virus, or mRNA.
      Patent numbers don’t lie.
      What it will actually do only time will tell.
      The real question is. Are there people running the world that would use a large portion of humanity as lab rats? For fun and profit?
      Well, history has proven time and again that the largest crimes generally go unpunished.

Comments are closed.