Mar 21, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

I think Lanka once said something about The Vatican setting some proto medical council to ascertain or determine leprosy - with a local official and a Papal representative.

the result of a 'negative test being banishment or social exclusion which usually meant a death sentence. Whatever intension may have set it up, it became a political tool.

Id like more info around that - but the pattern is recognisable.

From a bio of Captain Cook (v good!) posited the open sexuality of Polynesians or Tahiti (eventually resulted in VD attributed to the sailors.

German New Medicine's biological conflict expressing as poxes is often around a self-dirtying or feeling soiled conflict. Such conflicts can loop (ie reset themselves as persistent) or reappear from associative triggers.

We might assume mind and world the same but people believed silly things in the past, but I suggest our experience of self and world have radically changed. But as can be readily observed the underlying traumas and survival strategies run back to when Mars acquired the name 'Scarface' and a poxed face - as perhaps did many as a result of nanoparticulate poisons from volcanic actions and cosmic dust - both associated with electromagnetic disturbances - and famine from blocking the Sun Malnutrition).

I don't offer psychic aspects to 'explain' but to complement our experience.

The wish for a diagnosis would be to escape the fear of stigma. That this may still occur is at least counters by the attribution to microbes etc BUT insofar as we set the cause of our experience exclusively out and away from self, we set ourselves victim to them & THEIR TREATMENTS!

Wholeness of being as a felt quality of life and vitality is lost to self-conflict, or in some sense hostage to rules and filters of permission to live our freedom.

I've been looking at zeta-potential as an underlying biophysical basis of blood sludge, micro-strokes (TIAs). amidwesterndoctor gives a good background and outline - Andrew Moulden was the first to alert the clinical signs. But if you are not aware of this angle - please look.


Zeta potential article


He doesn't GET the basis for calling out virus fraud. But I am glad to not let that stop me reading his contributions.

Expand full comment

By the way I am very curious to know what the s-protein really is, rather than what it is patently defined falsely as.

I wonder if it is an advance cover story for shoehorning gene theory as real by its damage - while the damage is some other poison or synergy of poisons. That is to say I am not at all inclined to accept transfection theory, but I can accept cell death as part of any toxic shock and that as we know releases proteins that may be what s-protein was defined as, so as to then be 'found' by testing.

If you think any of this is way off - give me another view?

Expand full comment

I''m not entirely sure what the S-protein is other than it is not what they claim. I've seen enough evidence to make me skeptical of proteins in general, but I haven't delved into it too much on my own. This was the deepest investigation I did into the origins of the S-protein:


Expand full comment

'Stress proteins' were noted in a study :

DNA is a fractal antenna in electromagnetic fields

* April 2011

* International Journal of Radiation Biology 87(4):409-15


* Source

* PubMed


Martin Blank

* Columbia University

The realm of bio-field is cutting edge bio-hack.

At least as the attempt intent to marketise or weaponise (another gold rush for investors to then drive the narratives that become too big to fail - as with genes and germs/virology).


To review the responses of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in different frequency ranges, and characterise the properties of DNA as an antenna. We examined published reports of increased stress protein levels and DNA strand breaks due to EMF interactions, both of which are indicative of DNA damage. We also considered antenna properties such as electronic conduction within DNA and its compact structure in the nucleus. EMF interactions with DNA are similar over a range of non-ionising frequencies, i.e., extremely low frequency (ELF) and radio frequency (RF) ranges. There are similar effects in the ionising range, but the reactions are more complex. The wide frequency range of interaction with EMF is the functional characteristic of a fractal antenna, and DNA appears to possess the two structural characteristics of fractal antennas, electronic conduction and self symmetry. These properties contribute to greater reactivity of DNA with EMF in the environment, and the DNA damage could account for increases in cancer epidemiology, as well as variations in the rate of chemical evolution in early geologic history.

I don't share the storied assumptions of the article BTW - but I note of DNA biofield interactions that I associate with structured water (at nano-scale not just EZ) UPSTREAM to the gene doma of a physical (closed system) determinism. Proteins 'do their thing' in and by structuring/destructuring or phase changes that fold/unfold synthesise/replicate as translation of field information to mediums of differing response.

That might account for proteins that can be triggered by application of fields or modification of the medium and then assigned to 'transfection' (which is the man made version of what a virus is asserted to do.

It remains possible emf (not just 5g or even man made emf) contributes to a weakening of zeta potential (vitality and resilience of the living organism) - possibly by blocking communications for healing rebalancing - for the Biofield of Earth/Cosmos is our living context - not a separate thing.

And it remains possible that stealth exposures generate what is defined as 'spike protein' such as lipid nanoparticles - but even so these are colloidal or clumpy according to zeta potential - so even if NOT 'weaponised' or coordinated to act in synergy - they do.

If we WANT a good story that truth can wait on our experience to tire of - then we find or make one. That is 'gaming addiction' to effectively run on and as 'game theory' which is another level of modelling that is being applied to our world via predictive modelling instead of living relationships - (that are being replaced by zero-trust as zero tolerance for risk).

The idea that our consciousness is the primary effect or alignment of our own field but that we can assign responsibility externally and so suffer as if at the hand of an other has to then realise we use our mind to depreciate our mind. Like the idea of using 100% of our mind to give ourselves the experience of using only 1% or is that 0.001%? (Progressive limitation as a result of an out-of-control, control mentality).

None of our models is more than a set of definitions by which to generate experience - that may be more or less resonant/disonnant with felt nature (not our defined 'nature').

Expand full comment