International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 355
Cyborgs R Us: The Bio-Nano Panopticon of Injected Bodies?
Valerie Kyrie1 and Daniel Broudy2
1PhD in Experimental Psychology, Masters in Clinical Psychology
2Professor of Applied Linguistics, Okinawa Christian University, Nishihara-cho, Okinawa 903-0207, Japan,
firstname.lastname@example.org ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2725-6914
A survey and critical analysis of literatures in biotech, nanotech, and materials science can yield important insights on
major threats facing humanity in a world divided largely by highly compartmentalized epistemic communities.
Interdisciplinary research on the well-documented problems posed to human beings by the injectable mRNA platforms
claiming to address COVID-19 medical complications reveal surprising, if not deeply troubling, new evidence of
apparent fraud and deceit. Analysis presented here bolsters both the reported laboratory studies of blood samples from
injected subjects and experimental work exploring the potential reasons for observed phenomena relating to
electromagnetic properties exhibited in human bodies. The impetus for this cross-disciplinary study was current reports
from a substantial proportion of injected subjects who emitted alphanumeric signals in the frequency range
corresponding to Bluetooth communications networks. Discussion of these bizarre phenomena are framed by a wider
historical context in nanotechnology as an emergent industry and by recent commentary emanating from noteworthy
public figures concerning surveillance under the skin and the disappearance of civil and human rights.
Keywords: BioNano Age, Bluetooth connectivity, IoB, IoBNT, IoT, IoNT, MAC phenomenon, mRNA platforms,
This essay extends the cross-disciplinary study undertaken in an earlier article titled “Syllogistic Reasoning
Demystifies Evidence of COVID-19 Vaccine Constituents” (Broudy & Kyrie, 2021). In that article, we
addressed issues beyond the impaired reasoning that had, apparently, informed development of mRNA
“platforms” (Moderna, 2020), which continue to pose as vaccines in mainstream media, and thereby in the
public discourse. It was necessary, we felt, to grapple with the countless claims being made in various
alternative media that these new injectable platforms were causing, beyond “Sudden Adult Death
Syndrome” (Enerio, 2022), bizarre reactions resembling magnetism.
This present study has lead us to conclude that any honest and open analysis of vaccines — or any
technological platform pretending to be a vaccine — must also include critical discussion of an even larger
agenda at work hardly acknowledged by the mainstream gatekeepers framing and guiding polite
conversation. The “vaccines” (hereafter, “platforms”) are at the very center of the construction of a global
network of communications needed for the commodification of objects and bodies (Sinclair et al., 2019).
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 356
The conceptual work that has long guided vaccine development over the decades has clearly given way to
entirely new delivery systems of adjuvants (Cao et al., 2020), substances which are drawn today from
ongoing research in nanotechnology, biotech, and materials science. The Bio-Nano Age (Bushnell, 2001),
therefore, has moved from theory to practice, without the sufficient awareness and consent of a global
population largely uninformed about the banking and big business (WEF, 2020, p. 10) forces financializing
everything — synthetic and natural. This turn is, furthermore, entirely reasonable in a world dominated by
the erroneous belief that the leading concepts of speed, security, safety and efficiency are — beyond all
things — more valuable than life itself.
To ground our present analysis of the discourse and to reveal unmistakable signifiers of the Bio-Nano Age,
we begin with a somewhat long reference to a key scene in a piece of cinematic art which would, very likely,
never appear in theatres today. We find in this scene a newsreader of a major media company, having gone
off script and telling the truth to the public, being castigated by the company’s president.
You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it, is that clear?! You think you have
merely stopped a business deal — that is not the case! The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and
now they must put it back. It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity, it is ecological balance! You are an old man who thinks in
terms of nations and peoples. There are no nations! There are no peoples! There are no Russians. There are no Arabs!
There are no third worlds! There is no West! There is only one holistic system of systems, one vast and immane,
interwoven, interacting, multi-variate, multi-national dominion of Dollars! … It is the international system of currency
that determines the totality of life on this planet! That is the natural order of things today! That is the atomic, subatomic
and galactic structure of things today! And you have meddled with the primal forces of nature, and you will atone! …
… We no longer live in a world of nations and ideologies, Mr. Beale. The world is a college of corporations, inexorably
determined by the immutable by-laws of business. The world is a business, Mr. Beale! It has been since man crawled out
of the slime, and our children, Mr. Beale, will live to see that perfect world in which there is no war and famine,
oppression and brutality — one vast and ecumenical holding company, for whom all men will work to serve a common
profit, in which all men will hold a share of stock, all necessities provided, all anxieties tranquilized, all boredom amused.
And I have chosen you to preach this evangel, Mr. Beale.
What could this impassioned exchange between a corporate media executive and an uninitiated plebe teach
us about the world today? First, it is hard to estimate the significance of the meaning of Sidney Lumet’s
1976 directorial masterpiece Network (Chayefsky, 1976) for contemporary societies contending with the
fervent evangelism emanating from the World Economic Forum — a mere child when the film first
appeared in theatres. It is likely, too, just an interesting irony that the most articulate evangelist today for the
world — as described to Mr. Beale — was born in the very same year of Network’s debut. Yuval Noah
Harari, hailed by New York Times Chief European Business Correspondent as “the world’s most influential
historian of the future” (Harari, 2021a), scorns human meaning and purpose with the same sort of zeal that
Mr. Beale’s antagonist does in the film.
The film Network reads today as an urgent message for scholars of communication and propaganda, which
may be the most important areas of research, at this moment in time, to deconstruct the processes of
political and medical mystification at work around the world. The film is a mirror of the present — both a
figurative and literal representation of networked communications, networks of power relations, and
networks of injected biological bodies integrated into the “global central nervous system” (Broudy &
Arakaki, 2020). It is no exaggeration to say that no other tyranny in human history has hung more heavily
upon humanity and its freedom and sovereignty than the present age — with its manifold forms of highly
organized deception, oppression, and dispossession, “brilliantly camouflaged” (Kyrie & Broudy, 2022) under
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 357
the cynical cover of altruistic medical interventions. This article considers the present messaging and tactics
used by this global “business” whose true meaning is unveiled to us, like Mr. Beale in the boardroom.
A Global Network of Medicalized Population Control?
If total dispossession of natural and civil rights is the plan for humanity (Auken, 2020), an organized
program of integration and agitation propaganda must work unceasingly to manage perception of the
medical simulacrum maintained by the WHO, the CDC, and the FDA, and to preserve media simulations of
an idealized world obscuring the empirical reality of corrupted corporate science and campaigns of
censorship. Since language and all other “discursive and presentational symbols” (Langer, 1957) form the
very foundation upon which meaning is negotiated, the leading symbols must be controlled and directed by
these totalizing powers that be (Broudy & Kyrie, 2022).
Marx’s call for workers of the world to unite to seize the means of production betrays, we contend, even
more fundamental concerns shared across humanity — the natural rights of people to exercise their free
will to reproduce life itself. Absent this elemental right, human beings and human purpose can be effectively
undermined by the owners of the means of production. Peter Phillips recognized this and expanded on the
work of C. Wright Mills in The Power Elite (1956) to develop a crucial critique of the new order of power in
today’s age of globalization. Phillips referred to these new elites as a transnational organization of “Giants”
(2018) who effectively hold sway over political, social and economic orders by virtue of their control over
the technological levers that bind and guide the world and its resources. In the West, as Oliver Boyd-Barrett
notes, these Giants can be located in the activities of the “MICIMATT” — the military-industrial-
congressional-intelligence-media-thinktank complex — the “insufferable Incubus that determines foreign
In the past, this level of influence appeared largely in the guise of control over the means of production,
but today that influence has advanced to unprecedented levels of control over the means of re-production.
For years, we have seen the leading narratives and claimed imperatives evolve in public forums where the
Giants issue thinly veiled threats to curb rising global populations.
While Bill Gates has long been suspected of using his foundation’s investments in genetic engineering
ventures and vaccine R&D to manage (or check) the fertility of population centers, we can see today
industry leaders issuing bold claims about the very meaning and purpose of humanity itself. Such suspicions
have likely formed because of Gates’s outspoken concerns about populations, his ceaseless reproduction of
the myths of over-population, and his self-appointed role as the arbiter of human reproduction. Beyond
Gates, more broadly, a formula for recalibrating the value of humanity has become increasingly evident in
the gambits of elites: they urge us to make good use of easy and open access to powerful vehicles of
mainstream discourse, undertake a program of incubating dehumanizing propaganda that inculcates a
widespread sense of self-loathing, and mesmerize human beings into serving as willing recipients of all sorts
of technological updates injected or otherwise integrated into their own bodies.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 358
Of Human Trans-formation
The world is in transition — from transformers, transgenders, transhumanists, transplantations, and
transnationalism to transathletics, transient communities, and the transmission of disease by new bionano
Yuval Noah Harari, for example — the historical auger for the World Economic Forum as well as Mark
Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Barack Obama, Harvard, Stanford and many more — has suggested that
unadulterated human beings will soon be sufficiently worthless to the transnational Giants that humanity
will need to be radically transitioned to re-engineering (Miller, 2018). While the audacity of such a claimed
necessity may appear to be on par with the bizarre antihuman world contemplated in “The Obsolete Man”
of The Twilight Zone, Harari’s assertion is not grounded in fiction but, rather, in a global social milieu where
“logic is enemy and truth is a menace” (Serling, 1961). In 2016, the famed historian told the Royal
Institution (2022) “the ultimate value of human beings will be just as consumers that will do nothing useful
at all — but the economy needs consumers. However, you could have consumers which are not humans,
which are not conscious” (Harari, 2016).
From this, we suspect machines that consume electricity and petroleum products are not part of Harari’s
calculus. He further described a scenario in which corporations trade with one another, managed by an
algorithm, explaining that “they trade, and they make billions of dollars, and you don’t need any humans”.
Of course, the presupposition that informs this pathological thinking has been effectively deconstructed by
Wendy Brown: “ … neoliberal rationality disseminates the model of the market to all domains and activities —
even where money is not at issue — and configures human beings exhaustively as market actors, always,
only, and everywhere as homo oeconomicus” (Brown, 2015).
The upshot, according to Harari, will be what he has described as a class of “useless people” who are
“meaningless — worthless” (Harari, 2015a), with no value under a dominion of dollars, and no inherent
right, under the by-laws of business, to exist. He opined in 2015b:
We don’t have any answer in the Bible what to do when human beings are no longer useful to the economy. You need
completely new ideologies, completely new religions, and they are likely to emerge from Silicon Valley.
The cults of Silicon Valley, moreover, Harari ordains, promise to elevate the masters of the technological
universe from the status of transnational Giants to that of gods: “We are really upgrading humans into
gods”, he said (Harari, 2020a). He boasts that the Giants of the future will
… even go beyond God. Even if you believe in the Bible, the only thing the God of the Bible managed to create is
organic beings … Now we want to create inorganic life … Divinity is not far enough to describe what we are trying to
do … We are much better than the God of the Bible (Harari, 2017).
Which begs the question: What will the new “better” gods of inorganic life do with us lesser organic beings?
“I think given the immense power of the technologies we are developing”, Harari pronounced, “there are
two scenarios only”:
One scenario is that the technology will destroy humanity. I think it’s less likely, but still possible. The more likely
scenario is that it will change humanity in a profound way. That we will use AI and bioengineering to change Homo
Sapiens and to create new kinds of beings that will be much more different from us than we are different from
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 359
Neanderthals or from chimpanzees … (Harari, 2020b). We are probably one of the last generations of Homo Sapiens
(Harari, 2018a) … If you’re not part of the revolution fast enough then you’ll probably become extinct (Harari, 2015a).
Extinct? Alter Homo sapiens? Create new kinds of beings? What kinds of beings?
Maybe the most important impact of the new technologies is that they will change the very meaning of humanity, and
they will change the basic rules of the game of life. For 4 billion years — that’s a very long time — nothing fundamental
changed in the basic rules of life. All of life, for this immense period was subject to the laws of natural selection and of
organic biochemistry … But in the coming decades, that is about to change. Science is about to replace natural selection
with intelligent design … Not the intelligent design of some God above the clouds, but our intelligent design, and the
intelligent design of our clouds (Harari, 2018b).
The phrase “intelligent design” he noted, “immediately brings to the mind of many people the creationist
idea that all life forms are designed by God, and sometimes people tell me ‘don’t use the term intelligent
design’. But it is intelligent design, what we are about to see in the world, it’s just not the intelligent design of
the God of the Bible” (Harari, 2018c).
Whether intelligent or foolish to seek to overwrite human history by entrusting tech moguls to re-engineer
biological life, social relations, and human civilization for the good of the economy is one philosophical
question too far for Harari to ponder. As is the question of whether The Economy™ rather than humanity
should change when The Economy™ no longer serves human beings. Instead, while technological design is
actively marketed as “intelligent” — with the advent of artificial “intelligence”, “smart” cities, “smart” cars,
“smart” bombs, and “smart” phones — the wisdom of Silicon Valley’s unnatural designs on humanity is
taken as an article of faith. It is the dogma of the cult of technocracy as outlined by Harari. After all, how
could anyone argue with the man who actually wrote the book on the Homo sapiens?
But what kind of “intelligent” design does Dr. Harari have in mind?
Now, already today we have the technical ability to start redesigning humanity … The inorganic way, of linking humans
to computers, brains to computers or even creating completely non-organic entities, artificial intelligence — perhaps
even artificial consciousness — which is even a more radical change. You can say that genetic engineering is just playing
with the same bits and pieces that evolution has played with for billions of years. This is something completely new —
to create really inorganic entities (Harari, 2022).
New inorganic entities? Now, already today?
Now humans are developing even bigger powers than ever before. We are really acquiring divine powers of creation and
destruction. We are really upgrading humans into gods. We are acquiring, for instance, the power to re-engineer life
That God-like power, Harari elaborated, resides not with morality nor a grasp on empirical truth but with
science. “Science is not really about truth”, he said, “it’s about power. The real aim of science as a project —
as an establishment — is not truth, it’s power” (Harari, 2015b).
With the power of the scientific establishment at their disposal, Harari foresees a future in which Silicon
Valley gods will relegate the human qualities of today — a soul, an identity and free will — to the scrap
heap of yesterday’s quaint but obscure human anomalies. The process is part of a highly organized program
of planned obsolescence writ large that transitions man from organic carbon-based lifeforms to synthetic
cyborgs owned in part or whole by the technocratic Giants.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 360
The product this time will not be textiles or machines or vehicles or even weapons. The product this time will be
humans themselves. We are basically learning to produce bodies and minds (Harari, 2015a).
In Harari’s vision of a techtopia ruled by Silicon Valley gods, those human products will think and act not
for themselves, but according to the codes of their manufacturers.
Crucial decisions in people’s lives — what to study, where to work, whom to marry, whom to vote for — there is an
algorithm out there that can tell you better than what you can tell yourself what to do ... And people think it can never
happen. “Humans are too complicated. We have souls. We have spirits. No algorithm can ever figure out these mysterious things like the
human soul or free will.” But I think that this is 18th century mythology … Now or very soon we will have the technology
to do it (Harari, 2018d).
If you have a good two-way communication system directly between brains and computers, it also means you can
connect several brains together, to create an interbrain net … And nobody has any idea what this means for things like
identity. Who am I, when I can access directly the brain of another person? (Harari, 2018c)
Who are we, indeed? And who are we, as nodes on a global inter-brain network, to expect the same rights
that we enjoyed as natural beings endowed with personhood? Dignity, autonomy, agency, privacy ...
For the first time in history, it’s possible to completely eliminate privacy”, Harari told The Athens Democracy Forum,
which partners with the New York Times, Microsoft, Facebook and Amazon. “It was just never possible before, and it is
now. Something fundamental has changed. I mean dictators always dreamt about completely eliminating privacy:
monitoring everybody all the time, and knowing … not just everything you do, but everything you think, and everything
you feel … They could never do it because it was technically impossible. Now it’s possible” (Harari, 2021a).
Now we are told categorically it is technologically possible to erase privacy? How is this so? Why is such a
disruption to bodily autonomy promoted with such zeal?
Analysis of the Timeline of Possibilities
On April 14 2020, a mere 13 days after the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic,
Harari explained that, with the global response to COVID-19, we were seeing “a change in the nature of
surveillance. Previously surveillance was mainly above the skin. Now it’s going under the skin. Governments
want to know not just where we go or who we meet — above all they want to know what is happening
under our skin” (Harari, 2020c).
“This was the moment”, he later added during a panel discussion with the President of Microsoft, “when
everything became monitored. [It was the moment] that we agreed to be surveilled, all the time” (Harari,
It was? We did?
Harari told The Late Late Show early in The Pandemic™, on 16 April 2020:
What’s happening now, it’s really a watershed in the history of surveillance. First of all, we see mass surveillance systems
entering and being adopted in democratic countries, which previously resisted them. Secondly, we see the nature of
surveillance changing from over the skin surveillance to under the skin surveillance (Harari, 2020e).
By “under the skin surveillance” Harari explained to BBC Hard Talk in May 2020 he meant not merely
medical measurements such as temperature or heart rate. Under the skin surveillance, he stressed, would
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 361
enable governments and corporations to monitor not just what we do, but what we think and feel while we
are doing it, to the extent that they would “know me better than I know myself ” (Harari, 2020f).
“Once you have under the skin surveillance you can know that”, he said, “because emotions and feelings are
biological phenomena, just like fever.” Harari added that he thought it was likely that “people could look
back in 100 years and identify the coronavirus epidemic as the moment when a new regime of surveillance
took over, especially surveillance under the skin. Which I think is maybe the most important development
of the 21st century” (Harari, 2020f).
Is Harari some sort of Biblical prophet? What on Earth was he talking about? In April and May of 2020
citizens were still “sheltering in place” to “flatten the curve” and spare the hospital system unnecessary
burdens. Or so they thought.
Nevertheless, the “watershed” in surveillance and data collection ushered in under the cover of a COVID-
19 emergency, Harari has since stated on numerous occasions, has rendered human beings “hackable
animals”. All of which makes considerations such as a human soul, spirit, and free will redundant and
anachronistic in his view.
Governments and corporations for the first time in history have the power to basically hack human beings … Humans
are now hackable animals,” he observed (Harari, 2021b).
The whole idea that humans have, you know, this soul or spirit and they have free will … that’s over (Harari, 2021b).
It may seem puzzling to the casual observer why a scholar of Harari’s rank would offer such bizarre claims
about human beings — a category of sentient biological lifeforms he appears to belong to still. His
descriptions remind us of the Chancellor of the State in the Obsolete Man episode who had pitilessly
sentenced the librarian to death, but who was also ultimately judged to be a “ghost from another time”
condemned to liquidation. This totalitarian warning brings us to the latest existential threat from today’s
technocratic order. While integration propaganda has kept populations tightly focused on medical threats
and strictly medical answers in response to COVID-19, investigations in the realm of nanotechnology have
shed light on the possible meanings behind some of Harari’s more perplexing pronouncements.
The particularly bold assertion that COVID-19 sent surveillance under the skin, such that privacy and free
will are “over”, representing “the most important development of the 21st century”, may perhaps be
understandable in terms of what has been described as an intracorporeal network, posited to be delivered in
Granted, the possibility that technocratic Giants might weaponize science to inject humanity with
clandestine transhumanist platforms seems too outrageous to contemplate. A reality plucked so boldly from
the annals of science fiction falls more comfortably into the realm of “conspiracy theory” than that of any
serious scientific hypothesis.
And yet the fact abides that the “world’s most influential historian of the future” enjoys a powerful stage
from which to launch assurances to the world’s technocratic Giants that the conquest of human biology,
and the transformation of human beings into soulless products, is well underway: the human brain now
belongs to Silicon Valley, the body to science; Homo Sapiens is all but extinct, and COVID-19 is the
“watershed moment” when state surveillance breached the boundaries of the epidermis to engage the
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 362
neurological life of the mind. Life is imitating fiction on a world stage. Megalomaniacal fantasies are now
the stuff of empirical reality and polity. Science™ is power. Power is Science™. Sick is healthy. Healthy is
sick. Safe is Dangerous. Separate is together. Captivity is freedom. 1984 was fiction. 2022 is real.
New Ways of Gaining “Social” Connectivity
No sooner did COVID-19 interventions go under the skin than indications of the surveillance to which
Harari had referred began to appear in the public discourse. Following anecdotal observations of Bluetooth
signals emanating from those injected against COVID-19, in November 2021 an international research
cohort investigated these phenomena under controlled conditions (Sarlangue et al., 2021). Their study
returned the rather astonishing finding that a substantial proportion of vaccinated individuals emitted
alphanumeric signals in the frequency range corresponding to Bluetooth signals. The alphanumeric signals
did not accord with those of known manufacturers, were “not constant in time and their appearance [was]
brief ”. The investigators reported “a very clear prominence of signals emitted in an ambient
[electromagnetically exposed] environment compared to signals emitted in an environment without
electromagnetic activity”. In other words, COVID “vaccine” recipients appeared to show signs of Bluetooth
technology inside their bodies, which interacted with electromagnetic radiation. Surveillance under the skin?
Given the backdrop of historical pharmaceutical industry fraud (Anonymous, 2020; Llamas, 2022), the
testimony of COVID “vaccine” manufacturing whistleblowers (Thacker, 2021), the existence of vaccine
industry immunity from liability for harm (Knightly, 2021), dedicated global Vaccine™ brand management
operations (Facher, 2021; Rosen, 2022; World Bank, 2022), conflicts of interest throughout COVID policy
(Beeley, 2020; Frei, 2021; Matters, 2021), regulatory capture (Kennedy, 2021), and the unequivocal Fourth
Industrial / transhumanist agendas of the world’s most powerful military-industrial, political and financial
actors (Broudy & Kyrie, 2021; Kyrie & Broudy, 2022; Matters, 2021), such a question seems reasonable, if
not imperative, to ask. Indeed, the legal system appears to be showing signs of taking such questions
seriously, with an Administrative Litigation Court in Uruguay issuing a court order for the Uruguayan
Government and Pfizer to provide “documentation on the composition of the vaccines, including the
possible presence of ‘graphene oxide’ or ‘nanotechnological elements’ ” (AFP, 2022).
Meanwhile, the underlying gaps in knowledge papered over by the scientific establishment in defense of
transnational Giants have included: What has gone under the skin in the name of COVID-19? What is in
the COVID-19 “vaccines”, and how does that differ by batch or manufacturer? And what are the
implications for human health, human societies, and humanity itself?
With researchers and practitioners around the world reporting undeclared and apparently bizarrely
(bio)mechanical nano-contents in COVID-19 injections (Anonymous, 2022a; Anonymous 2022b; Botha,
2021; Campra, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, 2022; Delgado, 2022; Ghitalla, 2021a; La Quinta Columna, 2022; Lee et
al., 2022; Monteverde et al., 2022; Shelton & Gray, 2021; Young, 2021), accompanied by evidence of
unidentified inorganic structures in the blood of injected individuals (Anonymous, 2022b; Botha, 2021;
Ghitalla, 2021b; Koroknay, 2021; van Welbergen, 2021; Yanowitz, 2022; Young, 2021), combined with
reports of apparent Bluetooth connectivity in the vaccinated (Sarlangue et al., 2021), a set of possibilities
anchored in relevant scientific literatures has been proposed. In a comprehensively referenced video
presentation titled “The MAC Phenomenon” investigator Mik Anderson explains that the alphanumeric
sequences documented in vaccine recipients signify what are known as Media Access Control — or MAC —
addresses (Anderson, 2022).
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 363
The presence of anonymous, transient and EMF-responsive MAC addresses in vaccinated people, Anderson
(2022) posits, indicates the existence of an “intracorporeal network” that is designed to use Bluetooth low
energy (BLE) frequencies for sending and receiving signals between a person’s body and the outside world.
The likely underlying hardware, he suggests, is a micro- or nano-interface, described in the scientific
literature as technology that enables “communication of nano-machines inside the human skin”, using
“nano-networks” that are capable of facilitating “body-centric wireless communication” (Abbasi et al.,
The goal of such technology, according to mainstream scholarly literatures, is to expand the Internet of
Things (IoT) to an Internet of Bodies (IoB) via an “Internet of Nano-Things” (Akhtar & Purwej, 2020;
Gulek, 2022). Nanothings are at the center of what has been called the real “second industrial revolution”
(Khan, 2014), and revolve around materials or phenomena that exist on a nanometer (billionth of a meter)
scale, spawning nanotechnology whose devices are comprised of single atoms or molecules, with novel
properties and behavior such as superparamagnetism (Bao & Gupta, 2011; Chen et al., 2017; Zapotoczny &
Kapusta, 2019) that are unique to their nanoscale (for reviews see Akhtar & Perwej, 2020, Arvidsson &
Hansen, 2020, and Bayda et al., 2019).
Empirical Evidence of Bio-Nano-Connections
While it has not yet entered common currency, the term “Internet of NanoThings” (IoNT) (Akyildiz &
Jornet, 2010) was coined in 2010 to capture the process of ongoing technical developments in
“communication between nanomachines” (Suda et al., 2005) and “nanoelectromagnetics” (Rutherglen &
Burke, 2008). From the very outset of this research, a leading application of the IoNT was expected to be
not only networks of interconnected gadgets but “intrabody nanonetworks” (Akyildiz & Jornet, 2010).
Technologically speaking, human bodies are promising environments in which to develop nanonetworks, as
nanomachines on their own “represent small devices or components that are capable of performing only
very simple tasks of computation, sensing, or actuation” (Suda et al., 2005). However, “if multiple
nanomachines communicate, they may cooperate and perform complex tasks such as nano-scale
computing” according to computer scientists from the University of California Irvine, Suda et al., in 2005 at
an annual conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation. Should that communication occur “by for
instance, using signal molecules (e.g., ions, proteins, DNA) in an aqueous environment [such as the human
body], [the nanomachines] can perform more complex computing functionality” the group explained. “With
the advancement of current research in synthetic biology and in bio-nanotechnologies, it may become
relatively easy in the near future to adapt existing components from biological systems (e.g., receptors, nano-
scale reactions, communication molecules) to design a framework for molecular communication between
nanomachines”, they advised. In other words, industry and academia were already poised in 2005 to turn
living biological things, such as humans, into walking wireless computer networks.
A keynote speaker at the conference, an MIT biological engineer, placed such developments in context by
noting, much like Harari, that, “biology is going through a fundamental transition — from preexisting,
natural, and evolving systems, to synthetic, engineered, and disposable systems. Here, I will discuss … some
of the social, political, and risk opportunities and pitfalls worth considering as we begin to systematically
engineer the living world” (Endy, 2005).
In that living world in 2022, the IoB and IoNT are now expected to serve “biomedical, environmental,
industrial and military” ends, as well as have applications in “other fields such as consumer electronics, life
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 364
style and home appliances” (Abbasi et al., 2016) as part of the infrastructure for “smart” cities (Khan et al.,
2020). So ubiquitous is the underlying research and development that nanomachines under the skin are
essentially taken as a given among electrical engineers and senior members of IEEE — the world’s largest
professional association representing the field of technology, an organization that produces nearly a third of
the world’s technical literature in electrical and computer sciences. Such pervasive industry assumptions and
revelations about revolutionary nano-communications technologies are of a piece with Harari’s
pronouncements that the products of the future will be human beings.
Importantly for the credibility of Anderson’s (2022) parallel proposals regarding a MAC phenomenon
delivered in COVID-19 “vaccines”, technology such as nanonetworks has been developing at “triple
exponential” rates in recent decades, the Chief Scientist at NASA Langley, Dennis Bushnell, told his
national security partners in 2001 (Bushnell, 2001). Nanotechnological developments including nanotags,
“borgs”, and brain-machine interfaces were well underway as early as 2001 and “no pixie dust”, he informed
his colleagues in the military-intelligence and environmental science worlds (Bushnell, 2001, 2011). During
Bushnell’s 2001 presentation, in which he covered the fruits of NASA’s collaborations with DARPA, the
CIA, the DoD and over 30 other agencies, Bushnell gave the intelligence community what he called a
“heads up” that a new era would commence in 2020, ushering in a radically reconfigured technological and
social landscape, which he dubbed the Bio-Nano Age.
The Bio-Nano era, Bushnell said, was set to subsist on “social disruption” and to involve the “surreptitious
nano ‘tagging’ ” of “everything/everyone” with “microwave interrogation” for “status and identification
purposes”. In other words, it would see the introduction of covert surveillance under the skin. Bushnell
(2001) also foresaw a Bio-Nano future of weaponized viruses and “serious ‘Psywar’ ”. While empirical
reality may appear to be imitating fiction since 2020, in other words, it is also approximating, very closely,
the stated intentions of the national security agency tasked with “creating the future” (O’Keefe, 2002) —
Boasting more than space exploration to its name, NASA administrator Sean O’Keefe told the Maxwell
School of Citizenship and Public Affairs in 2002, “from medical devices to better tires, many of the
products we use and experience every day have their origins in NASA technology”. Sure enough, by 2021
the Internet of NanoThings had begun giving way to the Internet of BioNanoThings as foreshadowed by
NASA, according to a paper posted on the Cornell University website. The internet of BioNanoThings, the
authors explained, will open up “a heterogeneous network of nanoscale and biological devices …
communicating via non-conventional means … in non-conventional environments, e.g., inside the human
body.” The result will be “close interaction between bio and cyber-domains,” they said, enabling “intrabody
continuous health monitoring” (Kuscu & Unluturk, 2021).
Based upon existing protocols for (bio)nanonetworks and intrabody monitoring (Akyildiz & Journet, 2010;
Balghusoon & Mahfoudh, 2020; Cruz Alvorado & Bazán, 2019), Anderson (2022) proposes that any
injectable intracorporeal networks which may have been surreptitiously deployed under COVID-19 EUA
likely utilize personal devices, including mobile phones or wearable technologies, as gateways to relay data
packets between a person’s body and the internet. Such an arrangement would accord with the architecture
for integrating intrabody networks with “off-body networks” as described in the IoNT literature (e.g. see
Balasubramaniam & Kangasharju, 2013; Balghousoon & Mahfoudh, 2020; Cruz Alvorado & Bazán, 2019).
See Appendix A for a selection of diagrammatic representations of anticipated Body-Centric Wireless
Networks as in Figure 1.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 365
Candidates for injectable components of such a network, Anderson (2022) posits based on the components
IoNT architecture (Akyildiz & Journet, 2010; Balghusoon & Mahfoudh, 2020; Cruz Alvarado & Bazán,
2019; Lee et al., 2015), include: a. nanodevices, also termed nanonodes (Cruz Alvarado & Bazán, 2019), a
broad category that encompasses technology such as nanosensors (Balasubramaniam & Kangasharju, 2013;
Khan et al., 2020; Lee et al., 2015), which can circulate in blood vessels (Figure 5) and harvest energy from
the bloodstream or heartbeat (Balghousoon & Mahfoudh, 2020), and/or cross the blood brain barrier to
potentially read and transmit neural activity (Taylor, 2021), injectable and “single cell” nanoradios (Burke &
Rutherglen, 2010; Dolev & Narayanan, 2019), nanowires (Dambri et al., 2020), nanoantennae (Akyildiz &
Journet, 2010; Lee et al., 2015), magnoelectric nanorobots (Betal et al., 2018) and neural-nanorobots,
comprising endoneurobots, gliabots, and synaptobots that are capable of interfacing with individual neurons
and synapses to create a “human brain/cloud interface” (Martins et al., 2019), among other
nanotechnologies; b. nanorouters, which “act as aggregators of information coming from nanonodes”
Figure 1. The IoNT architecture in the healthcare system. From A. O. Balghusoon and S. Mahfoudh,
2020, IEEE Access 8, 200724-200748. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 366
according to IoNT literature (Cruz Alvarado & Bazán, 2019). See Balghousoon and Mahfoudh (2020) for a
review of over 20 nanorouting protocols, including for intrabody applications; and, c. nanointerfaces or
gateways, defined by Balghusoon and Mahfoudh (2020) as a “complex hybrid device that integrates the nano
world with the external world”.
Figure 2. Examples of molecular (a) and (b) nanonetworks to a microgateway. From S. Balasubramaniam and J.
Kangasbarju (2013), Realizing the internet of nanothings: challenges, solutions, and applications. Computer, 46,
62-68. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
Figure 3. IoNT middleware system architecture. Microgateways contain system management and data
analysis modules. On the user end, programing abstractions link to the microgateway middleware, and
application services use data from the nanonetworks. The image and preceding text is from S.
Balasubramaniam and J. Kangasbarju (2013), Realizing the internet of nanothings: challenges, solutions,
and applications. Computer, 46, 62-68. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 367
Balasubramaniam and Kangasharju (2013), for example, describe the following nanocomponents of an
intrabody wireless nanonetwork architecture (see Figures 2 and 3) capable of connecting to the outside
world, utilizing both bodily molecular and electromagnetic communication: nanosensors, implantable
microgateways, external microgateways, energy-harvesting nanowires, and mobile phones. Inspired by the
promise of “nanomaterials, such as graphene,” Akyildiz et al. (2015) detail the IoBNT paradigm shift in
“concealable and non-intrusive” networked communications and computing which have allowed for the
development of “techniques for the exchange of information, interaction, and networking within the
biochemical domain, while enabling an interface to the electrical domain of the Internet”.
To illustrate how bodily molecular and electromagnetic communication might co-ordinate inside the human
body, Khan et al. (2020) depict four arrangements pertinent to “Body Area Networks” with “applications in
smart cities” in an image titled “Molecular communication paradigms. (a) Diffusion-based molecular communication.
(b) Wired active molecular communication using a microtubule. (c) Bacteria-based wireless molecular communication.
(d) Catalytic nanorods in hydrogen peroxide solution without and with applying a magnetic field (A) and (B), respectively”
(see Khan et al., 2020, p.7).
The image displays three scenarios showing different methods of molecular communication between a
“transmitter nanomachine” responsible for “emission”, and a “receiver nanomachine” responsible for
“reception”, all of which enable intrabody functions such as drug delivery and internal physiological
monitoring. In one scenario molecules are shown diffusing from the transmitter nanomachine to the
receiver nanomachine via a “fluid medium” as explained in the text. In another, molecules are shown
moving from transmitter to receiver nanomachines inside a “microtubule” via a “molecular motor”, and in a
third bacteria capable of acting as “carriers of nanorobots” are shown moving from the transmitter to the
receiver using “flagellum for propulsion”, with “DNA based information” inside.
Broadening the scope of possibilities to nanorobots that move autonomously inside the body, a fourth
scenario depicts two “catalytic nanorods” in which one rod moves randomly in the absence of a magnetic
field, while the other travels in a specific direction under the influence of magnetism. Nanorods such as
these have been dubbed “microjets and microrockets” (Mei et al., 2008) in that they can be “wirelessly and
remotely controlled” using UV and near infrared radiation, ultrasound and magnetic fields, enabling them to
achieve “controlled navigation to targeted locations” inside the body, including “many hard-to-reach tissue
locations” (Zha et al., 2018). At their destinations the nanorods can deliver drug payloads, kill unwanted cells
and act as “microdrillers” capable of “penetrat[ing] deeply into cells”, including achieving “remarkably high
average velocities at over 158,000 body lengths per second, providing a strong thrust to deeply penetrate and
deform tissues” (Zha et al., 2018).
Canovas-Carrasco et al. (2018) describe a Body Area Nano-network in the hand (Figure 4), consisting of
nanorouters and nanonodes in blood vessels, which communicate every 52 minutes, harvest energy from the
bloodstream, and send and receive signals via the TeraHertz band. Each nanonode consists of (i) a
nanoprocessor, (ii) memory nanomodules (RAM and ROM memories), (iii) a graphene radiocommunication
nanosystem, (iv) nanosensors and (v) an energy nanogenerator.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 368
Figure 4. Hierarchical BANN architecture. Image from Figure 1 of S. Canovas-Carrasco, A. J. Garcia-Sanchez, and J. Garcia-Haro
(2018), A nanoscale communication network scheme and energy model for a human hand scenario. Nano Communication
Networks, 15, 17-27. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
Simply put, what is not in dispute is whether the technology, protocols, industry intentions, and government
plans to connect human bodies to the internet, and deploy nanorobots inside the body, using a combination
of nanotechnology and “smart” technology exist. It is patently obvious that they do. The only open
questions are whether that project is, at present, covertly underway, if so how, and whether this is what
Harari meant when he said that future generations would look back on “the coronavirus epidemic as the
moment when a new regime of surveillance took over, especially surveillance under the skin” (Harari,
2020c). Should Harari’s statement refer to the mass injection of intrabody components for a Bio-Nano
Internet of Things — a reasonable hypothesis based on the IoBNT literatures — calling that “the most
important development of the 21st century” (Harari, 2020c) would make sense.
Regardless, if we are to navigate the oncoming Internet of Bodies and Internet of Bio-Nano Things with
our ethics and morality, our bodies and minds, and our societies and humanity intact, research questions
such as the following must be asked and answered according to the norms of a science that pursues truth:
Was Pablo Campra right in concluding that he found nanorouters in COVID-19 vaccines? Can that finding
be reliably replicated by other laboratories? What about other reports of similar findings across nations
(Anonymous, 2022a; Anonymous 2022b; Botha, 2021; Campra, 2021a, 2021b, 2021c, 2022; Delgado, 2022;
Ghitalla, 2021a; La Quinta Columna, 2022; Lee et al., 2022; Monteverde et al., 2022; Shelton & Gray, 2021;
Young, 2021), such as Australian investigators who documented moving structures in COVID vaccine vials,
which appeared to light up when nearby mobile phones were turned on, and dimmed again when the mobile
phones were turned off (Zeee, 2022)?
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 369
If human beings are no more than
subjects and potential products in a
vast experiment of networked
communications for a global market,
it is certainly reasonable to be
reminded each day by the Gospel of
Global Capital to re-charge the
batteries of our new synthetic
operating systems (Figure 6).
Radical though the reconfiguration
of our understanding of what is
possible must be, we are forced
either to make that psychological
and conceptual leap, in line with the
“triple exponential” (Bushnell, 2001)
speed of technological change, or let
self-appointed Silicon Valley gods
try to reshape us in their artificially
“intelligent” and soulless image.
Figure 5. Image from K. Yang, D. Bi, Y. Deng, R. Zhang, M. M. U. Rahman, N.
A. Ali, M. A. Imran, J. M. Jornet, Q. H. Abbasi, and A. Alomainy (2020). A
comprehensive survey on hybrid communication in context of molecular
communication and terahertz communication for body-centric nanonetwork.
IEEE Transactions on Molecular, Biological, and Multi-Scale Communications, 6(2), 107-
133. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that
Figure 6. Photograph: Amer Ghazzal/Rex/Shutterstock. Retrieved from https://www.shutterstock.com/editorial/image-
editorial/pedestrians-walk-past-covid-booster-poster-campaign-12789515d, July 8, 2022.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 370
Unfazed by the Annihilation of Humankind?
None of the facts we have presented here should surprise readers. The warnings of an approaching
technocratic order in which hegemonic social control is achieved over everything and everyone at all times
have been explicitly articulated over decades from the highest realms of influence. Most notably in the
postwar era, President Dwight D. Eisenhower spoke in the plainest terms of a technocratic dystopia he
observed in the context of an emerging “military industrial complex” (Broudy & Arakaki, 2020), wielding
massive unwarranted influence. “We must also be alert,” he cautioned, to the danger that “public policy
itself could become captive to a scientific technological elite” (Eisenhower, 1961).
Aldous Huxley had forewarned the world four years prior to Eisenhower in an interview with journalist
Mike Wallace. Huxley’s description of a coming era foretells a time when communications controlled by the
technocratic Giants would co-opt our capacity to reason and, like a Trojan Horse, open our minds to
consent to attacks on our human rights, agency, and sovereignty. Huxley begins with the maxim, elaborated
by Walter Lippmann in the 1920s, that officials must “manufacture [the] consent” (1922) of the people they
… if you want to preserve your power indefinitely, you have to get the consent of the ruled, and this they will do partly
by drugs as I foresaw in Brave New World, partly by these new techniques of propaganda (1958).
Earlier in the decade, Bertrand Russell lectured on “Scientific Technique in Oligarchy” and discussed a time
in the future when a technocratic elite would deploy new tools and techniques to acquire wider control over
societies. An effectively propagandized public is central to societal consent to the technological and
pharmacological interventions foisted upon citizens:
Diet, injections, and injunctions will combine, from a very early age, to produce the sort of character and the sort of
beliefs that the authorities consider desirable, and any serious criticism of the powers that be will become psychologically
impossible. Even if all are miserable, all will believe themselves happy, because the government will tell them that they
are so (Russell, 1951, p. 50).
The propaganda that has worked to normalize the convergence of human beings and technological
innovations has persisted for decades. Maybe the most popular network series that entertained audiences
and normalized the possibilities of human-machine convergence was the 1970s Six Million Dollar Man. The
implicit and explicit messaging of a global trans-human agenda has since continued unabated and has
moved from science fiction to scientific facts backed by government funding for the new technocratic
normal. Recall Elon Musk’s 2019 claim that human beings are already cyborgs (CNBC, 2019).
What we have synthesized in this survey of scientific literature, experimental data, and discourse extends our
understanding of the connections and discoveries outlined in our analysis of magnetism (Broudy & Kyrie,
2021) exhibited in people injected with the experimental platforms. We are reminded of Harari’s admission
that scientific pursuits are, foremost, not about acquiring empirical truth about the world, but about
acquiring worldly power. To “trust the Science™” is to trust its agendas and outcomes set by power-hungry
people. If we can take care to ponder how political power “must involve itself in the [process of capital]
accumulation [by] either mystify[ing] its policies [and] calling them something they are not, or ... try[ing] to
conceal them (O’Conner, 2002), as well as how the public must be kept in relative ignorance of
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 371
weaponizable scientific research (Miller, 2018), we can then begin to see the actual reasons behind the bio-
nano invasions of human bodies and the proclamations emanating from the Scientific Establishment™.
The Bio-Nano Age demands the financialization and commodification of all biological agents. All levers of
power must, therefore, work to manage the human inventory at all available levels of control. It may seem,
at present, that human beings are losing the struggle against the dehumanizing forces of anti-human trans-
humanist tech Giants. But Yuval Harari’s grandiose rhetoric can also signify desperation. The antisocial
global transhumanist movement, we suggest, is certain to annihilate itself and its adherents. The movement
itself reveals how it is determined to fall into the pit it has dug in which to bury others. It appears to be fully
blind to its own unwillingness to account for the full scope of human creativity, versatility, adaptability, and
collective will to face and surmount threats. When power so intoxicates itself that it abandons rational
thinking, morality, and empathy, it embarks on a malignant self-destructive trajectory.
Abbasi, Q. H., El Sallabi, H., Chopra, N., Yang, K., Qaraqe, K. A., and Alomainy, A. (2016). Terahertz channel characterization
inside the human skin for nano-scale body-centric networks. IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, 6(3):427-
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery. (2005). Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Program (GECCO-
Adams, M. (2022). Shocking microscopy photos of blood clots extracted from those who “suddenly died” - cyrstalline structures,
nanowires, chalky particles and fibrous structures. Natural News. https://www.naturalnews.com/2022-06-12-blood-clots-
AFP. (2022). Uruguayan Justice asks the government and Pfizer to clarify components of anticovid vaccines. France 24.
Akyildiz, I. F., and Jornet, J. M. (2010). The internet of nano-things. IEEE Wireless Communications, 17(6):58-63.
Akyildiz, I. F., Pierbon, M., Balasubramaniam, S., and Koucheryavy, Y. (2015). The Internet of Bio-nano Things. IEEE
Communications Magazine, 53(3):32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273780747_The_internet_of_Bio-
Akhtar, N., and Perwej, Y. (2020). The internet of nano things (IoNT) existing state and future Prospects. GSC Advanced Research
and Reviews, 5(2), 131-150. [PDF]
Anderson, M. (2022). The MAC Phenomenon and the intracorporeal network of nanocommunications: A review. Rumble.
Anonymous. (2020). The biggest ever pharmaceutical lawsuits. Pharmaceutical Technology. https://www.pharmaceutical-
Anonymous. (2022a). Annexure U: Vaccine investigations in Australia. Open Letter to ATAGI, TGA and Federal Health Department.
https://www.covidmedicalnetwork.com/open-letters/AnnexU LBA & Vaccine Anomalies.pdf
Anonymous. (2022b). Nanotech in the shots? Web archive. https://archive.md/O8uUS
Anonymous. (2022c). Annexure U: Blood investigations in Australia. Open Letter to ATAGI, TGA and Federal Health Department.
https://www.covidmedicalnetwork.com/open-letters/AnnexU LBA & Vaccine Anomalies.pdf
Arvidsson, R., and Hansen, S. F. (2020). Environmental and health risks of Nanorobots: An early review. Environmental Science:
Nano, 7(10), 2875–2886. [PDF]
Auken, I. (2020). Welcome to 2030: I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better. Forbes.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 372
Balghusoon, A. O., and Mahfoudh, S. (2020). Routing protocols for wireless nanosensor networks and internet of nano things: a
comprehensive survey. IEEE Access, 8, 200724-200748.
Balasubramaniam, S., and Kangasharju, J. (2013). Realizing the Internet of Nano Things: Challenges, Solutions, and Applications.
Computer, 46, 62-68. https://www.computer.org/csdl/magazine/co/2013/02/mco2013020062/13rRUxNmPHo
Bao, N., and Gupta, A. (2011). Self-assembly of superparamagnetic nanoparticles. Journal of Materials Research, 26(2), 111-121.
Bayda, S., Adeel, M., Tuccinardi, T., Cordani, M., and Rizzolio, F. (2019). The history of nanoscience and nanotechnology: From
chemical-physical applications to nanomedicine. Molecules, 25(1), 112-127.
Beeley, V. (2020). Who controls the British Government response to Covid-19? UK Column.
Betal, S., Saha, A.K., Ortega, E., Dutta, M., Ramasubramanian, A.K., Bhalla, A.S., and Guo, R. (2018). Core-shell magnetoelectric
nanorobot – A remotely controlled probe for targeted cell manipulation. Scientific Reports, 8, Article 755.
Botha, Z. (2021). Never before seen: Blood doctor reveals horrific findings after examining vials. Stew Peters Show.
Boyd-Barrett, O. (2022). Thoughts about Weapons in the Context of the NATO-Russia War. Propaganda in Focus.
Broudy, D., and Arakaki, M. (2020). Who Wants to Be a Slave? The Technocratic Convergence of Humans and Data. Frontiers in
Broudy, D., & Kyrie, V. (2021). Syllogistic reasoning demystifies evidence of COVID-19 vaccine constituents. International Journal
of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research, 2(1), 149–171. https://doi.org/10.56098/ijvtpr.v2i1.23
Broudy, D., & Kyrie, V. (2022). The Serpent and the Staff: Symbols of Safety and Security in the Propaganda of a Global Medical
Tyranny. Propaganda in Focus. https://propagandainfocus.com/the-serpent-and-the-staff-symbols-of-safety-and-security-
Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution. New York: Zone Books. [Google Books]
Burke, P., and Rutherglen, C. (2009). Toward a single-chip, implantable RFID system: Is a single-cell radio possible? Biomedical
Microdevices, 12(4), 589-596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10544-008-9266-4
Bushnell, D. (2001). Future Strategic Issues/Future Warfare.
Bushnell, D. (2011). BlueTech Forum 2011 – Keynote presentation – Dennis Bushnell, Chief Scientist, NASA Langley. BlueTech
Research. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIPBTIlxKEU
Campra, P. (2021a). Detection of graphene in Covid19 vaccines by micro-raman spectroscopy: Technical report.
Campra, P. (2021b). Microscopic objects frequently observed in mRNA Covid19 vaccines.
Campra, P. (2021c). MICROSTRUCTURES IN COVID VACCINES: Inorganic crystals or Wireless Nanosensors Network?
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 373
Campra. P. (2022). DNA crystals nanotechnology in Covid19 vaccines.
Canovas-Carrasco, S., Garcia-Sanchez, A. J., and Garcia-Haro, J. (2018). A nanoscale communication network scheme and energy
model for a human hand scenario. Nano Communication Networks, 15, 17-27.
Cao, W., He, L., Cao, W., Huang, X., Jia, K., and Dai, J. (2020). Recent progress of graphene oxide as a potential vaccine carrier
and adjuvant. Acta biomaterialia, 112:14-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2020.06.009
Chayefsky, P. (1976). Network. https://www.scriptslug.com/assets/scripts/network-1976.pdf
Chen, X.-Z., Hoop, M., Mushtaq, F., Siringil, E., Hu, C., Nelson, B. J., and Pané, S. (2017). Recent developments in magnetically
driven micro- and Nanorobots. Applied Materials Today, 9, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.04.006
CNBC. (2020). Why Elon Musk says we are already cyborgs. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/08/29/why-elon-musk-says-
Cruz Alvarado, M. A., & Bazán, P. (2019). Understanding the Internet of Nano Things: overview, trends, and challenges. E-
Ciencias de la Información, 9(1), 152-182. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/4768/476862662008/476862662008.pdf
Dambri, O. A., Cherkaoui, S., and Makrakis, D. (2022). Design and evaluation of a receiver for wired nano-communication
networks. IEEE Transactions on NanoBioscience. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.11805.pdf
Delgado, M.R. (2022). Identification of possible micro-technology and artificial patterns in Pfizer vaccine using optical
Dolev, S., and Narayanan, R. (2019). Towards radio transceiving in-vivo nano-robots. SN Applied Sciences,1:** 969.
Dugan, R. (2013). Badass. All Things Digital Conference. https://www.wsj.com/video/regina-dugan-at-d11-badass/60D5FF10-
Eisenhower, D.D. (1961). Eisenhower’s other warning – about a scientific technological elite. YouTube.
Endy, D. (2005). Keynote address: Engineering biological systems. Genetic and Evolutionar y Computation Conference Program (GECCO-
Enerio, D. (2022). Mysterious Disease Is Killing Hundreds In Australia. Medical Daily. https://www.medicaldaily.com/mysterious-
Facher, L. (2021). The White House is set to unveil a wide-reaching, billion-dollar campaign aimed at convincing every American
to get vaccinated. STAT. https://www.statnews.com/2021/03/15/white-house-unveil-a-wide-reaching-billion-dollar-
Frei, R. (2021). The modelling paper mafiosi. Off Guardian. https://off-guardian.org/2021/02/18/the-modelling-paper-mafiosi/
Ghitalla, B. (2021a). New microscope analysis of vaccines & effect on blood. TimTruth.com.
Ghitalla, B. (2021b). German Doctors and Lawyers Assess Blood Smears from People Who Have Had Covid Injections. Exposing
Their Lies. https://www.exposingtheirlies.com/post/german-doctors-and-lawyers-assess-blood-smears-from-people-
Gulek, O. (2022). Extending lifetime of Wireless Nano-Sensor Networks: An energy efficient distributed routing algorithm for
Internet of Nano-Things. *Future Generation Computer Systems, 135:*382-393.
Harari, Y.N. (2015a). Yurval Noah Harari and Daniel Kahneman interview. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 374
Harari, Y.N. (2015b). Harari, Y. (2015). Yuval Noah Harari on the myths we need to survive. Intelligence Squared, , YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2016). The Future of Humanity. The Royal Institution, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2017). Yuval Noah Harari Gives A Brief History Of Tomorrow. WGBH. YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2018a). Will the future be human? World Economic Forum, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2018b). Globalization Over Nationalism: Historian Yuval Noah Harari | India Today Conclave, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2018c). Yuval Noah Harari Q&A Session at the WEF Annual Meeting 2018. YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2018d). Yuval Noah Harari in Conversation with RUSI chairman, Lord Hague of Richmond. YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2020a). Yuval Noah Harari in conversation with Sara Pascoe. YouTube
Harari, Y.N. (2020b). The Tim Ferriss Show transcripts: Yuval Noah Harari on the story of Sapiens, forging the skill of awareness,
and the power of disguised books (#477). The Tim Ferriss Show. https://tim.blog/2020/10/30/yuval-noah-harari-
Harari, Y.N. (2020c). Yuval Noah Harari In Conversation With Rahul Kanwal. India Today, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2020d). Panel Discussion: Technology and the Future of Democracy. Athens Democracy Forum, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2020e). Yuval Noah Harari on COVID-19’s Impact on Humankind. The Late Late Show with James Corden, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2020f). Coronavirus: Yuval Noah Harari, philosopher and historian, on the legacy of Covid-19. BBC HARDtalk,
Harari, Y.N. (2021a). Dialogue: The Geopolitics of Technology. Athens Democracy Forum, YouTube.
Harari, Y.N. (2021b). Hebrew University’s Prof. Yunal Noah Harari on the era of the coronavirus: Living in a new reality. The
Hebrew University of Jerusalem, YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltJTRnNLYqY&t=1s
Harari, Y.N. (2022). Frans de Waal & Yuval Noah Harari – Empathy, Ecological Collapse & Humanity’s Future Challenges.
Huxley, A. (1958). The Dictatorship of the Future. (interview with Mike Wallace) https://archive.org/details/aldous-huxley-the-
Kennedy Jr., R.F. (2021). The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the global war on democracy and public health. New York:
Skyhorse Publishing. https://www.skyhorsepublishing.com/9781510766815/the-real-anthony-fauci/
Khan, A.S. (2014). Ethics and nanotechnology. IEEE Xplore. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6893462
Khan, T., Civas, M., Cetinkaya, O., Abbasi, N. A., and Akan, O. B. (2020). Nanosensor networks for smart health care. In
Nanosensors for Smart Cities (pp. 387-403). Elsevier. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Oktay-Cetinkaya-
Knightly, K. (2021). 30 facts you NEED to know: Your Covid cribsheet. Off Guardian. https://off-guardian.org/2021/09/22/30-
Koroknay, A. (2021). What are the effects of anti-Covid vaccines on our blood. Ethical Citizen.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 375
Kuscu, M. and Unluturk, B.D. (2021). Internet of Bio-Nano Things: A Review of Applications, Enabling Technologies and Key
Challenges. Computer Science Emerging Technologies. https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.09249
Kyrie, V., and Broudy, D. (2022). Hidden in Plain Site: Technocratic Tyranny Behind a Medical Mask. Propaganda in Focus.
Langer, S. (1957). Philosophy in a New Key: a Study in the Symbolism of Reason, Rite, and Art. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
La Quinta Columna. (2022). Pfizer Covid injection [special report] graphene, microtechnology, teslaphoresis. Rumble.
Lee, S. J., Jung, C. A., Choi, K., and Kim, S. (2015). Design of wireless nanosensor networks for intrabody application. International
Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, 11(7), Art. no. 176761.
Lee, Y.M., Park, S. & Jeon, K. (2022). Foreign materials in blood samples of recipients of COVID-19 vaccines. International Journal
of Vaccine Theory Practice and Research, 2(1), 249-265. https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/37/74
Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt Brace. [Web]
Llamas, M. (2022). Pfizer. Drug Watch. https://www.drugwatch.com/manufacturers/pfizer/
Martins, N. R., Angelica, A., Chakravarthy, K., Svidinenko, Y., Boehm, F. J., Opris, I., Lebedev, M. A., Swan, M., Garan, S. A.,
Rosenfeld, J. V., Hogg, T., and Freitas, R. A. (2019). Human brain/cloud interface. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13, Article 112.
Matters, R. (2021). mRNA “vaccines”, eugenics & the push for transhumanism. Off Guardian. https://off-
Mei, Y., Huang, G., Solovev, A. A., Ureña, E. B., Mönch, I., Ding, F., Reindl, T., Fu, R. K., Chu, P. K., & Schmidt, O. G. (2008).
Versatile approach for integrative and functionalized tubes by strain engineering of Nanomembranes on
polymers. Advanced Materials, 20(21), 4085–4090. https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.200801589
Miller, L. (2018). The History Disruptor. Slate. https://slate.com/culture/2018/11/yuval-noah-harari-sapiens-facebook-silicon-
Miller, S. (2018). Dual Use Science and Technology, Ethics and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Cham, Switzerland: Spinger Briefs
Moderna. (2020). mRNA Platform: Enabling Drug Discovery & Development. Moderna. https://www.modernatx.com/power-
Monteverde, M., Femia, A., and Lafferreire, L. (2022). Microscope vials. https://www.docdroid.net/LotSygr/analisis-argentino-
Musk, E. (2019). Why Elon Musk says we are already cyborgs. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/video/2019/08/29/why-elon-
O’Connor, J. (2002/1973). The Fiscal Crisis of the State. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
O’Keefe, S. (2002). Pioneering the future. NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/about/highlights/Pioneering.html
Phillips, P. (2018). Giants: The Global Power Elite. New York: Seven Stories Press. https://www.sevenstories.com/books/4097-giants
Rosen, A.T. (2022). The “science” of manipulation: Researchers craft messages of guilt, shame to foster vaccine compliance. The
Royal Institution. (2022). How we’re run. The Royal Institution Website. https://www.rigb.org/about-us/how-were-run
Russell, B. (1951). The Impact of Science on Society. New York: AMS Press. https://philpapers.org/rec/RUSTIO-2
Rutherglen, C. and Burke, P. (2009). Nanoelectromagnetics: Circuit and electromagnetic properties of carbon nanotubes. Small,
Sarlangue, G., Devilleger, J., Trillaud, P., Fouchet, S., Taillasson, L., and Catteau, G. (2021). Projet Bluetooth Expérience X.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 376
Serling, R. (1961). The Obsolete Man. [episode] The Twilight Zone. YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOYYCkVazBI
Shelton, M., and Gray, S. (2022). Nanotech found in Pfizer jab by New Zealand lab: Sue Grey Co-leader of Outdoors and
Freedom Party and Dr Matt Shelton report findings to Parliament’s Health Select Committee.
Sinclair, S., McHugh, N., and Roy, M. J. (2019). Social innovation, financialisation and commodification: A critique of social
impact bonds. Journal of Economic Policy Reform. 24(1).
Suda, T., Moore, M., Nakano, T., Egashira, R., Enomoto, A., Hiyama, S., and Moritani, Y. (2005). Exploratory research on
molecular communication between nanomachines. Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO), Late Breaking
Papers, 25:29. http://gpbib.pmacs.upenn.edu/gecco2005lbp/papers/40-suda.pdf
Taylor, I. (2021). The injectable nanosensor that will one day read your thoughts. BBC Science Focus Magazine.
Thacker, P. D. (2021). Covid-19: Researcher blows the whistle on data integrity issues in Pfizer’s vaccine trial. British Medical Journal,
375, n2635. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2635
van Welbergen, P. (2021). Dr Philippe (Part 2) – The Blood Slides. Loving Life TV. https://lovinglifetv.com/dr-philippe-part-two-
Walt, V. (2019). Is ‘Biochipping’ A Good Idea? Fortune. https://fortune.com/longform/biochipping-biohax-microchip/
WEF World Economic Forum (2020). The Future of Nature and Business. New Nature Economy Report II. Geneva.
World Bank. (2022). Heidi J. Larson: Director, the Vaccine Confidence Project. World Bank Blogs.
Yang, K., Bi, D., Deng, Y., Zhang, R., Rahman, M.M.U., Ali, N.A., Imran, M.A., Jornet, J.M., Abbasi, Q.H., and Alomainy, A.
(2020). A comprehensive survey on hybrid communication in context of molecular communication and terahertz
communication for body-centric nanonetworks. IEEE Transactions on Molecular, Biological and Multi-Scale Communications,
6(2), 107-133. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1912.09424.pdf
Yanowitz, S. (2022). Evidence of self-assembling structures in C19 injection vials. Team Enigma.
Young. R.O. (2021). Scanning & transmission electron microscopy reveals graphene & parasites in CoV-19 vaccines.
Zapotoczny, S. and Kapusta, C. (2019). Special issue “Superparamagnetic Materials”, Materials, 12(11).
Zeee, M. (2022). Exclusive: Australian whistleblower scientists provide evidence of nanotech & graphene oxide in COVID-19
injections. Zeee Media. https://zeeemedia.com/interview/exclusive-australian-whistleblower-scientists-provide-evidence/
Zha, F., Wang, T., Luo, M., & Guan, J. (2018). Tubular Micro/nanomotors: Propulsion mechanisms, fabrication techniques and
applications. Micromachines, 9(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi9020078
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 377
Appendix A: Diagrams of Body-Centric Wireless Networks in an IoBNT
Figure 7. This is Figure 2 titled: “Cylindrical shape 3D hexagonal pole.” It is taken from K. Yang, et al. (2020), A comprehensive survey on hybrid communication in
context of molecular communication and terahertz communication for body-centric nanonetwork, IEEE Transactions on Molecular, Biological, and Multi-Scale
Communications, 6(2), 107-133. Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining
to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 378
Figure 8. This is Figure 14, “The sketch of the proposed nano-communication network,” also from Yang, et al. (2020). Reissued in compliance with the
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 379
Figure 9. This is Figure 2 from Martins et al. (2019), Human brain/cloud interface, Frontiers in Neuroscience, 13, Article 112.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.00112 Reissued here under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) as permitted by the
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 380
Figure 10. This is Figure 1 from Lee et al. (2015), Design of wireless nanosensor networks for intrabody application, International Journal of Distributed
Sensor Networks, 11(2), Article number 176761. http://csc.columbusstate.edu/lee/publications/IJDSN_176761-2015.pdf. Reissued here under the
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original work is properly cited.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 381
Figure 11. This is Figure 1 titled: “The Internet of Nano Things. The envisioned IoNT includes underlying nanoscale networks connecting a multitude of nanosensors,
devices that interact with the nanonetworks and process this information in a distributed manner, and context and service management systems.” From S.
Balasubramaniam and J. Kangasbarju (2013), Realizing the internet of nano-things: challenges, solutions, and applications. Computer, 46, 62-68. Reissued in
compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 382
Figure 12. This is Figure 1 titled: “Network architecture for the Internet of Nano Things: a) Intrabody nanonetworks for healthcare applications; b) The interconnected
office.” From Akyildiz and Jornet (2010), The internet of nano-things, IEEE Wireless Communications, 17(6), 58-63.
https://ianakyldiz.com/bwn/surveys/nanothings.pdf Reissued in compliance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ pertaining to that work.
International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research 2(2), August 12, 2022 Page | 383
The information on the website and in the
is not intended as a diagnosis, recommended treatment,
prevention, or cure for any human condition or medical procedure that may be referred to in any way. Users
and readers who may be parents, guardians, caregivers, clinicians, or relatives of persons impacted by any of
the morbid conditions, procedures, or protocols that may be referred to, must use their own judgment
concerning specific applications. The contributing authors, editors, and persons associated in any capacity
with the website and/or with the journal disclaim any liability or responsibility to any person or entity for
any harm, financial loss, physical injury, or other penalty that may stem from any use or application in any
context of information, conclusions, research findings, opinions, errors, or any statements found on the
website or in the
. The material presented is freely offered to all users who may take an interest in
examining it, but how they may choose to apply any part of it, is the sole responsibility of the viewer/user.
If material is quoted or reprinted, users are asked to give credit to the source/author and to conform to the
non-commercial, no derivatives, requirements of the Creative Commons License 4.0 NC ND