Purdue Engineering launches world's first Center for Internet of Bodies (C-IoB)
___________________________________________________________________________
But
it’s absolutely vital to make sure we fully understand who will protect
the human from being hacked, particularly as biometric innovations are
being introduced into literally every facet of our lives. - Toffler
Associates 2016
___________________________________________________________________________
As
the internet of bodies becomes an ever increasing reality, there are
some challenging questions that need to be asked. Perdue Institute
College of Engineering launched its Center for Internet of Bodies (C-IoB),
a new, emerging field that has been gaining global popularity in 2021.
Preparations to manage the Internet of bodies have been underway for
years now and are made everywhere. These people are talking about us,
and the nanotechnology accessed within our bodies for the Internet of
bio nano things. I have been writing about the WEF 2020 statements
regarding the Internet of bodies here:
WEF
2020: The Internet Of Bodies Is Here - Recent Advancements In The
Internet of Things Are Transforming The Human Body Into A New Technology
Platform
In
2016, Toffler Associates published a paper, discussing the augmented
human as a hackable entity that should be protected by homeland security
as a critical national infrastructure. Why should this be reconsidered
now?
We
know from Pfizer Whistleblower Melissa McAtee - who worked at Pfizer as
a Quality Manager and witnessed these events herself - that unlabelled
bags of chemicals came from China and were put into the Pfizer COVID19
bioweapons. You can listen to our interview and her testimony regarding
this here:
Breaking
News: Glowing C19 Shots and Fluorescent Nanotechnology - Conversation
With Pfizer Whistleblower Melissa McAtee - Truth, Science and Spirit, Ep
26
It
is a worthy question to ask where exactly the data collected from the
human beings who have the biosensor network in their blood is going. Was
this an act of war from a foreign adversary like China? Did they put in
the secret ingredients of the microchip self assembly or was it Ido
Balanchet’s team from Israel who collaborated with Pfizer and discussed
that he can put a thousand billion nanorobots into a syringe? Is the US
data going to Israel? China? Private corporations?
Dr.
Pedro Chavez team from COMUSAV in Mexico had intelligence officers
track the frequency signal emitted from the MAC addresses from COVID 19
vaccinated individuals, and they were going to a private AI firm. We
have tracked the frequency signal from implanted microchips in Targeted
Individuals and some were going to a CIA spy plane. I have seen the
frequency signature from Targeted Individuals leading to Crypto currency
accounts were they were producing dividends for large corporations, the
names of which you would recognize - and amounts of money generated per
person that would make your head spin. This is the famous Microsoft
patent 060606 that is verifiably active.
Cryptocurrency system using body activity data
Human
body activity associated with a task provided to a user may be used in a
mining process of a cryptocurrency system. A server may provide a task
to a device of a user which is communicatively coupled to the server. A
sensor communicatively coupled to or comprised in the device of the user
may sense body activity of the user. Body activity data may be
generated based on the sensed body activity of the user. The
cryptocurrency system communicatively coupled to the device of the user
may verify if the body activity data satisfies one or more conditions
set by the cryptocurrency system, and award cryptocurrency to the user
whose body activity data is verified.
Is
the vaccinated US population biometric data currently used for
cryptocurrency mining? What threat to national security does it pose if
key individuals have hackable WBAN in them? Do these individuals know
they are hackable or are they oblivious to the technology deployed that
is in their body?
We know that efforts to use WBAN to monitor COVID patients happened internationally.
Remote Monitoring of COVID-19 Patients Using Multisensor Body Area Network Innovative System
The
security challenges of WBAN use are recognized in the literature -
drone surveillance for data capture has been suggested - who owns the
data storage spaces?
A Perspective Review of Security Challenges in Body Area Networks for Healthcare Applications
Body
area network (BAN) connects sensors and actuators to the human body in
order to collect patient’s information and transmitting it to doctors in
a confined space with limited users. wireless body area network (WBAN)
is derived from wireless sensor networks (WSN) and enables to transfer
of the patient's information with a wide range of communication due to
the limitations of the wired body area network. It plays a vital role in
healthcare monitoring, healthcare systems, medical field, sports field,
and multimedia communication. Sensors and actuators lead to high energy
consumption due to their tiny size. WBAN facilitates in
securely storing patient information and transmitting it to the doctor
without data loss at a specific time. This review
examines and summarizes methodological approaches in WBAN relating to
security, safety, reliability, and the fastest transmission. Flying body
area networks (FBAN) utilizing unmanned aerial vehicles for data
transmission are recommended to promote rapid and secure communication
in WBAN. FBAN improve the security, scalability, and speed in order to
transmit patient’s information to the doctor due to high mobility.
Nanorobot
RFID surveillance has been discussed decades ago for Military “Medical”
Defense purposes. But could it be used in offensive ways?
"Nanorobot
Hardware Architecture for Medical Defense" Article From 2008 And
Comparison To Darkfield Live Blood Analysis Of C19 Unvaccinated Blood
Now
We
also know that the COVID19 injections contained self assembly
nanotechnology for wireless MAC address intrabody area network that were
injected into the US population and we know that this technology sheds
to the unvaccinated. I just learned from my colleague Dr Geanina Hagima
that the IEEE sells MAC addresses. Did they sell the populations MAC
addresses? If not them, who did? How did Professor Akyldiz know that the
COVID19 mRNA’s are nano bio machines? Who programmed the machine?
Many
Cybersecurity experts are concerned about China’s global takeover of
the infrastructure of internet of things via drones and sensors. This
has been recently discussed in relation to agricultural technologies.
The geopolitical impact and risk is enormous:
China's Digital Strategy: Cyber-Espionage and Biometric Surveillance in Global Technological Expansion
China's
infiltration into agricultural IoT (Internet of Things) networks
represents a critical yet underexplored dimension of its global
technological strategy. Through key players such as Huawei and Alibaba
Cloud, Beijing has embedded IoT technologies into agricultural systems
in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. These initiatives, often framed as
development partnerships aimed at improving food production and supply
chain resilience, concurrently enable the collection of extensive
agricultural and environmental data with profound strategic and
geopolitical implications.
What exactly came into those unmarked bags from China, and was it the surveillance self assembly nanotechnology?
If
the doctors don’t want to address the self assembly nanotechnology in
the human blood, should the US government investigate a possible warfare
scenario in which bio and neuromodulation technology was injected into
Americans? What if you can manipulate key players, politicians,
government and military personnel via this implanted technology - which
we know is absolutely possible due to its bidirectional telemetry
capacity - meaning you can read the biometrics and write via frequency
alteration and program the nanobots? We know that brain wave activity
can be monitored by these nanobots as well, and it can be altered. If AI
is collecting the biometric data of the US population - who owns and
programmed that AI? Is it hostile or benevolent? If I can find these
microrobots in common people what are the national security
implications?
Video: COVID19 unvaccinated blood affected by shedding - microrobot swarm building mesogen microchips. AM Medical
This
is why I want to share this 2016 paper by the Technocratic Toffler
Association - if they suggested then that this technology in peoples
body is worth national security infrastructure protection, should we not
be worried about who can hack our population?
Bio-Digital Convergence: The Human as Critical Infrastructure?
Who
are the Tofflers? They are technocratic transhumanists, they call
themselves Futurists, who have paved the way of the future vision of
humanity. I wrote about their books here:
Since
the Toffler Associates were discussing humans as hackable critical
infrastructure we now in 2025 have reached the tipping point of the 4th
Industrial Revolution of Transhumanism - and this article becomes
meaningful again. Any terrorist can hack into the intra body area
network AI controlled human bots.
Video: COVID19 unvaccinated blood - microrobots self assemble a mesogen microchip Magnification 2000x. AM Medical
You can read more about the dangers of the enormous data collection via this system connected to your smart phone:
Digital Twin Development Through The Healthcare System - Total Surveillance Via Smart Phones And WBAN?
This is the Toffler article:
Are humans the next critical infrastructure sector?
Currently, humanity is being augmented or networked by somewhere around 14 billion connected devices
and that number is increasing at an accelerating rate. The rate of
growth implies a growing comfort with networked, wearable, and implanted devices – and our connectivity with them.
Over the past decade, our work has exposed us to some amazing human-integrated technology advances
across a number of industries. We’ve seen need and a desire for longer,
healthier lives driving many of the bio-digital developments that
evolved quickly from bleeding-edge innovation to ubiquitous use. Implantable
Internet of Things (IoT) devices like pacemakers, defibrillators, and
insulin pumps are perfect examples – each external, electronic device
has the potential to supplement or repair a deficiency that would
otherwise shorten or even end someone’s life.
In
a short amount of time, implantables and wearables have progressed far
beyond these now commonplace technologies. At this point in our
progress, we’ve moved to a new point in the Third Wave
– Internet of Humans (IoH). We’re now thinking less about what forms
IoT can take and more about how those tools have reshaped how we
function, interact, and even exist.
Over
the next decade, innovations will continue to streamline our lives,
create greater insight into who we are as humans, and help us to know
what is happening beneath our skin and inside our minds. And all will
deepen our integration with technology, connecting us even more firmly
within a bio-digital network.
Artificial organs can be monitored and controlled remotely.
Brain wave technologies that allow people to control their devices, simply by thinking about them.
High tech e-skin (artificial skin) allows users to project and control their smartphone on their body.
Smart tattoos and implantable RFID chips read and project body temperature and even emotions.
Already,
we rely on enhanced biometric security to connect us to elements of
IoT, smartphones, and computers. With this incredible progress and
possibility for human connected technology to improve and extend lives
comes the even greater potential for a threat like the ability for
adversaries to manipulate these technologies.
To defeat the threat of tomorrow, we cannot afford to be reactive.
We tend to focus on the benefits of technological innovations – particularly those that solve fundamental human problems. But
it’s absolutely vital to make sure we fully understand who will protect
the human from being hacked, particularly as biometric innovations are
being introduced into literally every facet of our lives.
Through
conferences and client meetings, Toffler Associates has engaged in
conversations with a variety of relevant experts from industry,
academia, and government regarding both the potential and risk of
implantable and wearable technologies. What we’ve heard is a general
lack of consistency around how to weigh the potential benefits and risks
of innovation.
In
one conference, representatives from academia and the medical
technology industry were discussing implantable medical technologies
they were developing. These representatives explained that they don’t
typically consider the possible vulnerabilities (i.e., hacking) that
could accompany these emerging devices because their focus was on the
life-saving roles these innovations promised.
In
another, we discussed the ability of criminals and terrorists to attack
parts of urban environments by remotely controlling or shocking
people’s pacemakers and defibrillators. We also examined
the threat of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) devices that can block all
signals or destroy all electronics, including wearable and implantable
devices, within set distances.
To combat tomorrow’s enemy, we need to develop a proactive approach that includes viewing the human as critical infrastructure.
Today,
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) defines 16 sectors as
Critical Infrastructure, including Dams, Water and Wastewater Systems,
Communications, and Energy. As humans and technology become more deeply
intertwined, we should consider the inclusion of a 17th Critical
Infrastructure sector focused on protecting citizens against hacking and
other manipulation that could put lives at risk.
As
our society relies on a cyber foundation for our daily lives, we
subject ourselves to dangerous, potentially life-threatening risks. As
we literally link our bodies to this cyber foundation, we must look
farther than the promise that prompted the innovation to enhance our
understanding of the potential negative implications.
The
digital infrastructure has been build in the recent years also in
space: - which we know that Directed Energy Weapons are torturing
Targeted Individual from Space stations. We know the global surveillance
system of humans is tied to this infrastructure:
"Your
Life As A Digital Ghost" And The Race For Space Satellites And Space
Lasers For The Metaverse Infrastructure Of Digital Twins
We know that nanorobots/ biosensors/ smart dust can be aerosolized, hence the digitization of all life:
LITERALLY MINDBLOWING: We can AEROSOLIZE NANOBOTS to clump your blood or neuromodulate masses – DARPA expert lectures
There is a criminal side to the nanotechnology push as well:
Is there anybody is a position of power who can ask this question?
Who
is making sure that American’s WBAN that has been deployed to everyone
is not being hacked? The people who developed this are not. If people
ignore the problem, how can we keep people safe while pushing forward
the Internet of Bodies everywhere?
These
questions need an answer. One first would have to admit that self
assembly nanotechnology has been deployed in the COVID19 bioweapon.
Then
the question should be asked: If the deployment of the COVID19
bioweapons was an act of war - who is now in control of the US and
world’s population?
And whoever is in control now, did they win the war that most people did not know even happened at a nano level?
Shouldn’t “somebody” investigate this?
No comments:
Post a Comment