Archive for the ‘Eugenics’ Category

Not created with illness, but vaccinated or implanted with one?

Thursday, October 17th, 2013

131017 blog image

“I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; wonderful are Your works, and my soul knows it very well.” Psalm 139:4

Vaccines and donated stem cells can contain Human DNA traits of hosts:

While I definitely haven’t read the huge file of the HHS Mandate affordable health care act, I’m wondering where vaccines and stem cell research fit in with this overhaul which is at the core of the recent government shutdown? Often when I tell people that stem cell therapy and vaccines for babies, international travel and other reasons sometimes contain human DNA from hosts, they accuse me of sensationalism. They definitely don’t want to hear that Planned Parenthood and other eugenicists are up on the “ins and outs” of this “hidden in plain sight” information.

At and there is genuine evidence that vaccines sometimes include fetal DNA. As we begin to connect some dots and ask pertinent questions, we can wonder if through vaccines, are DNA links to various conditions and behaviors transmitted as well? In other words, a baby may not be created, conceived or fertilized with certain proclivities towards say high blood pressure, diabetes, sexual issues, etc.; but once born and vaccinated they may “inherit” some otherwise not “bred” conditions. Please see excerpts below:

Vaccines and Production of Negative Genetic Changes in Humans
(c) 1996-1998 Leading Edge Research Group
Vaccination and Genetic Change: Mobility of Genetic Material Between Life Forms:

One of the indications that vaccinations may in fact be changing the genetic structure of humans became evident in September of 1971, when scientists at the University of Geneva made the discovery that biological substances entering directly into the bloodstream could become part of human genetic structure. Originally, Japanese bacteriologists discovered that bacteria of one species transferred their own specific antibiotic resistance to bacteria of an entirely different species. Dr. Maurice Stroun and Dr. Philip Anker in the Department of Plant Physiology at the University of Geneva, began to accumulate evidence that the transfer of genetic information is not confined to bacteria, but can also occur between bacteria and higher plants and animals. According to an article in World Medicine on September 22, 1971, “Geneva scientists are convinced that normal animal and plant cells shed DNA, and that this DNA is taken up by other cells in the organism.”

Dr. Theresa Deisher, Current: President & CEO at AVM Biotechnology writes: “When pharmaceutical companies switched from using animal cell lines to using aborted human fetal cells lines to produce these vaccines, in the mid to late 1970s, they assumed, without any evidence, that using aborted fetal cells would result in a more efficient production system. Brief discussions about potential adverse health consequences of using aborted human cell lines for vaccine production were captured in minutes from FDA advisory meetings about this switch. However, no studies have been done to actually measure the extent of those potential adverse consequences.

Vaccines and biologics (engineered proteins as drugs) are too large to make in a test tube, so companies harness the normal machinery used to make these, cells. No final drug is ever completely ‘pure’ and you will find contaminating DNA and cellular debris from the production cell in your final product. When we switch from using animal cells to using human cells we now have human DNA in our vaccines and our drugs.”

When we consider the “law of unexpected outcomes,” we discover that with embryonic and adult stem cell intervention, vaccines and other “scientific and medical” approaches, it takes many years to truly determine whether a process or procedure will have harmful side effects. Such is the case for example, with stem cell research and Roe VS Wade, which at its onset ignored the long term effects to a woman’s mental and physical health impacted by abortion, while it discreetly overlooked the humanity of the children in the womb.

As human beings we have the privileged advantage of being able to think and to pray. The question is, do we still have an obligation or a desire to be informed? Or don’t we?

Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.

Life Dynamics Applauds Decision to Compensate Victims of Secret Eugenics Program!

Monday, July 29th, 2013

Life Dynamics Logo

July 25, 2013

Interview Requests contact (940) 380-8800

Today, Life Dynamics Inc., a national pro-life organization located in Denton, Texas applauds the decision by North Carolina lawmakers to allocate $10 million to compensate victims who were forcefully sterilized under the state’s secret eugenics program.

From 1929 to 1974, North Carolina forcibly sterilized thousands of people who were deemed to be mentally handicapped, promiscuous or unfit to have children. Life Dynamics has documented the history of the American Eugenics Society including North Carolina’s forced sterilization program in our film, Maafa21: Black Genocide in 21st Century America.


The term eugenics was coined in the mid 1800’s by Francis Galton, the cousin of Charles Darwin. Galton believed in trying to increase those he felt were superior in stock and decrease those he felt were inferior. This ideology still exists today in organizations that promote population control and abortion.

The idea of forced eugenics was not something that suddenly developed in the 1970s. In 1907, Indiana had become the first of more than 30 states to pass sterilization laws and some of those laws stayed on the books well into the 1970s. In fact, the State of Oregon did its last sterilization in 1981 and did not abolish its eugenics board until October of 1983.

There were some within the eugenics movement who were uncomfortable with the idea of using force and they would express their reservations about it in public. But when pressed, virtually none of them would rule it out – including Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger.

Margaret Sanger advocated sterilization of the so-called unfit, in 1950 in a personal letter she wrote to Katharine Dexter McCormick, an heir to the International Harvester fortune who used her immense wealth to fund the development of the birth-control pill. Sanger wrote, “I consider that the world and almost our civilization for the next twenty-five years, is going to depend upon a simple, cheap, safe contraceptive to be used in poverty stricken slums, jungles, and among the most ignorant people. Even this will not be sufficient, because I believe that now, immediately; there should be national sterilization for certain dysgenic types of our population who are being encouraged to breed and would die out were the government not feeding them.”

Sanger’s connections to eugenics was nothing new. She had long praised their ideologies and published several articles on the topic in her Birth Control Review. In 1935, Sanger’s American Birth Control League published a resolution to unite with the American Eugenics Society.

To continue reading press release click HERE.

Click here to leave a comment for
the article above.