Informed Dissent: Exposing the Bioengineering of the Human Future
Updated
Without question, the COVID-19 pandemic introduced not only a novel virus of suspicious origins but also a unique and tyrannical response riddled with experimental mRNA gene-damaging jabs—touted as vaccines to save the world—deployed to the masses using guilt, coercion, mandates, and emergency use authorization. Now, years later, an ever-growing group of medical professionals, scientists, and legal scholars are evaluating that response. Among the latest and most compelling critiques comes the combined evidence of two pivotal documents. One is a statistical analysis by Dr. John W. Oiler and Dr. Daniel Santiago. The other is a declaration by the Alliance of Indigenous Nations (AIN). Between the two, they form a sobering reality that many of us have said for years. Not only did the COVID-19 mRNA injections cause widespread harm, but under international law, they constitute weapons of mass destruction.
At this point, everyone should be knowledgeable enough to know that, unlike traditional vaccines, which are weakened or inactivated viruses designed to stimulate immunity, the mRNA shots introduced synthetic instructions that reprogram human cells to produce spike proteins. In the study by Santiago and Oiler, published on October 7, 2025, in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research (IJVCPR), the authors argue that this skilled level of manipulation constitutes gene therapy, not vaccination. And we agree. By completely bypassing the immune system’s natural pathways with the dangerous lipid nanoparticles, they contend, as do many others, that these injections modify cellular function in irresponsible and unpredictable ways. Make no mistake, labeling gene therapy as vaccination enabled the emergency use authorization, while also skipping crucial safety trials. In doing so, those pushing the jabs misled billions of people into accepting an unproven technology.
Cutting straight to the crux of the concern, the AIN Declaration asserts that the rollout of the COVID-19 injections violated core human rights and international law. The group references the Nuremberg Code, which explicitly prohibits medical experimentation without informed consent. It is safe to assume that we can all agree that the COVID-19 jab experiment failed to include that key factor. Beyond a doubt, the AIN document states that coercive measures, including vaccine mandates, travel restrictions, and employment threats, nullified consent across the globe. This oversight is in direct violation of both bioethics and wartime statutes. Under the section titled “Reasons,” the declaration states:
“Upon review of expert evidence and published peer reviewed articles, it is proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the COVID-19 injections, mRNA injections, or mRNA nanoparticle injections, are in fact biological weapons of mass destruction.”
Wow. OK, that indeed fully tracks from this vantage point. The AIN declaration denotes the first time that any recognized international judiciary authority has formally labeled the jabs as biological weapons. The declaration goes even further, stating that, based on evidence by Dr. Ana Mihalcea—who noted that the quantum dots in the jabs can transmit information and act as biosensors—humans are being transformed into trans-humans without their consent. In its declaration, AIN explains that hydrogel (which has been detected in blood and contributes to long COVID symptoms) is an extremely versatile substance that can imitate any cell in the body, including the brain. The scary part? “It doesn’t just mimic cells—it replaces them,” as noted by Mihalcea. She explained further, stating:
“I’ve witnessed the growth of hydrogel sheets in human blood, and how that growth results in a reduction of natural blood cells. This change in the body is nothing less than transhumanism, and affected people are unwittingly being transformed without their consent.”
Without question, Dr. Mihalcea presents alarming evidence showing that the COVID-19 jabs are not just toxic but indeed part of a transhumanist agenda. She references MIT research that openly praises hydrogel interfaces that aim to merge humans with machines, as well as another study touting a 36.3 percent increase in neurite extension, which is essentially synthetic growth inside the brain. What? This information should immediately concern everyone because it is the literal engineering of a second, artificial brain system.
According to Dr. Mihalcea’s findings, what we are witnessing is the deployment of heavy metals, PEGs, nanotech biosensors, and other poisons as part of a massive live, real-life experiment. All without consent. The goal? It isn’t hard to guess. Predictably, the objective is to embed synthetic control systems inside the human body. In plain terms, it is the forced integration of humanity with machine-based systems under the guise of public health. A disguise we are all quite leery of, thanks to the pandemic.
Dr. Mihalcea’s findings are terrifying. Why? Because she confidently insists that the mRNA injections are packed with a cocktail of weaponized nanomaterials and gene-damaging agents that are designed to manipulate biology, destroy DNA, and override sovereign bodily autonomy. What governments have executed here, she maintains, is nothing short of a bioweapon attack on humanity.
Further reinforcing the wicked scheme at play, Oiler and Santiago’s study documents the systemic suppression of safe and effective therapeutics already available to combat COVID-19, such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. As if part of a nightmare, public health agencies and media outlets joined the game and colluded to erase the existence of these treatments, thus justifying the EUAs for the mRNA shots. At the same time, dissenting medical professionals were silenced, censored, and penalized. Which, of course, were clear violations of free speech and scientific integrity.
The AIN Declaration calls for immediate investigations, legal proceedings, and public tribunals. It accuses deep state-aligned governments, pharmaceutical companies, and international agencies of perpetrating crimes against humanity, and it demands that the perpetrators be held accountable under both domestic and international law. Will the reckoning be soon? It needs to be, as these findings represent a turning point in public discourse. The evidence is no longer anecdotal or speculative. It is backed by evidence and is empirical, judicial, and moral. History will not look kindly upon the silencing of truth, the manipulation of science, and the betrayal of ethical medicine. That is, as long as it is written by pure humans whose hearts, minds, and souls have not been hijacked by biotech.
Indeed, what they labeled as a necessary “vaccine campaign” must ultimately be remembered as one of the most significant human rights violations in modern history. And for that, there must be not only remembrance, but a fierce reckoning.
