Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'risks'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • GENERAL DISCUSSION (MAIN)
    • General Discussion
    • The CHANI Knowledge Base (Ask A Chani Member)
    • General "Surface" Intel Board for The Watcher.
    • CHANI's Believe It or Not Board
    • Music & Humor (Funny and Entertaining stuff)
    • CHANI VIP MEMBERS BOARD
    • AIM Whispers
    • The WTH? Board. (A Place for Controversial, Hijacked, Drama, Rant and OP Busted threads.)
    • FORUM HELP TOPICS & NOTIFICATIONS
    • The Alternative News Project - ANP
    • Alternative News Project (ANP) News Feed
  • Dedicated Community Topic Boards - CURRENT AFFAIRS
    • GEOPOLITICS
    • ANCIENT MYSTERIES
    • THE UNEXPLAINED
    • SCIENCE FUTURES
    • HEALTH & HEALING
    • FUKUSHIMA
    • The MAPPING Board
    • EARTH EVENTS
    • Problem Nuclear Reactors
    • PSYCHIC Healing and Relevant Topics
    • Google Earth Navigators
    • CoEvolution
    • Book of Aquarius - Alchemy of the 21st Century
    • Return of The Gods
  • CHANI PROJECT FORUM BOARDS
    • ANNOUNCEMENTS (NEW) Please Read
    • THE CHANI PROJECT
    • Question and Answers (Q&A)

Found 2 results

  1. Courts in Europe have sentenced a baby to death. This is socialized medicine. Matt Walsh June 28, 2017 .TheSun.co.uk (video) "There’s a horrific case over in the U.K. that hasn’t gotten a ton of attention here, but it should. If we look closely, we may see our future — and our present. Charlie Gard is a 10-month-old baby who suffers from a rare genetic disorder called mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome. It’s a horrendous condition that leads to organ malfunction, brain damage, and other symptoms. The hospital that had been treating the boy, Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children in London, made the determination that nothing more can be done for him and he must be taken off of life support. He should “die with dignity,” they said. The parents, Chris Gard and Connie Yates, disagreed. This is the very crucial thing to understand: they are not insisting that GOSH be forced to keep Charlie on life support. Rather, they want to take him out of the hospital and to America to undergo a form of experimental therapy that a doctor here had already agreed to administer. Chris and Connie raised over $1.6 million to fund this last ditch effort to save their child’s life. All they needed the British hospital to do was release their child into their care, which doesn’t seem like a terribly burdensome request. They would then leave the country and try their luck with treatment here. However slim the chance of success may have been, it was better than just sitting by and watching their baby die. Here’s where things get truly insane and barbaric. The hospital refused to give Charlie back to his parents. The matter ended up in the courts, and, finally, in the last several hours, the European Court of “Human Rights” ruled that the parents should be barred from taking their son to the United States for treatment. According to the “human rights” court, it is Charlie’s human right that he expire in his hospital bed in London. The parents are not allowed to try and save his life. It is “in his best interest” to simply die "they ruled". In Europe, “Death with dignity” supersedes all other rights. In Europe, a mother may kill her baby but she is not allowed to keep him alive. Again: barbaric." snip http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/matt-walsh-courts-in-europe-have-sentenced-a-baby-to-death-this-is-socialized-medicine/ Pay attention everyone, we are facing the same things in the US, as are many other countries. Tx Redwolf
  2. Experts: New Computers Can Delete Thoughts Without Your Knowledge Ian Johnston April 26, 2017 Wikipedia Commons "Neurotech scientists are rapidly mapping the brain and discovering new ways of controlling your thoughts and memories. Remember, Technocrats push the envelope because they can, without caring one whit about the collateral damage to humanity. ⁃ TN Editor “Thou canst not touch the freedom of my mind,” wrote the playwright John Milton in 1634. But, nearly 400 years later, technological advances in machines that can read our thoughts mean the privacy of our brain is under threat. Now two biomedical ethicists are calling for the creation of new human rights laws to ensure people are protected, including “the right to cognitive liberty” and “the right to mental integrity”. Scientists have already developed devices capable of telling whether people are politically right-wing or left-wing. In one experiment, researchers were able to read people’s minds to tell with 70 per cent accuracy whether they planned to add or subtract two numbers. Facebook also recently revealed it had been secretly working on technology to read people’s minds so they could type by just thinking. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-mind-reading-brain-technology-building-8-regina-dugan-pentagon-a7692481.html And medical researchers have managed to connect part of a paralysed man’s brain to a computer to allow him to stimulate muscles in his arm so he could move it and feed himself. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/paralysed-man-moves-arm-for-first-time-in-years-using-brain-implant-that-can-read-his-thoughts-a7654761.html The ethicists, writing in a paper in the journal Life Sciences, Society and Policy, stressed the “unprecedented opportunities” that would result from the “ubiquitous distribution of cheaper, scalable and easy-to-use neuro-applications” that would make neurotechnology “intricately embedded in our everyday life”. https://lsspjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40504-017-0050-1 However, such devices are open to abuse on a frightening degree, as the academics made clear. They warned that “malicious brain-hacking” and “hazardous uses of medical neurotechnology” could require a redefinition of the idea of mental integrity. “We suggest that in response to emerging neurotechnology possibilities, the right to mental integrity should not exclusively guarantee protection from mental illness or traumatic injury but also from unauthorised intrusions into a person’s mental wellbeing performed through the use of neurotechnology, especially if such intrusions result in physical or mental harm to the neurotechnology user,” the ethicists wrote. “The right to mental privacy is a neuro-specific privacy right which protects private or sensitive information in a person’s mind from unauthorised collection, storage, use, or even deletion in digital form or otherwise.” And they warned that the techniques were so sophisticated that people’s minds might be being read or interfered with without their knowledge. “Illicit intrusions into a person’s mental privacy may not necessarily involve coercion, as they could be performed under the threshold of a persons’ conscious experience,” they wrote in the paper." http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/delete-thoughts-read-your-mind-without-your-knowledge-neurotechnology-new-human-rights-laws-a7701661.html edited title and tags to include DNA and quantum technology