Let's start with Nature.
Günter Oberdörster of the University of Rochester in New York and colleagues tracked the progress of carbon particles that were only 35 nanometres in diameter and had been inhaled by rats. In the olfactory bulb -- an area of the brain that deals with smell -- nanoparticles were detected a day after inhalation, and levels continued to rise until the experiment ended after seven days.
"These are the first data to show this," says Ken Donaldson, a toxicologist at the University of Edinburgh, UK. "I would never have thought of looking for inhaled nanoparticles in the brain."Here is a rendering of some of these nanoparticles (Credit: National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology).
Now, let's turn to the Guardian and its article, "Research on tiny particles could damage brain, scientists warn."
"It's too early to be alarmed, because we don't yet know what the particles might do in humans. We shouldn't stop working with them, we should just look for what adverse effects these particles might cause," said Oberdorster. The report is due to appear in the journal Inhalation Toxicology.
"This is the first documented evidence that an innocent particle like carbon, if it's small enough, can find its way into the brain," said Professor Ken Donaldson, a toxicologist at Edinburgh University. "The worry would be if the nanotechnology business designs nanoparticles which are fundamentally different from the ones which we are already exposed to, and seem to cope with reasonably well. If very different nanoparticles are manufactured, there's a concern that they might have a different effect in the body."(http://radio.weblogs.com/0105910/2004/01/09.html)
Refresh your memory - article dated August 20, 2009 - : it contains important details about nanoparticles:
Now here is another article on the topic. Yes, nanoparticles are listed as ingredients in some of the H1N1 vaccines. It is important to read inserts before agreeing to any injection, or even medications for that matter - and not the short version, the pages long PDF version available on the internet, if you bother to look for it.
But before getting all worked up about this article, get more information. After all, the nanoparticles mentioned here are only one of a kind, There are many different types of nanoparticles. Are they ALL so dangerous? I don't have the answer at this time; this topic should be explored further. What to me appears dangerous is the ability of the particles to penetrate cell walls; they are like a shotgun to the cell. They can therefore also, among others, penetrate the blood-brain barrier, and with this ability, any harmful molecule that can be propelled can install itself in the brain, by simple inhalation. Very dangerous weapon indeed! In the hands of the monsters in charge, very deadly.
Deadly nano particles in untested "swine flu" jab, William Engdahl reports
Nano Particles used in Untested H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccines
F. William Engdahl
September 14, 2009
Vaccines which have been approved by the responsible government authorities for vaccination against the alleged H1N1 Influenza A Swine Flu have been found to contain nano particles. Vaccine makers have been experimenting with nanoparticles as a way to “turbo charge” vaccines for several years. Now it has come out that the vaccines approved for use in Germany and other European countries contain nanoparticles in a form that reportedly attacks healthy cells and can be deadly.
|There is only one small problem with vaccines containing nanoparticles — they can be deadly and at the least cause severe irreparable health damage. |
There is only one small problem with vaccines containing nanoparticles—they can be deadly and at the least cause severe irreparable health damage.
Nanoparticles, promoted in the mass media as the new wonder revolution of science, are particles that have been produced vastly smaller than deadly asbestos particles which caused severe lung damage and death before being outlawed. Particles at a nano size, (nm = 0,000000001 Meter) fuse together with the membranes of our body cell membranes and, according to recent studies in China and Japan, continuously destroy cells once introduced into the body. Once they interact with the body’s cellular structure, they cannot be removed. Modern medicine euphemistically terms the phenomenon, a continuing infectious reaction.
Since the asbestos scandal, it has been established that particles in size a millionth of a meter, because of their enormous attractive force, penetrate all cells, destroying all those they come into contact with. Nanoparticles are far smaller than asbestos fibers.
Beijing Tests confirm deadly effects on humans
The fact that WHO, the European Medicines Evaluation Agency, the German Robert Koch Institute and other health bodies today would permit the population to be injected with largely untested novel vaccines containing nanoparticles says more about the powerful pharma lobby in Euiropean politics than it does about the sanity or moral integrity of the civil servants responsible for health of the general public.
The September 2009 issue of the respected European Respiratory Journal, made public on 19 August, and available since 21 August online, contains a peer-reviewed article with the title, “Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma.”
The article describes tests carried out in 2008 at the elite Beijing Chaoyang Hospital on seven young women. All seven, ages 18-47 had been exposed to nanoparticles for 5–13 months in their common workplace. All were admitted to the hospital with shortness of breath and pleural effusions, or excessive fluids surrounding the lungs, inhibiting breathing. None of the seven had ever smoked and none were in any special risk group. Doctors carefully tested for every possibility and confirmed that the lung problems had a common origin—regular inhalation of nanoparticles in their factory. They had been exposed to Polyacrylat nanoparticles.
The tests confirmed the nanoparticles had set off a “super-meltdown” reaction in the patients. Despite all heroic efforts of doctors, two of the seven died from the lung complications. 2
In their report, the scientists concluded something so alarming it is necessary to quote at length:
“Immunological tests, examinations of bacteriology, virology and tumour markers, bronchoscopy, internal thoracoscopy and video-assisted thoracic surgery were performed. Surveys of the workplace, clinical observations and examinations of the patients were conducted. Polyacrylate, consisting of nanoparticles, was confirmed in the workplace. Pathological examinations of patients’ lung tissue displayed nonspecific pulmonary inflammation, pulmonary fibrosis and foreign-body granulomas of pleura. Using transmission electron microscopy, nanoparticles were observed to lodge in the cytoplasm and caryoplasm of pulmonary epithelial and mesothelial cells, but are also located in the chest fluid. These cases arouse concern that long-term exposure to some nanoparticles without protective measures may be related to serious damage to human lungs.“3To date Animal studies and in vitro experiments show that nanoparticles can result in lung damage and other toxicity in animals, but no reports on the clinical toxicity in humans due to nanoparticles prior to the Beijing study had been made.
The Beijing Chaoyang Hospital study has now conclusively confirmed that nanoparticles cause lung damage and other toxicity in humans as well. At this point in time, when two of the approved vaccines planned to be mass distributed in Germany and elsewhere contain nanoparticles, failure of the relevant responsible public health and epidemiology officials to order an immediate emergency freeze on distribution of any vaccine containing nanoparticles can only be considered tantamount to criminal negligence. Hopefully the responsible authorities will react in time to avert a possible human health catastrophe orders of magnitude worse than the worst case of Swine Flu reported to date.
1 EPFL, Bioengineering researchers from the EPFL in Lausanne, Switzerland, have developed and patented a nanoparticle that can deliver vaccines more effectively, with fewer side effects, and at a fraction of the cost of current vaccine technologies, accessed in www.azonano.com/nanotechnology%20news.asp?catid=13.
2 Song Y, Li X, Du X, Exposure to nanoparticles is related to pleural effusion, pulmonary fibrosis and granuloma , European Respiratory Journal, 9/2009, 34(3): 559-567.