Did “Nature” kill Steve Jobs? (3)

By: James V. Kohl | Published on: July 21, 2016

So Many Research Scientists, So Few Openings as Professors


Even someone as brilliant as Emmanuelle Charpentier, who in 2015 became head of the Max Planck Institute for Infection Biology after a momentous discovery in gene editing, spent the previous 25 years moving through nine institutions in five countries.

My comment: Why did she move around so much when in the same year, on 07/02/2015, George Church and colleagues filed a patent application for “RNA-Guided Human Genome Engineering.”

Repetitive elements or endogenous viral elements can be targeted with engineered Cas+gRNA systems in microbes, plants, animals, or human cells to reduce deleterious transposition or to aid in sequencing or other analytic genomic/transcriptomic/proteomic/diagnostic tools (in which nearly identical copies can be problematic).

My comment: I suspect that Emmanuelle Charpentier was forced to move around and that others are now going to link virus-driven energy theft to all pathology and take credit for discoveries people like Emmanuelle Charpentier reported. If successful, those with successfull patent applications typically make the money that goes with the credit for taking others works and hiding information that would help others put an end to virus-driven pathology.

See also:  What does it mean for researchers, journalists and the public when secrecy surrounds science?


…some observers were concerned that the organizers’ decisions – which included seeking industry partners and private funding – were quiet moves towards “privatiz[ing] the current conversation about heritable genetic modification.”

My comment: What does it cost others in terms of their health or their careers when only a few key people control the release of information about how energy-dependent genetic modifications could be used to benefit humanity? If a few key people continue reporting their works in terms used by theorists, such as mutations and evolution, what must serious scientists do to try to stop them?

See for example: RNA sequencing uncovers antisense RNAs and novel small RNAs in Streptococcus pyogenes

My comment: Emmanuelle Charpentier is the senior author. You could ask her about the role RNA-guided genetic engineering plays in microbes for comparison to the role that RNA-mediated genetic engineering plays in humans.

See for example:  The Mechanisms of Virulence Regulation by Small Noncoding RNAs in Low GC Gram-Positive Pathogens


In order for pathogens to successfully infect and colonize a host, strict control of virulence is critical. Recently, a group of noncoding RNAs called small RNAs (sRNAs) has been recognized as an essential factor of virulence control in many pathogens. These bacterial sRNAs have become the most abundant class of post-transcriptional regulators [1].

My comment: Energy-dependent control of cell type differentiation is RNA-mediated. If viral latency is not controlled by nutrient energy-dependent microRNAs, the proliferation of viruses may cause unrepaired DNA damage that can be epigenetically inherited across generations. With Zika virus damage as an example, why have so few serious scientists called attention to the facts about cell type differentiation?

See also: Voices of biotech Published online 10 March 2016

My comment: Both these researchers obviously understand the need to detail how energy-dependent RNA-mediated DNA repair typically prevent virus-driven mutations and pathology. If patents prevent others from using the technology that is available, only the wealthy will benefit from research funded by your tax dollars, which are funneled through the gatekeepers of the evolution industry and, to a lesser extent, the gatekeepers of the big bang cosmology industry.

Jennifer Doudna: Exciting opportunities in genome engineering include curing human genetic disease, creating disease-resistant crops and trees, and developing fungi capable of sustainable chemical production. To advance fundamental knowledge and applications of genome engineering, new technologies for delivering editing molecules into cells and tissues are needed, as well as ways of controlling DNA repair and chemical modification pathways.

Feng Zhang: Being able to modify the genome and to modulate gene expression precisely has enormous potential for advancing our understanding of biology, treatment of diseases and development of important agricultural products. The efficiency of making precise genetic changes needs to be increased. We need to advance our understanding of DNA damage and repair processes and to explore and harness the diversity of DNA-acting molecular mechanisms in nature.

Please revisit: What is life when it is not protected from virus driven entropy Published to YouTube on 30 Mar 2016


The anti-entropic force of virucidal ultraviolet light links guanine–cytosine (G⋅C) Watson–Crick base pairing from hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution to supercoiled DNA, which protects the organized genomes of all living genera from virus-driven entropy. For example, protection of DNA from permanent UV damage occurs in the context of photosynthesis and nutrient-dependent RNA-directed DNA methylation, which links RNA-mediated amino acid substitutions to DNA repair. In the context of thermodynamic cycles of protein biosynthesis and degradation, DNA repair enables the de novo creation of G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs). Olfactory receptor genes are GPCRs. The de novo creation of olfactory receptor genes links chemotaxis and phototaxis from foraging behavior to social behavior in species from microbes to humans. Foraging behavior links ecological variation to ecological adaptation in the context of this atoms to ecosystems model of biophysically constrained energy-dependent RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry. Protein folding chemistry links nutrient-dependent microRNAs from microRNA flanking sequences to energy transfer and cell type differentiation in the context of adhesion proteins, and supercoiled DNA that protects all organized genomes from virus-driven entropy.

My presentation placed the invention of neo-Darwinian theory into its proper context.

See Schrodinger (1944)

“…about forty years ago the Dutchman de Vries discovered that in the offspring even of thoroughly pure-bred stocks, a very small number of individuals, say two or three in tens of thousands, turn up with small but ‘jump-like’ changes, the expression ‘jump-like’ not meaning that the change is so very considerable, but that there is a discontinuity inasmuch as there are no intermediate forms between the unchanged and the few changed. De Vries called that a mutation. The significant fact is the discontinuity. It reminds a physicist of quantum theory -no intermediate energies occurring between two neighbouring energy levels. He would be inclined to call de Vries’s mutation theory, figuratively, the quantum theory of biology. We shall see later that this is much more than figurative. The mutations are actually due to quantum jumps in the gene molecule. But quantum theory was but two years old when de Vries first published his discovery, in 1902. Small wonder that it took another generation to discover the intimate connection! (page 33-34).”

Excerpt from the forward to the reprint:

How often do we still hear that quantum effects can have little relevance in the study of biology, or even that we eat food in order to gain energy? — Roger Penrose
My comment: De Vries called the energy-dependent changes “mutations” and neo-Darwinists assumed that the changes could be linked to the evolution of one species from another. Only recently have serious scientists tried to force the biologically uninformed theorists to acknowledge that virus-driven energy theft prevents beneficial mutations from being considered in the context of all the links from angstroms to ecosystems that must be considered in the context of ecological variation.

When Roger Penrose asks about the quantum effects of food energy, he presents a direct challenge to people like George FR Ellis who ignore the facts about food energy and the facts about virus-driven energy theft, and the fact that the physiology of reproduction links top-down causation from angstroms to ecosystems in all living genera.

See my review: Energy vs virus-driven energy theft must be considered in the context of adaptive changes in the brain, June 12, 2016

My comment: Energy-dependent changes in cell types and in all tissues of all individuals of all living genera have been considered by serious scientists, but ignored by pseudoscientists and other theorists, who simply put have killed people like Steve Jobs with their ignorance.

Pancreatic cancer ‘breakthrough’ hailed

This was reported as if it was a “medical miracle.”


…treatment options for someone with pancreatic cancer are “limited”, with the surgical removal of tumors possible in less than one fifth of patients. Apple co-founder and former CEO Steve Jobs died of the disease in 2011.

My comment: The facts about RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry and biophysically constrained cell type differentiation that link the innate immune system to supercoiled DNA via the physiology of reproduction have been known for at least two decades. Virus-driven energy theft has been linked to all pathology for more than three decades. Medical miracles should be linked to those who survived the past few decades of ignorance that clearly should have linked energy to RNA-mediated gene duplication.

See for example: RNA-mediated gene duplication: the rat preproinsulin I gene is a functional retroposon (1985)

For comparison, see: RNA-Mediated Gene Duplication and Retroposons: Retrogenes, LINEs, SINEs, and Sequence Specificity (2013)

See also: RNA-mediated gene duplication, fixation, and ecological adaptation (2015)

See also: JBC Thematic Minireview Series RNA-mediated Regulation and Noncoding RNAs (2007)

Excerpt with my emphasis on their emphasis:

Ten research articles in the collection cover topics ranging from mechanisms of post-transcriptional gene regulation by microRNAs to activation of the RNA-dependent protein kinase, PKR, by double-stranded viral RNA in a process critical to the innate immune response. Additional results of recent investigations of microRNA biogenesis and mechanism of action are distilled in a minireview with a specific emphasis on the roles of microRNAs in viral infection and oncogenesis.

For specific information on the role of microRNAs in different types of pancreatic cancers, see: microRNA “pancreatic cancer”

My comment: Many researchers have failed to link any of the biomarkers from pathology in neuroscience to the pathology of cancer.

See for example: Neurons Form Synapse Clusters


“The existence of these clusters suggests that the synapses interact with each other to control the strength of the combined signal,” explains Onur Gökçe, author of the study. This is the first anatomical explanation for the disproportionate strength of clustered synapse signals in comparison to the individual signals – a finding known from activity measurements.

My comment: It is not the first anatomical explanation. It links energy-dependent changes in morphological and behavioral phentotypes to RNA-mediated cell type differentiation in every neuronal system that is linked via feedback loops to the gonadotropin releasing hormone neuronal system of all vertebrates. We did that in our 1996 Hormones and Behavior review: From Fertilization to Adult Sexual Behavior. See our section on molecular epigenetics.

The existence of these “clusters” also links virus-driven energy theft to all pathology. That fact refutes every claim made by neo-Darwinian theorists who are still trying to convince you that they correctly linked mutations from natural selection to increasing organismal complexity in species from microbes to humans.  Mutations in the “clusters” link energy-dependent changes from hydrogen-atom transfer in DNA base pairs in solution to RNA-mediated cell type differentiation in all living genera. All serious scientists know that, especially those who have linked angstroms to ecosystems via energy-dependent changes in the immune system, which are clearly linked to supercoiled DNA. The supercoiled DNA links RNA-mediated cell type differentiation to all morphological and behavioral phenotypes via the physiology of reproduction. It’s time to look at the facts from the perspective of ethics and the suffering and death caused by researchers who are willing to delay reporting results that clearly link virus-driven energy theft to all pathology. They are waiting to cash in.
I reiterate: What does it mean for researchers, journalists and the public when secrecy surrounds science?


The global market for synthetic DNA is estimated at nearly US$1 billion annually, and does not typically draw much ethical scrutiny. Indeed, both Drs. Church and Endy are co-founders of a DNA synthesis company called Gen9. 

See also: Get Well in the RNAi Way-RNAi, A Billion Dollar Baby in Therapy
George Church and others appear to be waiting to deliver their billion dollar baby until their patent is granted. However, there is still time for others to force them to disclose the basis for their patent application and also admit that the information on RNA-mediated cause and effect has been known to many others for at least two decades.
Unfortunately, the devil is in the details of what is known.
For example: The miRacle in Pancreatic Cancer by miRNAs: Tiny Angels or Devils in Disease Progression

…it is important to identify biomarkers that can detect early stages of this devastating disease with high sensitivity and specificity. Among these biomarkers, microRNAs (miRNAs) have supplied a profitable recourse and become an attractive focus of research.

My comment: If you still cannot find how “devil” is linked from virus-driven energy theft to all pathology, it is probably because you were not taught where to look. If you were taught to link mutations and natural selection to the evolution of increasing organismal complexity, you never learned about the difference between energy-dependent healthy longevity and virus-driven pathology during life history transitions that link biophysically constrained protein folding to the physiology of reproduction and all biodiversity in species from microbes to humans.
See also: Is Schizophrenia a Disorder of the Immune System?

They conclude that schizophrenia does not appear to be an autoimmune disease and that the illness could be caused by environmental risk factors which activate the immune response, like infections or stress, although further research is needed.

My comment: Further research is always needed, but not to link nutrient-stress and/or social stress to pathology via changes in pH in specific tissues of organs, like the liver, pancreas, or brain. The stress-induced changes in pH have been linked to all pathology via the immune system and energy-dependent histones that are called oncohistones in what appears to be an attempt to confuse people about the role that energy-dependent amino acid substitutions play in healthy longevity. The oncohistones are amino acid substitutions that link virus-driven energy theft to all pathology.  Calling amino acid substitutions “oncohistones” blurs the defined boundaries between epigenetics and genetics at a time when most serious scientists have already realized there is no boundary between epigenetics and genetics. Pseudoscientists took the definition of “mutation” and used it in their assumptions about biologically-based cause and effect, which they thought explained how one species evolved into another species. No experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect ever supported their ridiculous claims, so “oncohistones” must link mutations to healthy longevity and to virus-driven pathology in the context of ridiculous theories.
In the context of what is known about biophysically constrained energy-dependent RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry and cell type differentiation a different story has emerged and evolved.
See also: Gen9 Our Founders
Excerpts (with my emphasis):

Joseph Jacobson

He has authored over 70 peer reviewed papers and conference proceedings in the fields of femotosecond lasers, quantum optics, molecular electronics, nano-chemistry and synthetic DNA. In the private sector Joe was co-founder of E Ink, Kovio and Gen9 and was a founding board member of One Laptop Per Child (OLPC).

George Church

Professor of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Director of the Center for Computational Genetics. 1984 Harvard PhD included the first direct genomic sequencing method, molecular multiplexing tags, which lead to automation & software used at Genome Therapeutics Corp. for the first commercial genome sequence — pathogen, Helicobacter in 1994. This multiplex solid-phase sequencing evolved into polonies (1999), ABI-SOLiD (2005) & open-source Polonator.org (2007). Innovations in DNA reading, writing & allele replacement in cells lead to current research & commercialization in human genomics (Complete Genomics, PersonalGenomes.org, 23andme, Knome), synthetic biology (SynBERC, Joule, LS9) & new ethics/security strategies.

My comment: Femtosecond blasts of ultraviolet light link the sun’s anti-entropic virucidal energy to DNA repair and they link the physiology and reproduction of soil bacteria from the bull sperm microRNAome to microRNAs in breast milk, which protect against further DNA damage from the Zika virus. Helicobacter pylori and other bacteria link virus-driven energy theft in the bacteria to cancer.  By the time human genomics is fully commercialized, the billions of dollar spent on research will be used to line the pockets of those who deliver their billion dollar babies to the people who have not yet suffered and died from virus-driven pathology. Those who remain will receive better treatment, but no one will be told anything more about preventing the virus-driven pathology. Greed is the nature of all human suffering, and it will always link either the angels or the devils from microRNA flanking sequences to RNA-guided human genome editing via what is known about RNA-mediated protein folding chemistry and virus-driven pathology compared to nutrient energy-dependent healthy longevity.
What should serious scientists who want to help people avoid unnecessary suffering and death do? How can they make more people realize that the commercialization in human genomics  synthetic biology and new ethics/security strategies are killing us all?

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Want more on the same topic?

Swipe/Drag Left and Right To Browse Related Posts: