Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

Reminder that in 2016 “bioethicist” S Matthew Liao called for the bioengineering of humans to make them allergic to meat in exactly the manner caused by the lone-star tick. He said this should be done to save the planet from climate change.

84,468 views • 11 months ago •via X (Twitter)

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

The Disturbing Push for "Moral Enhancement" & Meat Intolerance via Science In 2016, a bioethicist at the World Science Festival floated a chilling idea: What if we engineered humans to be intolerant to meat—like those with lactose intolerance—to "save the planet"? His reasoning? People lack the "willpower" to stop eating steak, so science should force them. Fast forward to 2024, and the same dystopian idea is back—but worse. A recent paper argues that if eating meat is "immoral," then preventing the spread of tick-borne alpha-gal syndrome (AGS)—which makes people allergic to meat—is also immoral. Worse, they claim: "It is morally obligatory to genetically modify ticks to spread AGS, forcing meat intolerance on humanity." The author? Parker Crutchfield, who wrote Moral Enhancement for the Public Good (2021), arguing that: ➡️ Humans are too "morally deficient" to handle crises like pandemics & climate change. ➡️ Everyone should be secretly dosed with "moral enhancers"—without consent—to make them "better people." This isn’t science—it’s 21st-century eugenics. The elite don’t just want to control behavior; they want to rewire humanity itself. From lockdowns to climate mandates to forced meat allergies, the pattern is clear: A small group of "experts" believes they have the right to alter human biology—by any means necessary. The question isn’t "Could they?"—but "Will we let them?" Wake up. Push back. Or lose the right to choose what you eat—or even who you are.

Camus

14,500 views • 11 months ago