Lymphatic human parasite – part 3a

In the second part of the article, I mentioned the “Hayflick effect” (or Hayflick), which found that the number of divisions of ordinary cells is limited. It was allegedly established that for cells of the human body, the number of divisions is only about 50 times. The “Hayflick effect” is explained by the fact that at the ends of DNA molecules there are specialized structures called telomeres that are not included in the common helix of the DNA molecule, or as experts say, “do not spiralize”, but simply “hang down” as tips. At the same time, DNA polymerase, an enzyme that synthesizes a DNA copy, cannot reach the very end of the double chain of the DNA molecule, that is, to the end of these very telomere tips, so part of the DNA molecule is not copied (replicated).

But then the question arose, how do new organisms appear, and how can a new organism develop from an embryo if the cells divide very quickly at the initial stage? This official science also gives an answer. It turns out that there is a special enzyme – telomerase, which synthesizes telomeric repeating sequences using the mRNA molecule embedded in it and lengthens telomeres. This RNA molecule acts as a template on which duplicate sequences are copied, just as the retrovirus does. In most mature (differentiated) cells, telomerase is blocked, but it functions in stem and germ cells. Why and how this telomerase is blocked, I still could not find the answer. Blocked and that’s it.

At first glance, everything seems to be beautiful and convincing. Since we received a copy that is slightly shorter than the original, then with each subsequent copying we will receive an ever shorter DNA molecule, and at some point the telomeres will become so short that it stops the DNA copying process itself. That is, that “Hayflick limit” by the number of divisions of a given cell will be reached.

But this theory seems convincing only at first, superficial glance. Let’s see what’s wrong with her.

If earlier we were told that when replicating (creating a copy) we get an absolutely identical copy of the original DNA molecule, then the presence of telomeres and the impossibility of their complete copying by DNA polymerase means that the copy is actually different from the original. In other words, there is a complete parent DNA molecule, as well as its shorter copy. In turn, this means that after cell division, we will have one parent cell, in which there are original full-length DNA molecules, as well as a copy cell, in which the DNA molecules have become one “step” shorter.

Now, attention, the question is, how many such copies, in which the DNA molecules are one “step” shorter, can a parent cell, which has a complete set of DNA molecules, generate? Yes, as many as you want! After all, her telomeres are not shortened during the copying process! Or shortened too? But then it turns out already some other process of “biting” telomeres, which is not associated with the replication of the DNA molecule itself.

Having read the specialized forums of biologists where the issues related to the “Hayflick limit” are discussed, I found out that they have a lot of questions on this topic. That is, it is only an average person the question is submitted so that the “Hayflick limit” is an indisputable scientific fact that explains why our bodies die over time. And when you start digging this topic deeper, it turns out that Hayflik made several experiments, and in each of them he received a different lifespan of a colony of cells, which varied from 20 to 80 divisions! And the most frequently mentioned number of “50 divisions” is only the arithmetic average of the entire series of experiments. But then the question arises, why such a large variation in the number of divisions?

It is also interesting that Hayflik conducted his experiments in a special nutrient medium where the primary cell was placed. But at the same time, this cell was outside the original parental organism. In this connection, another question arises, does the same “Hayflick effect” manifest while the cell is inside the parent organism? Is the separation of the cell from the primary parent organism the condition that triggers the above-mentioned blocking of the enzyme telomerase, which must restore the original telomere length after copying?

Dealing with all these questions I went to a very interesting book by Mironin SS “Pseudoscience – genetics. Plague of the twentieth century “, which is published in electronic form. I’ll say right away that this is not fun entertaining reading, which can be quickly read in a couple of hours, although the author tried to write his book as intelligibly as possible for a non-specialist in this field. I didn’t master it until the end, because I have to delve into the text, understand the terms, look at the links or look for some explanations on incomprehensible questions. But in this book, the author comes to conclusions, to which I myself, independently of him, came some time ago thinking about how a living cell works and functions. At the same time, it turned out that this topic is very closely related to the topic of “Hydra”, that is, a certain parasite entity that lives inside people, but at the same time allows it to look at its nature in a completely different way.

From the school bench, most of us know that inside the cell there are DNA molecules that contain “genetic” information about the body. It is argued that this information is sufficient for the organism to fully develop from the fertilized egg into an adult organism, after which it functioned successfully until its death. But in a living cell in the process of vital activity, a lot of very different and complex processes occur, starting from the synthesis of various complex compounds, and ending with the creation of a copy of the cell itself during its division. How are all these complex processes managed and coordinated? After all, DNA is only a static information carrier! It is not an actuator. If you give an analogy with a computer, then this is a memory chip that stores information, various programs and data, and not the central processor that executes this program. Such a “central processor” is the core of the cell, and the whole cell as a whole is the “motherboard”, “power supply” and other components that ensure the functioning of the “central processor” – the cell nucleus.

In other words, in order for a living cell to function, including executing those programs that are recorded in DNA, an appropriate operating environment similar to the operating system in a computer is necessary. Moreover, like a computer, this environment must be dynamic, constantly changing, reacting to many factors and events occurring both inside the cell and in the environment. But modern “science” doesn’t tell us anything about any such operating environment inside a living cell. There are atoms and molecules, there are complex organic compounds, and there are many complex chemical and physical interactions between them, which supposedly explain all the processes occurring in the cell.

In my articles, I occasionally use the term “energy-information field”. At the same time, I regularly receive in the comments and letters a reproach that no “energy-information fields” exist. That all this is unscientific nonsense. So for starters, let’s see if the energy-information fields are an objective reality or is it just an invention of mystifiers.

When we press the power button on a conventional light bulb, the electric current starts to flow through the wires and the light starts to glow. If there is an electric current, especially alternating current, then we can quite easily be able to detect the presence of an electromagnetic field with the help of appropriate instruments.

Now we press the power button on the computer. An internal current also begins to flow through the internal circuits of the electronic components, but in this case much more complex processes occur in the components of the computer than when the light bulb is lit. A clock is started, which sets the base frequency of the entire computer. The central processor, obeying the work logic embedded in it, begins to read the starting program from the memory chips of the starting memory and transfer it to the RAM, and then proceeds to its execution. At the same time, in different parts of the CPU, memory chips and other components, we will have different voltages at any given time, which constantly changes according to the logic of the chip, the program being executed and the data processed by this program. I.e, inside the computer there is a complex, constantly changing electromagnetic field. At the same time, we can call this field energy-information, since the energy of the electric field is filled with information that the computer is currently processing. We can also fix the presence of this field with the help of appropriate devices, including in some cases even reading the information contained in it. This proves that this energy-information field is an objective reality. including in some cases, even read the information that it contains. This proves that this energy-information field is an objective reality. including in some cases, even read the information that it contains. This proves that this energy-information field is an objective reality.

Consider another example. During the work of the brain and the nervous system as a whole between the neurons are constantly exchanging electrical impulses. These impulses affect both the neurons themselves and other cells, such as muscle tissue, causing its cells to contract. Just like a computer, our brain processes a lot of different information, including information from the senses, including vision and hearing, which are transmitted from the senses as a set of electrical impulses propagating through the neural network of our nervous system. We can fix these impulses with the help of special equipment. Thus, we are again dealing with a complex energy-information field formed by the nervous system of living organisms, which is an objective reality, and not at all an invention of mystifiers.

Interestingly, in both cases, the energy-information fields are dynamic, constantly changing structures in time.

Now back to the processes that take place inside a living cell. Yes, we have a certain program for the synthesis of various organic compounds, including various proteins, which are written in DNA. But DNA does not control the entire complex process of cell functioning. As Mironin S.S. writes in his book, in the process of synthesis of proteins inside the cell, many processes occur that are not directly connected to DNA at all. For example, some of the proteins cannot be synthesized in a single pass, so they are assembled in pieces. To do this, at the beginning of the DNA the necessary code is read for several fragments, which are synthesized separately. As their synthesis is completed, the data ready fragments are attached to the membrane of the cell nucleus, which for this purpose has the corresponding “nests” in the form of special molecules, to which these pieces can join and disconnect. After all the necessary fragments are synthesized, they are detached from the membrane of the nucleus and join together into one large protein molecule. Moreover, in some cases, when the future protein molecule is too large to pass through the pores of the membrane of the cell nucleus, the necessary fragments are first taken out of the nucleus, and the final synthesis of a large protein molecule occurs there.
But the process of creating molecules of various compounds is not limited to their synthesis. Inside the cell there are special mechanisms that check the synthesized molecules for their quality. And if one or another complex molecule does not pass this quality control, then it will be destroyed by the corresponding structures inside the cell, and those elements of which this wrong molecule was composed, in many cases, will be reused in the synthesis of other compounds.

In other words, inside a living cell, we observe the work of a rather complex operating environment that controls all the most complex processes of synthesis of compounds and their quality control. At the same time, all these mRNAs and other components of the nucleus and the rest of the cell that are involved in the process are only final actuators that are controlled by this operating environment. For me personally, it is obvious that in the case of a cell, we are also dealing with the manifestation of an energy-information field (EIT), that is, a kind of dynamic structure that processes information. But unlike the computer or the nervous system, where on the physical plane the energy-information field is manifested in the form of electromagnetic impulses, the field inside the cell clearly has some other nature, not electromagnetic, since no structures

Thus, we can say that the processes inside the living cell are controlled by some energy-informational field of some unknown for modern science of nature, which official science prefers not to notice. At the same time, this energy-information field is an objective reality, since we clearly observe the consequences of its functioning in the form of those complex ordered processes occurring inside a living cell. And it is the presence or absence of this energy-information field that distinguishes a living cell from inanimate, and living matter from inanimate matter.

At the same time, we all perfectly know the name of this energy-information field, which controls the work of a living cell. It is called the Soul. And this is stated in all religious teachings of the world. Living matter is distinguished from inanimate matter by the presence of the Soul, an energy-information field that controls the processes inside living organisms.