Wave Genetics Research
Wave genetics research seeks to understand how words, thoughts and vibration frequencies influence DNA sequences to activate health-promoting genes while suppressing disease-causing ones. Although difficult to prove scientifically, it may appeal to people who prefer black-and-white solutions or conspiracies over biological or chemical studies.
Demystifying Pseudoscience
Pseudoscience refers to any idea which purports to be scientific but lacks the logical, methodological or rhetorical foundation necessary for it to be recognized as science. While some topics remain under scientific investigation today, others were once scientific but later disproved and refuted and have since been refuted and resurfaced as pseudoscience. While new ideas must first be tested against existing hypotheses, theories, models or paradigms before being judged valid; many pseudoscientific notions have been widely disapproved of by both scientific community and skeptical organizations due to their logical or rhetorical deficiencies.
Numerous factors could explain the appeal of pseudoscience, including individuals’ proclivity for black-and-white solutions and distrust in institutions. Furthermore, pseudoscience might appeal to people’s natural curiosity and interest in conspiracy theories or just as entertainment over real science (for instance choosing UFOlogy or alien studies over biology or chemistry studies).
Lydia Kang notes in her book “The Pseudoscience of Mothman and Other Terrifying Tales” that gaps in public knowledge allow pseudoscientific beliefs to flourish, especially when combined with distrust for institutions or the need to find alternative explanations for unexplained phenomena.
Notable examples of pseudoscience include conspiracy theories, supernatural claims and pseudohistory. Other pseudoscientific ideas might include:
People characterized as merchants of doubt have often been accused of misrepresenting science that contradicts their political or economic agendas, discrediting it in order to advance it further. While some merchants of doubt simply promote their own opinions while others actively mislead the public to advance their goals.
An effective strategy against pseudoscience is educating the public on science and its limitations. One option would be hosting a “Science Cafe” at your local library or coffee shop where scientists discuss any topic they wish. This can be a fun and engaging way of building community awareness.
Start a “Mythbusters Journal” as another way of debunking pseudoscience and keeping track of claims that may be considered pseudoscientific in daily news articles, social media posts and conversations – then use online scientific resources and historical context to evaluate their credibility over time. Over time this will develop your ability to distinguish fact from fiction while helping prevent believing or sharing harmful pseudoscience claims.
Disproving Pseudoscience
People often fall prey to pseudoscience for various reasons, including an absence of critical thinking skills or the inability to distinguish scientific facts from misleading claims. Another contributing factor may be that some pseudoscientific claims sound very much like real science; for instance, Ford Doolittle and others made headlines disproving arsenic life – but this claim may not have been made false by virtue of the research alone – it was misrepresented and hyped up by uncritical media outlets who misrepresented and oversold it instead.
Another example would be Soviet geneticist Lysenko, who introduced Lamarckian ideas of heredity into Russian scientific thought to fit with Marxist ideology, setting back Mendelian genetics by one generation. Eugenics is another form of pseudoscientific movement founded on fear and prejudice against certain groups.
Other pseudoscientific ideas can be more difficult to pin down. Wave genetics is one such idea that offers claims about DNA that simply are not supported by real science, including that “waves” emanating from one’s mind can influence it in ways that activate health-promoting genes while suppressing disease-causing ones; such claims not only make no scientific sense but may lead people away from practicing good lifestyle habits and toward believing false claims instead. Although such ideas may provide entertainment value they do nothing to explain or predict our natural world.
Including Gender and Sexuality Perspectives in Genomics Research
Genetic variants contribute in small ways to an individual’s probability of engaging in same-sex sexual behavior; so far, five locations in the human genome have been statistically associated with it (p 1%).
Researchers have used genome-wide association studies to pinpoint genetic locations associated with sexual orientation and other traits, while studying their effects. According to these findings, one region on the X chromosome may be linked with sexual orientation; yet its precise mechanism remains unknown. We used another type of analysis called genomic fine mapping study to delve further into this question, using a type of genotype-phenotype linkage method and were able to pinpoint one specific locus on the X chromosome that might be connected with sexual orientation.
Our study included a qualitative component to gain an in-depth understanding of stakeholder opinions and perspectives regarding genomic research that uses sexual orientation or gender identity (SOGI) data. For this, 31 LGBTQ+-identified individuals participated in in-depth, semi-structured interviews conducted over multiple sessions. Interviewees were asked to consider the potential benefits, risks, and harms of genomic research on SOGI data. Participants generally anticipated that research confirming genetic contributions to sexual orientation and gender identity would significantly impact their lives. Primary hopes for confirmation included validating LGBTQ+ identities and experiences, improving healthcare access and quality, and increasing acceptance in familial, sociocultural, and political environments. Interviewees identified potential threats associated with confirmation efforts as pathologizing or medicalizing these experiences or identities; undermining reproductive rights; gatekeeping of health or social systems; or malicious testing or misuse of SOGI results.
Interviewees predicted that scientific investigations that confirmed genetic contributions to sexual orientation and gender identities would likely meet with resistance in their own communities, even if such findings did not lead to harmful practices such as conversion therapy. This was in large part because such research bolstered narratives of biological essentialism that asserted sexual orientation and gender identities were biologically determined and immutable.
Suppressing Wave Genetics Research
Peter Gariaev and his colleagues at the Russian Academy of Sciences have long been working to develop cutting-edge genomics technology that could render today’s gene editing techniques obsolete. Unfortunately, however, powerful factions in Russia’s Academy of Sciences have waged an aggressive campaign of suppression against this research which is inimical to science itself.
Defenders of the current genetic engineering paradigm claim that Gariaev and his team’s work is pseudoscience and its experiments flawed – an attempt by some to undermine what could be significant advances in medicine and biology thanks to Gariaev and his team’s groundbreaking efforts. This deception may serve only to hide what is actually an extremely promising development.
Gariaev’s experiments demonstrate that DNA can be altered using resonant waves directed at it, as evidenced by numerous double-blind experiments designed by his team. As proof, they were able to regrow vital organs like pancreas without needing costly and risky surgical procedures.
Resonant waves interact with DNA and activate certain genes to trigger changes to cell functions – this process has been termed “morphogenetic effects.” Morphogenetic effects may help treat cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and diabetes among others.
Resonant waves have not only proven morphogenetic effects; they have also been demonstrated as effective tools in eliminating pathogenic viruses and bacteria from organisms through scientific evidence presented via laser holographic projection.
One of the key characteristics of non-chemical gene editing is that it does not involve chemical manipulation or the introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMO). This makes it a safer and more ethical solution for both human and animal populations alike.
Critics of this form of genetic engineering are criticizing its proponents for lacking scientific rigor and being too “pseudoscientific.” But these accusations are unjustifiable as they stem from a misperception that most DNA is waste. But in reality, most genomes contain functional genes of various kinds including non-protein coding sequences, micro RNA, long repeat RNA and more – the latter providing much-needed biological diversity and protection from mutation.



