


Morgellons -
A Nano-911 Foreign Invader

By Hildegarde Staninger, PhD, RIET-1
Integrative Health Systems, LLC
415 3/4th N. Larchmont Blvd
LA, CA 90004 
323-466-2599  323-466-2774 (fax)
All Material © 2007 Hildegarde Staninger

Presented at the
National Registry of Environmental Professionals
2007 Annual Conference, September 6, 2007, San Antonio, Texas
There is an environmental disease on the horizon that will affect more humans and the environment than any one person will know. Its environmental impact will be far greater than DDT, PCBs and asbestos have ever been. It is called Morgellon's: A Nano-911 Foreign Invader. It has many names ­ fiber disease, mystery disease, delusional parasitosis and unknown dermatological skin disorder, to name a few. It is silent, smart, glistening ­ powered by its own transitional metal battery. And when it strikes its victim it feels like a piece of burning broken glass as it pierces the skin. Smaller than any of the 150 pieces of a virus (known as virons), it is invisible to the naked eye. So silent is it, only the one who has been invaded knows its true nature. Marked with the seal of man-made, self-assembling nano-size materials they can be used in forming drugs, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, biomaterials, artificial nerves, artificial brains, pseudo skin and molecular electronics. Yes, it was patterned after nature's many wonders, but it is still one hundred percent man-made. The nano-brew has been let loose from its scientific flask casting its woes upon an unsuspecting innocence.
Introduction to Chemical Foreign Invaders
Plants, humans and other animals are constantly exposed in their environment to a vast array of chemicals that are foreign to their bodies. These foreign chemicals, or xenobiotics, can be of natural origin or they can be man-made. In general, the more lipophilic (fat loving) compounds are readily absorbed through the skin, across the lungs, or through the gastrointestinal tract. Constant or even intermittent exposure to these lipophilic chemicals could result in their accumulation within the organism, unless effective means of elimination are present. Indeed, chemicals can be excreted unchanged into urine, bile, feces, expired air, and perspiration. Except for exhalation, the ease with which compounds are eliminated from the body largely depends on their water solubility. This is particularly true for non-volatile chemicals that are eliminated in urine and feces, the predominant routes of elimination. Lipophilic compounds that are present in these excretory fluids tend to diffuse into cellular membranes and are reabsorbed, whereas water soluble compounds are excreted. Therefore, it is apparent why lipophilic xenobiotics could accumulate within the body; They are readily absorbed but poorly excreted.1
Fortunately, animal organisms have developed a number of biochemical processes that convert lipophilic compounds to more hydrophilic metabolites. These biochemical processes are termed biotransformation and are usually enzymatic in nature. It should be stressed that biotransformation is the sum of the processes by which a foreign invader such as a chemical is subjected to chemical change by living organisms (Figure 1 ­ 1). This definition implies that a particular chemical may undergo a number of chemical changes. It may mean that the parent molecule is chemically modified at a number of positions or that a particular metabolite of the parent compound may undergo additional modification. The end result of the biotransformation reaction(s) is that the metabolites are chemically distinct from the parent compound. Metabolites are usually more hydrophilic than the parent compound. This enhanced water solubility reduces the ability of the metabolite to partition into biologic membranes and thus restricts the distribution of the metabolites to the various tissues, decreases the renal metabolite(s), and ultimately promotes the excretion of the chemical by the urinary and biliary fecal routes.
Morgellons is a disease that affects humans and animals with a minimum of 93 or more symptoms. Humans experience different colored fibers growing out of their skin with the presence of lesions that ooze a gel like material or may have the feeling of hot burning glass ripping through the underside of their skin as a needle. Toxicological Pathology evaluations of specimens taken from a patient who was diagnosed with this disease and was having a knee replacement operation revealed that the specimen contained silica and silicone.2 Further analysis of these specimens using Micro Raman technology revealed that the fibers that grew out of this same patient were composed of a two part polyester, like a plastic straw within a straw with a head that was made up of silicone (Figure 1 -2 & 1-3). Polyester is a definite man-made material. It is "nylon" by another name. Nylon is a compound that is a lipophatic compound, just as silicone. In addition, high density polyethylene fibers were found in a different patient's heel of their foot. (Figure 1-4). The difference in these compounds and ones that are man-made in a chemical factory are that they have a size, which is measured at a "NANO" level.
Nano is nine decimals below the zero or 0.000,000,001.3 It is smaller than the width of a human hair. How can something so small be so harmful to humans?
Well this is were size counts Big Time. The nano material, which has many forms such as smart dust, nano gels, quantum dots, nano tube, nano wire, nano bots, nano horns are all part of the growing field of nanotechnology. If something is so small that it does not stimulate the immune system to react to its foreign invasion of the cell new cellular toxicological reactions will occur. Collectively these materials were found in specimens taken from the same patient who had the knee replacement operation. The individual had blue fibers that would not burn at 1,400 degrees F and harden gels that made lesions. The callus-like scab had cat-like claws on its underside. These specimens went through Toxicological Pathology and it is true, a picture says a thousand words (Figure 1-5).
No matter what the biological agent, chemical or foreign invader, the body is geared up to protect itself and remove the toxic material. The body is not ready for a nano foreign invader because one can not see it at any level. Normally the body would go through biotransformation and remove this toxic material from the body through biotransformation, but not in the case of Moregellons, which seems to have a mind of its own as it riddles the body with its fibers and continuous self- replication.
Normal Compounds vs Moregellons through Biotransformation
A number of enzymes in animal organisms are capable of biotransforming lipid-soluble xenobiotics in such a way as to render them more water soluble. These enzymatic reactions are of two types; phase I reactions, which involve oxidation, reduction, and hydrolysis, and phase II reactions, which consist of conjugation or synthetic reactions. Although phase I reactions generally convert foreign compounds to derivatives that are more water soluble than the parent molecule, a prime function of these reactions is to add or expose functional groups (e.g.,
- OH, - SH, _NH2, - COOH). These functional groups then permit the compound to undergo phase II reactions. Phase II reactions are biosynthetic reactions where the foreign compounds or a phase I ­ derived metabolite is covalently linked to an endogenous molecule, producing a conjugate. In these cases, the endogenous moieties (e.g. glucuronic acid, sulfate) usually confer upon the lipophilic xenobiotic or its metabolite increased water solubility and the ability to undergo significant ionization at physiologic pH. These conjugated moieties are normally added to endogenous products to promote their secretion or transfer across hepatic, renal, and intestinal membranes. The transport mechanisms that have developed recognize the conjugating moiety. Thus, the excretion of conjugated xenobiotics is enhanced by their ability to participate in transport systems that have evolved from the conjugated products of endogenous molecules.4
The relationship between phase I and phase II reactions is summarized in Figure 4-1. The fate of a particular chemical is determined by its physical/chemical products. Volatile organic compounds may be eliminated via the lungs with no biotransformation. Those with functional groups may be conjugated directly, whereas others undergo phase I reactions before conjugation. As implied, biotransformation is often integrated and can be complex. Because of this complexity, imbalances between phase I and phase II reactions or dose-related shifts in metabolic routes are often causes of chemical-induced tissue injury.5
Organ and Cellular Location of Biotransformation
The enzymes or enzyme systems that catalyze the biotransformation of foreign compounds are localized mainly in the liver. This is not surprising, since a primary function of the liver is to receive and process chemicals absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract before they are distributed to other tissues. Liver receives all the blood that has perfused the splanchnic area, which contains nutrients and other foreign substances. Because of this, the liver has developed the capacity to extract these substances readily from the blood and to modify chemically many of these substances before they are stored, secreted into bile, or released into the general circulation. Other tissues can also biotransform foreign compounds. Nearly every tissue tested has shown activity toward some foreign chemicals (Figure 1-6). Extrahepatic tissues are limited with respect to the diversity of chemicals they can handle, and thus their contribution to the overall biotransformation of xenobiotics is limited. However, biotransformation of a chemical within an extrahepatic tissue may have an important toxicological implication for that particular tissue.6
Subcellular Localization of Biotransformation Enzymes
Biotransformation of foreign compounds within the liver is accomplished by several remarkable enzyme systems. These can chemically modify a wide variety of structurally diverse drugs and toxicants that enter the body through ingestion, inhalation, the skin, or injection. The phase I enzymes, those that add or expose functional groups, are located primarily in the endoplasmic reticulum, a network of interconnected channels present in the cytoplasm of most cells. These enzymes are membrane bound, since the endoplasmic reticulum is basically a contiguous membrane composed of lipids and proteins. The presence of enzymes within a lipoprotein matrix is critical, since lipophilic substances will preferentially partition into a lipid membrane, the site of biotransformation. 7
When liver is removed (in the laboratory) and homogenized, the tubular endoplasmic reticulum breaks up and fragments of the membrane are sealed off to form micro vesicles. These are referred to as microsomes, which can be isolated by differential centrifugation of the liver homogenate. If the supernatant fraction that results from centrifugation of the homogenate at 9000 x g (to remove nuclei, mitochondria, and lysosomes as well as unbroken cells and large membrane fragments) is subjected to centrifugation at 105,00 x g, a pellet highly enriched in microsomes is obtained. The resulting supernatant fraction, which contains a number of soluble enzymes, is referred to as the cytosol. This cytosol contains many of the enzymes of phase II biotransformation. Many of the important biotransformation enzymes are referred to as cytosolic or microsomal to indicate the subcellular location of the enzymes.
The microsomal enzymes that catalyze the phase I reactions were characterized primarily by their ability to metabolize drugs. Thus, much of the literature refers to these enzymes as the microsomal, as the microsomal enzymes will convert drugs to more polar products, but they also act on the numerous chemicals. Therefore, the word biotransformation is preferred to drug metabolism, since it conveys the more universal nature of the reactions. In addition, if delineates the normal process of metabolism of endogenous nutrients form the biotransformation of foreign chemicals.7
Detoxication ­ Toxication
Inasmuch as both phase I and phase II enzymes convert foreign chemicals to forms that can be more readily excreted, they are often referred to as detoxication enzymes. However, it should be emphasized that biotransformation is not strictly related to detoxicaiton. In a number of cases, the metabolic products are more toxic than than the parent compounds. This is particularly true for some chemical carcinogens, organo-phosphates, and a number of compounds that cause cell necrosis in the lung, liver, and kidney. In many instances, a toxic metabolite can be isolated and identified. In other cases, highly reactive intermediates are formed during the biotransformation of a chemical. The term toxication or bioactivation is often used to indicate the enzymatic formation of reactive intermediates. These reactive intermediates are thought to initiate the events that ultimately result in cell death, chemically induced cancer, teratogenesis and a number of other toxicities (Figure 1-7).
Moregellon affected individuals have the opposite reactions of phase I and II, because they experience specific physical parameters such as low body temperature, high blood pressure, urine conductivity high (20 -21), gels, fibers and fluorescents on the body as nano tattoo fluorescent shapes. All tell a tale of being injected with a burning glass needle through their skin as they suffer from severe itching.
Nanotechnology presents new opportunities to create better materials and products. Already, nano material containing products are available in U.S. markets including coatings, computers, clothing, cosmetics, sports equipment and medical devices. A survey of EmTech Research of companies working in the field of nanotechnology has identified approximately 80 consumer products, and over 600 raw materials, intermediate components and industrial equipment items that are used by manufacturers. Our economy will be increasingly affected by nanotechnology as more products containing nano materials move from research and development into production and commerce.8
Nanotechnology also has the potential to improve the environment, both through direct applications of nano materials to detect, prevent, and remove pollutants, as well as indirectly by using nanotechnology to design cleaner industrial processes and create environmentally friendly products. However, there are unanswered questions about the impacts of nano materials and nanoproducts on human health and the environment, and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or "the Agency") has the obligation to ensure that potential risks are adequately understood to protect human health and the environment. As products made from nanomaterials become more numerous and therefore more prevalent in the environment, EPA is thus considering how to best leverage advances in nanotechnology to enhance environmental protection, as well as how the introduction of nano materials into the environment will impact the Agency's environmental programs, policies, research needs, and approaches to decision making. Currently, the only regulation that addresses to evaluate the environmental risk of nano materials/technology is the City of Berkley, California.9
Some examples of this technology that applied to a private research study addressed the composition of the fibers used current terminology to address the researcher's findings.10
Carbon nanotube injectors ­ a nano carbon nanotube, conjugated with streptavidin-coated quantum dots. Developed by Xing Chen, Andrax Kis, Alex Zetti, and Carolyn Bertozzi fromt eh University of California at Berklely. Unique feature is its ability to deliver genes.
Nano motor - Carlo Montemagno of Cornell University made a molecular motor less than one-fifth the size of a red blood cell. The key components are protein from E. coli attached to a nickel spindle and propeller a few nanometers across, which is powered by ATP, the energy-intermediate that the body itself uses to power all living activities. But this molecular motor works with the efficiency of only 1 to 4 percent, comparing poorly with those in living organisms that could work at close to 100 percent efficiency.11
Nanobombs - Researchers in Michigan have designed smart "nanobombs" that are said to evade the immune system, to hone in on diseased cells to kill them or deliver drugs to them.11
Nanoelectrosensor - Electronic devices that can tell cells to make specific hormones when the body needs them, and electricity generators that self-assembling inside the cell. 11
Nano-pharmaceuticals ­ Another idea is to interact directly with cells, so they can be harnessed as pharmaceutical factories to produce drugs on demand. Milan Mrksich, chemist at the University of Chicago, plans to hook up cells to electronic circuits by tethering them to a carpet of molecular arms. Carbon chains between 10 to 20 atoms long attached to a gold-plated glass plate with sulphur atoms. The strands are packed so tightly that they have to stand upright on the surface. That creates a thicket of free sticky molecular ends to capture and manipulate cells.11
Quantum dots, nanoparticles, carbon nanotubes (in microelectronics) and other throw-away nanodevices may constitute whole new classes of non-biodegradable nano-junk and nanosmog, environmental pollutants that could make cancer-causing asbestos seem tame.11
The prospect of adverse immune reactions has already been pointed out. Scientists have yet to develop artificial materials that don't cause at least some problems when inserted into the body, starting with silicone breast implants.11 Nanoscale devices are worse. As David Williams an advisor to the European Union on problems of public perceptions of medical technologies says, "The human body is best designed to repel or attack things the size of a cell." Worse yet, the devices could clog up our immune system for good.
And if so small as to not stimulate the immune system at all, "What will be the effects upon the cellular membranes, organelles or the nuclear material (DNA) or its membrane. If the nano material is made up of DNA plasmids of fungi, bacteria or viruses will this new material mix and bind to our own internal cell constituents?
Nano and the Enviornment
In the NIOSH white paper on Nano Technology, it specifically states that the nano material is so small that it will not do any harm to living cells. Current studies on the use of nano tubes on rat lungs have shown that the rats become ill or died after the procedure.12
In Project FMM two individuals who had Morgellons submitted samples for analysis using scanning electron microscope technology along with a sample of a chemtrail cottoncandy-like material that fell from the sky in Texas. The test revealed that the materials in all 3 samples were various stages of development or degradation of the material within the host (Anna and Lily), while the chemtrail sample matched the ladies'. The samples were over 1,500 miles from each other.13
Our environment has seen the results of chemicals upon its land, waters and air. DDT and how it almost whipped out the American Bald Eagle almost 40 years ago was a perfect example of how a chemical could do harm in the food chain of other animals. Nano materials that are dumped into the streams and air are a time bomb of environmental problems. It is important for both scientists and the general public to keep a close track on the developments of nanotechnology and to distinguish the real facts of this technology. And determine if it can really improve our lives without compromising our dignity, integrity and the human race.
1. Amdur, Mary O., J. Doull, and C.D. Klaassen. Casarett and Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons, 4th Edition. Chapter 4: Biotransformation of Toxicants by I. Glenn Sipes and A. Jay Gandolfi. Pergamon Press. New York. © 1991. Pgs. 88 ­ 126.
2. Staninger, Hildegarde. Far-Infrared Radiant Heat (FIR RH) Type Remediation for Mold and Other Unique Diseases. National Registry of Environmental Professionals. Annual Conference in Nashville, Tennessee. NREP, Des Plaines, IL © October 18, 2006,
3. Staninger, Hildegarde. 'Size Matters'
http://www.rense.com/morgphase/sizematters.htm © March 2007
4. Dutton, G.J. Glucuronidation of Drugs and Other Compounds. CRC Press, Inc.. Boca Raton, FL. © 1980
5. Guengerich, F.P. and Liebler, D.C. Enzymatic activation of chemicals to toxic metabolites. CRC Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 14:259-307. © 1985
6. Hawkins, D.R. (ed): Biotransformaitons. Vol. 1: A Survey of the Biotransformations of Drugs and chemicals in Animals. Royal Society of Chemistry. London. © 1988
7. Weber, W.W. The Acetylator Genes and Drug Response. Oxford University Press. New York. © 1987
8. U.S. EPA Environmental Protection Agency. External Review Draft Nanotechnology White Paper. Science Policy Council. U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C. December 2, 2006, http://www.epa.gov/osa/nanotech.htm
9. City of Berkley, California County Commissioner's Meeting. Testimony of
Dr. Edward Spencer and other public citizens on the risk of
nanotechnology to the environment. (City developed an
ordinance/regulation to evaluate the risk to the environment from
nanotechnology.) Berkley, California © 2006, http://www.seektress.com/berkeley.htm
10. Staninger, Hildegarde. Project: Fiber, Meteroite & Morgellons. Phase I and II. http://www.rense.com/morgphase/phase2_1.htm, © March 2007.
11. Ho, Mae-Wan. Nanotecnology, a Hard Pill to Swallow.
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/nanotechnology.php © July 16, 2007
12. Lam, et. al. Pulmonary Toxicity of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes in Mice 7 and 90 Days after Intratracheal Instillation. Toxicol. Sci. 77:126-134 © 2004
14. Environmental Defense Fund & Dupont. Brochure: NANO Risk Framework. (www.dupont.com & www.environmentaldefensefung.com )


This Site Served by TheHostPros