Code Breakers

Code Breakers

Hijacked DNA

Guest Authors:
Robert Melashenko, M.D.
Michael Webster, M.D.

Virus parasites cause disease.
Cutting-edge science indicates invasive foreign DNA is corrupting the human genome.

Hijacked DNA corrupts the genome leading to disastrous results. The Bible tells us something went wrong, very wrong, at the beginning of man’s perfect existence. It’s called “sin.” It also offers the “good news” that God has intervened to make things right again. This is an ongoing process.

© Jerry Horbert

Questions linger as to whether parasitic DNA may cause some plants to sprout thorns rather than leaves.1

The Biblical description of sin depicts it as a global disrupter of human existence on every functioning level. God’s “Book of Nature” helps answer “What went wrong” and “How is it fixed” by providing relevant observable data that correlates with both life sciences and the Bible.

“… to him that knows to do good, and does it not, to him it is sin.” 2…As through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin; and so death passed unto all men, for that all sinned.3Everyone practicing sin also practices lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.” 4 First John sums things up saying any behavior outside the boundaries of the Law is “lawlessness.”

The Ten Commandments, composed of five “do’s” and five “do not’s,” is the law referenced as it reflects God’s perfect character.

The Law of Genetics

What makes you, “you”? And me, “me”?

Does our uniqueness reside in the building blocks (atoms or molecules) that compose our bodies? The obvious answer is: “No.” Atoms, which serve as building blocks for our human frame, are much like Lego blocks.

When you purchase a box of Lego blocks with a picture of a barnyard on its cover, an instruction sheet lists where blocks of different colors must be placed to build the barnyard. Since the green blocks are identical in size and shape, they are interchangeable. Same for the blacks, browns, and reds. What matters is that you place a green block where the instruction sheet calls for green. It doesn’t matter which green block you choose. If one should break, it doesn’t matter which replacement block you choose, as long as the shape and color are the same as the one which was broken.

The same goes for the human body. The instruction sheet (the genome) sets the pattern for all the atoms and/or molecules in our bodies. Scientists have estimated that the atoms in our bodies change out, or are replaced, every 7 years. In our brains, it’s even faster, with the major metabolic proteins changing out as often as every 5 days.

It’s not the individual atoms that provide our uniqueness—it’s the “instruction sheet,” our individual genetic codes, our genomes, that makes you “you” and me “me”.

A 2006 article in the Public Library of Science describes how precisely our DNA codes everything about us. “By comparing cells from 43 unique positions that finely map the entire human body, the authors discovered that cells utilize a ZIP-code system to identify the cell’s position in the human body. The ZIP code for Stanford is 94305, and each digit hones in on the location of a place in the United States; similarly, cells know their location by using a code of genes.” 5

Although estimates vary, many scientists place the number of cells in a human body at over 100 trillion! And, each of these cells has a code—a directed specified space to occupy–just like the barnyard Lego blocks!

It’s scientific fact that genetic diseases are directly produced by errors in the genetic code, but many people are unaware that most human maladies also are, in one way or another, dependent upon genetic processes—whether in the host or in an attacking pathogen.

According to the Bible, sin introduced disease into the human condition. It then follows, the human information system must harbor instructions for these sinful processes. Sin impacts the genetic code.

DNA is hereditary. So is sin.

Why, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed on all men, for that all have sinned.” 6Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.7

The human sperm is comprised of a protein coat with an attached flagellum and half a human genome…period. Nothing more, nothing less. Since sin is inherited, and the father contributes one-half of the inheritance—then the genome has to carry the sin-burdened information.

About two-thirds of the DNA in the human genome has been added! Put another way, approximately two-thirds of today’s human DNA was not there when the original genome was created. 8

An unknown amount of genetic material in the original code has been destroyed when the new, corrupted code was introduced. From the perspective of the genome, there has been a massive rewriting (consisting of both addition and deletion) of the information!


What or who caused the corrupted rewrite and how was it accomplished?

Mobile Genetic Elements

In the late 1940s and early 1950s, Barbara McClintock discovered that corn chromosomes changed shape when the corn stock was stressed. DNA from one chromosome would actually “jump” to another—whole sections of DNA would change locations between chromosomes. Not only did these chromosomal changes cause changes in the inner working of the corn kernels, it also changed drastically the kernel’s appearance—they changed color from yellow to shades of green and blue. But note: the changes did not involve evolutionary transformation to a new and different life kind.
McClintock called the “jumping” DNA controlling elements. Other names such as jumping genes, junk DNA and silent DNA have also been applied to these mobile genetic elements (MGE’s). (McClintock’s term did not survive, but was clearly the most accurate).

MGE’s are foreign strips of genetic material that are incorporated into a host genome where they can perform regulatory or protein-coding functions. They can lay dormant for years, or become active immediately. As far as bringing new instructions, or destroying code already present, they are without peer in engineering change in a genome.

They accomplish this by being extremely accurate in their “attack,” with over 80% of MGE’s converging on protein-coding areas that are utilized to produce and maintain neurological functioning—especially in the central nervous system.9

All living cells have MGE’s. In general, the higher up the organism complexity scale, the higher the percentage of MGE’s in the genomes–with human beings far and away the largest carriers. These MGE’s are anything but silent. In fact, they have been demonstrated to control how and when much of the genome is transcribed (hence the term controlling elements).

Think of it this way: What would be the result if whole chapters (even books) in the Bible were to be removed and replaced with completely new material written by other authors. In addition, the remaining “original” portions of the Bible would still have sentences and whole paragraphs sullied. How much (if any) of the original message would remain?

If two-thirds of the production manual’s design plan for the F-16 fighter jet were altered—would it still fly? The complexity of the F-16 pales into insignificance when compared to the human cell—much less the human body!

MGE’s take control of the genome in several ways.

Seventy-five percent of gene promoters are under the control of MGE’s. Gene promoters control when, how, and to what extent a gene is transcribed. If you “own” the promoter—you “own” the gene. MGE’s have the capabilities to modify and/or corrupt the genome. A change so significant that it can account for the great variety of species. 10

The term ”LTR” is a type of MGE. “Some of the first LTR promoters to be discovered were found to have a major impact on the cellular gene…
Individual cases of alternative gene promoters have long been described and presumed to contribute to this phenomenon. 11 More recent genome-wide studies have estimated that up to 75% of human genes use alternative promoters, perhaps far more than anticipated….12

Alternate promoters” means MGE regulated or created promoters. Some of these promoters were original equipment that were modified by MGE’s, while others were actually brought into the genome by MGE’s from elsewhere. Either way, regulatory control over a protein-coding area has been ceded to a new and different “director.”

Protein coding areas are very analogous to keys on a piano keyboard. The piano keys can be used to produce music—from Beethoven to rock and roll. Which type of music depends on the order and manner in which the keys are struck. The piano player is responsible for this and thus is credited for the music produced. So it is with genes. The controlling agent is responsible for the organism produced.

Where do MGE’s Come From?

The answer has vexed scientists right up to the present. They are constructed in a way distinctive and unique in the biological world.

Every cell in the body has all the instructions needed to make the whole organism. The MGE’s enter all the cells in the body (including the germ cells that make the egg and sperm), but are often less active in the somatic cells while being very active in neurological cells. 13

In many ways, MGE’s behave like cruise missiles, delivering their payload to very specific and strategic targets.

Many “families” of MGE’s are present in living cells. They infest all living cells, with different families often found predominately in different types of cells (i.e., plant, bacterial, mammalian, etc.).

There are two large categories into which all the families can be segregated— viral and non-viral. The MGE’s in both categories can be further characterized by whether they are RNA or DNA based.

As to why MGE’s etiology is a mystery, “Scientists who deal in the history of life have never been quite sure what to do with viruses. One measure of their uncertainty is the Tree of Life Web Project, a collective effort to record everything known about the relationships of living and extinct species… Scientists continued to find more DNA-copying enzymes in viruses that have no counterparts in the world of cells….14

Scientists have nowhere to put viruses when constructing a “Tree of Life.” They just don’t fit anywhere! They are so different from living cells that an “evolutionary” answer is not viable.

“The existence of several genes that are central to virus replication and structure, are shared by a broad variety of viruses but are missing from cellular genomes (virus hallmark genes) suggests the model of an ancient virus world, a flow of virus-specific genes that went uninterrupted from the pre-cellular stage of life’s evolution to this day…Virus-specific genes that are conserved in a (relatively) broad group of viruses but have no detectable homologs in cellular life forms.” 15

This perception offers two major ideas:

  1. From an evolutionary point of view, viruses were present before cellular life forms came on the scene. This presupposes that viruses were already waiting for the first cells to evolve, perfectly engineered in advance to manipulate the just evolving complex cellular genetic information system! Explanation as to just how this was done? None!
  2. The specific genetic information coding for a number of protein enzymes is only present in the viral world and has no counterpart in the cellular world. This is why science does not know where to place the viruses: They have genetic instructions for the construction of enzymes that are not found in any cellular life form. These nano-tools are only helpful if one wishes to add or delete information from the cell’s DNA code by making a break in the DNA double helix to allow foreign DNA to be integrated into the cell’s double helix.

The viral “Hallmark Genes” (term coined by Eugene Koonin) code for the enzymes that perform the following functions:

  • Make a break in the cell’s DNA double helix.
  • Make a DNA copy of an RNA template….this information flow is in the exact opposite direction than normally is found in cells. The only purpose of this enzyme is to make foreign information from an outside source compatible for incorporation into the cell’s genome.
  • Align the foreign DNA copy into the break in the cell’s DNA helix to allow incorporation.
  • Patch up the break in the double helix once the “new” DNA is in the correct position—thus incorporating foreign “new” information into the cell’s genetic code where it can be transcribed. Now it becomes a permanent part of the cell’s DNA.

Multiple complex and highly engineered enzymes, all working together in perfect cadence, are needed to “hijack” the cell’s code—and that is exactly what MGE’s have the ability to do thanks to these enzymes. A “created” cell would have no need for such actions!

From a Biblical standpoint, there’s even less need for these enzymes! When creation week was over, “God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.16 If God pronounced everything to be “very good,” why would He need to make further changes?

Whether a Biblical or evolutionary stance is taken, how the MGE’s came to be is still unanswered! Clearly, MGE’s only corrupt the DNA code, never transforming a once-perfect genome into some new, better, and more complex.

Given the fact MGE’s are the rule, not the exception in the human genome, what does this mean to our everyday lives—if anything?

Well, almost everything!

Nowhere in life are the MGE’s without effect. In some areas, MGE’s are in full control.

Invaders have been infiltrating our genome for millions of years. You’re less human than you think, says Frank Ryan…On top of that, huge chunks of the genome are made up of mysterious virus-like entities called retrotransposons, pieces of selfish DNA that appear to serve no function other than to make copies of themselves…All in all, the virus-like components of the human genome amount to almost half of our DNA.

“This would once have been dismissed as mere ‘junk DNA,’ but we now know that some of it plays a critical role in our biology. As to the origins and functions of the rest, we simply do not know.” 17

MGE’s are nestled among the parts of our genome that regulate how and when our genes are transcribed. They impact who and what we are.

The chimpanzee has long presented a conundrum for human geneticists.
The orthologous proteins of humans and chimpanzees are more than 99.5% identical… yet the two species differ profoundly across a broad spectrum of apparently unrelated phenotypes. This evident paradox led King and Wilson to speculate, famously, that differences in gene regulation, rather than protein-coding sequences might primarily explain differences in physiology and behavior between humans and chimpanzees.18

Even though our proteins and those of chimps are 99.5% identical, we differ from each other in the way we look, act, think, and operate. These differences are coded for in the regulatory DNA that composes over 98% of our genome as they control (remember Barbara McClintock called MGE’s “controlling elements”) the multiple chemical pathways that make humans differ from other life forms.

Around two-thirds of the regulatory genome is composed of MGE’s. Since everything in our cellular life is programmed, it should come as no surprise that MGE’s have been implicated in causing: Genetic Diseases, Autoimmune Diseases, Endocrine Diseases, Psychiatric Disorders, “Selfish” Behavior, Cancer, Aging, and Death. Although not all disease processes have presently been genetically mapped, it is not outside the realm of possibility that all disease may have a genetic cause—namely MGE’s.

MGE’s do not confine their activity to causing human sickness—they also impact us in other equally sinister but less obvious ways. Around two-thirds of the nerve cells in our brains do not have a normal number of chromosomes in their nucleus. Instead of the 46 that all cells are supposed to have, they have 45 or 47. 19 These cells still function in our thinking processes! Scientists are unsure how this finding may affect our cognitive capabilities and to what degree our ability to think may be compromised.

Gerald R. Crabtree from Stanford University underscores the cognitive issue.

Taken together, the large number of genes required for intellectual and emotional function, and the unique susceptibility of these genes to loss of heterozygosity, lead me to conclude that we, as a species, are surprisingly intellectually fragile and perhaps reached a peak 2000-6000 years ago. But if we are losing our intellectual capabilities, how did we acquire them in the first place?20

MGE’s have caused an unknown amount of the original code to be lost—how much, and what information was irretrievably destroyed, is unknown! 21 MGE’s are the primary cause of our genes undergoing mutation 22 and also are responsible for our brain cell’s chromosomal number variance problem.

MGE’s have altered “original” genes to the point that the protein they code for functions completely different from what the “original” was supposed to do. Or, the “original” genes are so hijacked that they no longer code for a functioning protein at all.

Hijacked genes are called pseudogenes, in stark contrast to the “original” functioning gene population which account for just over 1%! 23 Other genes, from outside sources such as bacteria, are brought into the human genome via MGE’s. This is called “horizontal gene transfer.”

In short: MGE’s have played havoc with the human genome!

It is widely assumed that roughly half of the human genome has been laid waste by transposable elements and other classes of repetitive sequences, which have repeatedly and haphazardly pummeled the genome at various evolutionary intervals…In marked contrast to the prevailing wisdom, “Encode chromatin and transcription studies now suggest that a large number of transposable elements encode highly cell-type-specific regulatory DNA that controls not only their own cell-selective transcription but also those of neighboring genes…..

“Far from an evolutionary dustbin, transposable elements appear to be active and lively members of the genomic regulatory community, deserving the same level of scrutiny applied to other genic or regulatory features.24

We know MGE’s are “foreign” intruders since the body goes to great lengths to identify, mark, and either lock-down or destroy invading parasites. If they were part of the “original” equipment, the body would not go to this extreme effort to neutralize them.

The body is equipped with sophisticated “search and destroy” systems that detect and identify parasite intruders. These cell defenses either lock them up and render them incapable of “jumping”, multiplying and being transcribed—or destroy them altogether. At any given moment, a significant percentage of the genome is under “lock-down”.

Large parts of chromosomes (called heterochromatin) are tightly wrapped in protein coats which render the DNA inside “locked-down.” The vast preponderance of the DNA in the heterochromatin is composed of MGE’s.

How Did Mobile Genetic Elements Get Into the Genome?

When reading the Biblical narrative about the “fall” of Adam and Eve, the story in Genesis 3 makes it clear that eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, was the trigger that released all that we call “sin” into our human existence.

The logical question then arises: MGE’s have been shown to be associated with all the characteristics which the Bible labels as “sinful.” Death is placed directly at sin’s door: Evidence that MGE’s both, directly and indirectly, cause what the Bible labels the “first death” is persuasive. 25

The question then follows: “Did the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil somehow carry a cargo of MGE’s?”

Today, it is undisputed that fruit, in general, carries a large number of biologically active substances that have definite effects on the genome—we call these epigenetic effects. The recipient’s actual DNA code is not changed, but certain parts of the genome are either “locked-down” or “freed-up” for transcription by these substances. Changing the code sequence can only happen if the fruit also carries some viruses or other MGE entities.

The two unique trees in the center of the Garden, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life, were set apart as having special properties that fruit from the other trees did not possess. Continued ingestion of the Tree of Life conferred eternal life while eating of the other would cause certain death (“dying thou shalt die”).

Whether the fruit of these trees possessed special code-changing entities in addition to their epigenetic capabilities the Bible does not say.

Scientific studies have shown that not only viruses can gain entrance into a human body via foodstuffs—but non-viral MGE’s can do so as well! 26 Large strands of MGE’s mixed with food can traverse the stomach and be absorbed in the intestines fully intact and functional. 27

MGE’s could have entered Adam’s and Eve’s physical bodies via this route—but did they?

Eve was not driven to eat the forbidden fruit because she was hungry—this test was not whether or not she could control her hunger. And even should Eve have suddenly experienced a severe craving for fruit while talking with the serpent—the Tree of Life was but a few short steps away! If hunger was not driving Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit, what motivated her regrettable choice? The Bible answers!

…When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.28

Eve swallowed the serpent’s lie and took the next step because she wanted to become “wise” like God. She intentionally ate the fruit, fully anticipating it would change her into something new and better—just like the “talking” snake.

Did Adam and Eve know about DNA? Did they understand how the genome worked? We don’t know. But we do know, from the Bible, that the pair walked with God and discussed things with Him, openly and freely. There is no reason to believe that reference to the basic information system (DNA) that governs their identities would have been off-limits.

What happened next in the Biblical narrative sheds further light on the answer to the question of whether MGE’s existed in the forbidden fruit.

Something physical did change, and it was not subtle. “And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.29

This visible, physical change was likely the result of “cause-and-effect” and not some heavenly directed retribution. And…it was physical in nature. Cut off from access to the Tree of Life, our first human parents eventually did die.

The Bible describes a genetic corruption, attributed directly to sin.

Conventional science has discovered corruption of the human genome attributed directly to MGE’s that have invaded DNA and then been passed along genetically from generation to generation. This scientific reality is not in conflict with the Scriptural narrative of humanity’s decline and fall.

There is reason to believe sin provided the trigger that activated the disastrous consequence that haunts the human race.

Robert Melashenko, M.D. and Michael Webster, M.D., his assistant, are brilliant scientists who have analyzed thousands of cutting-edge, peer-reviewed articles relating to factors impacting DNA. Their findings are summarized in Chapter 15, created exclusively for inclusion in the 2016 edition of Three Days Before the Sun. It’s In the Code, the definitive scientific book on corrupted DNA by these two physicians is expected to be published sometime in the near future in both print and eBook formats.

  1. C. A. Kidner & Martienssen, R A., “Spatially restricted microRNA directs leaf polarity through ARGONAUTE1.” Nature, Vol. 428. 4 March 2004.
  2. The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, James 4:17.
  3. The Holy Bible, American Standard Version, Romans 5:12.
  4. The Holy Bible, Literal Translation Version, 1 John 3:4.
  5. John L. Rinn, et.a., “Anatomic Demarcation by Positional Variation in Fibroblast Gene Expression Programs,” PLoS Genetics, Volume 2, Issue 7; July 2006.
  6. The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, Romans 5:12.
  7. The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, Romans 5:14.
  8. Jason, A.P., de Koning,, “Repetitive Elements May Compromise Over Two-thirds of the Human Genome,” PLoS Genetics, Volume 7, Issue 12. 2011.
  9. Abdel-Halim Salem, et al., “Recently Integrated Alu Elements and Human Genomic Diversity” Mol Biol Evol, 20 (8), 2003.
  10. G. Bourque., “Transposable elements in gene regulation and in the evolution of vertebrate genomes,” Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 19:607-612, 2009.
  11. Ramana Davuluri, et al., “The functional consequences of alternative promoter use in mammalian genomes.” Trends in Genetics. Vol.24 No.4, 2008.
  12. Carla J. Cohen, et al., “Endogenous Retroviral LTR’s as Promoters for Human Genes; A Critical Assessment,” Gene; 448 [2009) 105-114.
  13. Nicole G. Coufal, et al, “L1 retrotransposition in human neural progenitor cells,” Nature 460, 1127-1131, 27 August 2009.
  14. Carl Zimmer, “Did DNA Come From Viruses?”, Science, Volume 312, May 12, 2006.
  15. Eugene V. Koonin,, “The ancient Virus World and Evolution of Cells,” Biology Direct 2006, 1:29.
  16. The Holy Bible, Authorized King James Version, Genesis 1:31.
  17. Frank Ryan, “I, virus: Why you’re only half human,” New Scientist, January 30, 2010.
  18. Adam Siepel, et al., “Cis-regulatory elements and human evolution,” Current Opinion in Genetics & Development, 29:81-89, 2014.
  19. M. A. Kingsbury, et. al., PNAS, April 26, 2005, Volume 102, No. 17, 6143-6147.
  20. Gerald R. Crabtree, “Our Fragile Intellect, Part One,” Trends in Genetics: January 2013, Volume 29, No. 1.
  21. Nicholas Gilbert, et al., “Genomic Deletions Created upon LINE-1 Retrotransposition.” Cell, Vol.110, 315-325, Aug. 9, 2002.
  22. A. Carnell & J. Goodman, “The Long (LINEs) and the Short (SINEs) of It: Altered Methylation as a Precursor to Toxicity.” Toxological Sciences 75, 229–235, 2003.
  23. I. Ezkurdia, et al., “Multiple evidence strans suggest that there may be as few as 19,000 human protein-coding genes,” Human Molecular Genetics, Vol. 23, No.22, 2014.
  24. John A. Stamatoyannopoulos, “What does our Genome encode?,” Genome Research, 2012, 22:1602-1611.
  25. M. De Cecco, et al. “Genomes of replicatively senescent cells undergo global epigenetic changes leading to gene silencing and activation of transposable elements.” Aging Cell, 12 (2013). 247-256.
  26. A. Forsman,, “Uptake of Amplifiable Fragments of Retrotransposon DNA from the “Human Alimentary Tract,” Mol Gen Genomics, 2003, 270, 362-368.
  27. M. Palka-Santini,, “The gastrointestinal Tract as the Portal of Entry for Foreign Macromolecules: Fate of DNA and Proteins,” Mol Gen Genomics, 2003, 270:201-215.
  28. The Holy Bible, King James Version Genesis 3:6.
  29. The Holy Bible, King James Version Genesis 3:7.