Patents prove preconceived coronavirus is not novel experts agree

Dr David E. Martin is chairman of M-CAM International risk management – the world’s largest underwriter of non-intangible assets used in corporate finance in 168 countries. His company maintains the three largest mid cap indexes worldwide – patents, etc. Part of its core business is to “monitor the innovation happening around the world”.

Dr David and his company reviewed more than 4000 patents around sars coronavirus’s and done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all of the manipulations of coronavirus which gave rise to sars as a subclade of the beta coronavirus family.
– Took the gene sequence which was said to be of the novel coronavirus and reviewed it against the patent records which are freely available and came up with over 120 patented pieces of evidence to suggest that the declaration of the novel coronavirus was in fact a fallacy.
The records show that patents attributed to novelty were sought as early as 1999.  The patents were uniquely in the veterinary sciences.  The first vaccine ever patented for coronavirus was actually sought by Pfizer – the application was for an s-spiked protein and was registered January 28, 2000. Miller, Klepfer, Reid and Jones filed for US patent number 6372224. – A spike protein virus vaccine for the canine coronavirus.

Google Censors out this website and other websites that are critical of the mRNA Vaccines.

Google publishes its Search Quality Raters’ Guidelines; a rule book for a remote workforce that is tasked with assessing and providing feedback on the quality of its search results.  Sections 7.3 to 7.5 instruct its quality raters to give the lowest ratings to “Pages that Potentially Spread Hate”, “Potentially Harmful Pages” and “Pages that Potentially Misinform Users”.

  • June 5, 2009 – Amino acid sequences directed against envelope proteins of a virus and polypeptides comprising the same for the treatment of viral diseases;
    • April 28, 2004 – Antiviral agents for the treatment, control and prevention of infections by coronaviruses

    April 19, 2002 – The NIAID patented #7279327 infectious replication defective coronavirus specifically targeted for human lung epithelia. that patent very clearly lays out specific gene sequencing the fact that we knew the ace recepter, the ace-2 domain, the S2 spike protein and other elements of what we today know as this scurge pathogen. it was initially considered a way to harness coronavirus as a method to distribute HIV vaccine.
    was asked to monitor biological and chemical treaty violations in early 2000 (anthrax). his organization was part of the investigation that gave rise to the congressional inquiry into the anthrax origins.
    throughout the fall of 2001 began monitoring an enormous number of bacterial and viral pathogens that were being patented through NIH, NIAID, US armed services infectious disease program, and the international agencies that collaborated with them. coronavirus was seen as a potential vector for vaccines but was also seriously being considered as a potential biological weapon candidate.
    patent #7220852 and derivative patents associated with it including 46592703p , 776521. these patents not only covered the gene sequence of coronavirus but also covered the means of detecting it using rc PCR which presents a problem – if you own the patent on the gene itself and its detection then you have a patented advantage and 100% of the provenance.  This gives you entire scientific and message control.  This patent sought by the CDC was justified by their public relations teams so that everyone would be free to research coronavirus but that’s a lie since the patent office twice rejected the patent on the gene sequence as unpatentable because the gene sequence was already in the public domain.  This meant that the patent office recognized the gene as already been found in previous sars virus outbreaks.  Subsequently the CDC rejected the patents office claim, overrode the decision and ultimately in 2007 got the patent on sars coronavirus.  That this is all in the public interest is disproven by their bribery of the patent office.  Then they paid an additional fee to keep their patent private making it unavailable for public research.

    The SARS outbreak in China in 2000-2002 gave rise to a (problematic) 2003 patent filing by the United States center for disease control and prevention.  Filing the entire gene sequence for what became sars coronavirus is a violation of 35 US code section 101- you cannot patent a naturally occurring substance.

    So called fact checkers say cov-2 is distinct from the CDC patent but this is false.  If you look at the gene sequence filed in 2003 and then in 2005, 2006 what you find is identity.  In up to 99% of the sequence there is overlap that has been identified in what’s called the novel subclade of sars-cov-2.  What we know is that the core designation of sars coronavirus (the clade of the coronavirus family) and the subclade sars-cov-2 have to overlap from a taxonomy point of view – you cannot have sars designation without it first being sars.  The disingenuous fact checking which states the CDC has nothing to do with this pathogen, is beyond the literal credibility of the published sequences and is beyond credulity when it comes to the ICTV taxonomy which states this is a subclade of the current coronavirus.  3 days after CDC filed a patent on coronavirus in 2003, Sequoia Pharmaceuticals on 28 April 2003 filed a patent 7151163 on antiviral agents and treatment and control of infections by coronavirus. Sequoia and ultimately Ablings Pharmaceuticals became rolled into the proprietary holdings of Pfizer and johnson & johnson.
    How would one have a patent for the treatment of a thing invented three days earlier ? also it was issued and published before the CDC patent on coronavirus was actually allowed. this reveals the problem of insider information – CDC paid to keep the goings-on private. this is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering, and collusion.
    June 5, 2008 – around the time DARPA actively took an interest in coronavirus as a biological weapon, Ablynx NV (now part of Sanofi) filed a series of patents that specifically targeted what are now being told is the novel feature of the sars coronavirus – the poly basic cleavage site of sars-cov : the novel spike protein and the ace-2 recepter binding domain which is allegedly novel to sars-cov-2 and all of that was patented on the fifth of june 2008 and those patents in sequence were issued between November 24, 2015 (9193780 – came out after the gain of function moratorium, after the mers outbreak in the middle east) and 2016, 2017, 2019 a series of patents all covering not only the RNA strands but also the subcomponents of the gene strands all issued to Ablynx NV and Sanofi.
    Then crucel, rubius therapeutics, childrens medical corporation, and others that included Chinese national genome center in Shanghai, all identifying in patent filings every attribute (ranged from 2008 through 2017) that was allegedly uniquely published by the single reference publication : the novel bat coronavirus reveals “natural inserts of the S1 S2 cleavage site of the spike protein and possible recombinant 3 origin of the sars-cov-2 virus – the paper routinely used to report the novel coronavirus. 73 patents between 2008 and 2019 for things that this paper allege were novel in the sars-cov-2 specifically as it relates to the polybasic cleavage site, the ace-2 recepter binding domain, and the spike protein. so the clinically novel components of the clinically unique clinically contagious : there was no outbreak of sars because we had engineered all of the elements of that and by 2016 the paper that was funded during the gain of function moratorium that said that the sars coronavirus was poised for human emergence written by ralph baric was also patented for commercial exploitation.
    someone knew something in 2015 and 2016. statement made in 2015 by peter daszak reported in the national academy of press publication feb 12, 2016 ” we need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures such as a pan coronavirus vaccine a key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. we need to use that hype to out advantage to get to the real issues. investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.” 73 patents on everything clinically novel all issued before 2019. patent 7279327 on the recombinant nature of lung targeting covid was transferred from the national university of chapel hill to moderna. in 2017 and 2018 the national institute had to take ownership of the patents they already had rights to owned by the university of north carolina chapel hill. in 2019 the university, moderna, and the NIC began sequencing of a spike protein vaccine a month before an outbreak ever happened. january 6, 2004 – conference call called sars and bioterrorism – merk introduced the notion of what he called “the new normal”. the branded campaign that was adopted the WHO, the Global preparedness monitoring board which was the board upon which the chinese director of the center of disease control, bill gate’s doctor elias and anthony fauci sat together on that board of directors.

    Moderna knew that it was going to be placed in the front of the line with respect to the development of a vaccine in march of 2019 for reasons that are not transparent. they amended a number of patent filings to make mention of a deliberate release of coronavirus for vaccine development.  This relied on technology that was owned by two Canadian companies; arbutis pharmaceutifcals and acuitus;  They actually owned the patent on the lipid nanoparticle envelope that is required to deliver the injection of the mrna fragment.  Moderna began negotiating to get a resolution on this patent so as to include it in the vaccine.  In November they entered into a R&D contract with university of chapel hill to get the spike protein included in the lipid nanoparticle- this gave them a vaccine candidate before we had a pathogen (obvious irregularity).  From 2016 until 2019 at every one of the IAID board council meetings Anthony Fauci lamented the fact that he could not get the public to accept a universal influenza vaccine – he was trying to get everyone engaged in this process.  By March 2019 in the amended patent filings of Moderna we see that there is an epiphany of what if there was an accidental release of a pathogen – it is exactly recited in “the world at risk” which was put together by the WHO in September 2019,  months before there’s an alleged pathogen which says that we need to have a global coordinated experience of a suspected pathogen release and a universal capacity for public relations management crowd control and the acceptance of a universal vaccine mandate – emergency preparedness board of the WHO ‘unified statement’.
    117 patents specifically for the ACE-2 receptor targeting the sars coronavirus. it’s in publications going back to 2008 in the weaponization conferences in Slovenia, all across Europe, and across DARPA affiliated organizations. it’s isolation and amplification has been known since 2013.
    Moderna amended its patents just in time o enjoy the earliest priority dates available.
    is it novel ? no, because the actual gene sequences were already published in the patent record.
    – Peter Daszak himself stating that we have to create public hype to get the public to accept the medical countermeasure of a pancoronavirus vaccine.
    – in 2007 and 2008 the WHO said that we have eradicated the pancoronavirus concern so why did companies spend billions of dollars on a vaccine for a thing that was declorated extinct.

    this was seen as a highly maleable bioweapon – by 2005 it was unquestionably a weapon of choice. the mrna vaccine is a computer derived sequence we are injecting a spike protein mrna sequence which is a computer simulation it’s not derived from nature. it’s a computer simulation of a sequence which has been known and patented for years. and what we know is that that sequence is reported across things like the reliable phone conversations that took place between moderna and the vaccine research center by self report. the cover story is that if you get injected with the spike protein you’re going to get general symptomatic relef but the fact of the matter is there has never been an intent to vaccinate a population as defined by the vaccine universe. when dr fauci tried desperately to get some of his synthetic RNA vaccines published, he had his own patents rejected by the patent office. here’s what the patent office told him when he filed as a member of the NIAID : “these arguments are persuasive to the extent that an antigenic peptide generates an immune response that may produce antibodies that bind to a specific peptide or protein but it is not persuasive in regards to a vaccine”. this is the patent office. the immune reponse produced by a vaccine must be more than merely an immune response but must also be protective. as noted previously, the art recognized the term vaccine to be a compound which prevents infection. Applicant has not demonstrated that the instantly claimed vaccine meets even the lower standard set forth in the specification let alone the standard art definition for being operative in regards therefore claims five seven and nine are not operative as the anti HIV vaccine (which is what he was working on) is not patentable utility. does not meet the patentable standard legal standard clinical standard

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *