Thursday, May 23, 2024
HomeCOVID-19Twenty-year genetic trail behind Covid's creation

Twenty-year genetic trail behind Covid’s creation


THE topic of the year so far has been Covid-19 and the rollout of experimental vaccines to ever-younger age groups. TCW Defending Freedom has been at the forefront of critiquing Government policy, notably by our writers Neville Hodgkinson and Sally Beck. From today until Bank Holiday Monday, we are re-running our top ten most-read articles from the end of 2020 in reverse order. Today is No 8 by Neville Hodgkinson, which was first published on July 13, 2021.

A 20-YEAR trail of patent applications concerning the virus responsible for Covid-19 proves it is neither new nor the result of a jump from animals to humans, an inquiry has been told.

Instead, the patents show that a natural virus, harmless to humans, was subjected to numerous laboratory modifications which ‘weaponised’ it, such that it could become the basis of a marketing campaign for tests and vaccines which are of questionable value to the public health, but which have proved to be a financial bonanza for drug companies.

A dossier of evidence supporting these claims has been presented to the international Corona Investigative Committee headed by Reiner Fuellmich, a senior German lawyer specialising in exposing corporate swindles. The committee has been taking testimony from scientists and other experts since July last year. 

The dossier was submitted last week by Dr David Martin, who heads M-CAM International, a US company which monitors innovations relevant to financial interests.  

First made public more than a year ago, Martin’s allegations were widely dismissed as ‘conspiracy’ by so-called fact-checkers, who at the time were promoting the view fostered by the scientific establishment that the virus had a natural origin.       

That view has become seen as in itself based on a conspiracy to mislead involving British scientist Dr Peter Daszak, head of the EcoHealth Alliance, which has received tens of millions of US dollars for investigating coronaviruses, but who was appointed by the Lancet medical journal to head an inquiry into the virus’s origins.  

Last month Daszak ‘recused himself’ without explanation from the inquiry. He played a leading role in a similar investigation by the World Health Organisation, widely dismissed as a whitewash when published on March 30.  

On Friday last week Martin gave a two-hour, live-streamed interview to Fuellmich and his team in which he spelled out the patent data that led to his explosive conclusions; you can watch it here.)

He said that ‘somebody knew something in 2015 and 2016 which gave rise to my favourite quote of this entire pandemic’. This was a statement made by Peter Daszak in 2015, and reported in the National Academies Press on February 12, 2016, in which he declared: ‘We need to increase public understanding of the need for medical counter-measures 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 our advantage, to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.’   

Of his own company, Martin said: ‘We have since 1998 been the world’s largest underwriter of intangible assets used in finance in 168 countries. Our underwriting systems include the entire corpus of all patents, patent applications, federal grants, procurement records, e-government records, etc. We have the ability to track not only what is happening, and who is involved in what’s happening, but we monitor a series of thematic interests for a variety of organisations and individuals as well as for our own commercial use.

‘We have reviewed over 4,000 patents issued around SARS-coronavirus and done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all the manipulation of coronavirus which gave rise to SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome).  

‘We took the actual genetic sequences that were reportedly novel, and reviewed those against the patent records available as of the spring of 2020. What we found, as you’ll see in this report, are over 120 patented pieces of evidence to suggest that the declaration of a novel coronavirus was entirely a fallacy. There was no novel coronavirus. There are countless, very subtle modifications of coronavirus sequences that have been uploaded. But there was no single identifiable novel coronavirus at all.

‘As a matter of fact, we found patent records of sequences attributed to novelty going to patents sought as early as 1999. So not only was this not a novel anything, it’s actually not been novel for over two decades.’

Martin took the inquiry team on what he called a ‘short journey through the patent landscape, to make sure people understand what happened’.

Until 1999, he said, patenting activity around coronavirus applied only within veterinary science. As early as January 2000, the Pfizer drug company filed for a patent on a genetic sequence giving rise to a coronavirus spike protein, ‘the exact same thing we have allegedly rushed into invention’, to be used in a vaccine against a canine disease.  

So, based on patent filings more than two decades old, neither the coronavirus concept of a vaccine, nor the principle of the coronavirus itself as a pathogen of interest with regard to the spike protein’s behaviour, were ‘anything novel at all’.

Even more problematic, the patent record showed that in 1999 Anthony Fauci, head of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), found the ‘malleability’ of the coronavirus made it a potential candidate for vaccines against HIV (the purported cause of AIDS, for which US taxpayers have contributed more than $300billion in research and treatment over the past 35 years).       

‘Anthony Fauci funded research at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, specifically to create – and you cannot help but lament what I am about to read, because this comes directly from a patent application filed on April 19, 2002 – “an infectious replication defective coronavirus”.’  

This virus was specifically targeted to invade human lung epithelia, the protective cells lining the lungs, Martin said.  

‘In other words, we made SARS. Before there was ever any alleged outbreak in Asia, which as you know followed that by several months. 

‘That patent, issued as US patent 7279327, clearly lays out in very specific gene sequencing the fact that we know that the . . . ACE-2 binding domain [a protein on the surface of many cell types, through which both SARS-CoV-2 and the original SARS coronavirus enter host cells], the S1 spike protein, and other elements of what we have come to know as this scourge pathogen, was not only engineered but could be synthetically modified in the laboratory, using nothing more than gene sequencing technologies taking computer code, and turning it into a pathogen.  

‘And the technology was funded exclusively in the early days as a means by which we could harness coronavirus as a vector to distribute HIV vaccine.’

Martin went on: ‘It gets worse.’ His organisation was asked to monitor biological and chemical weapons treaty violations, and was part of an investigation into events in October 2001, in which letters containing anthrax spores were sent to several news media offices and two senators.

‘Throughout the fall of 2001 we began monitoring an enormous number of bacterial and viral pathogens that were being patented through the National Institutes of Health, NIAID, USAMRIID [the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases], and a number of other agencies internationally that collaborated with them.

‘Our concern was that coronavirus was being seen not only as a potential manipulable agent for potential use as a vaccine vector, but it was also very clearly being considered as a biological weapon candidate.  

‘Our first public reporting on this took place prior to the SARS outbreak in the latter part of 2001. So you can imagine how disappointed I am to be sitting here 20 years later, having 20 years earlier pointed that there was a problem looming on the horizon with respect to coronavirus.’

That first SARS event gave rise to a ‘very problematic’ April 2003 patent filing by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). It was for the entire SARS gene sequence, and for a series of derivative patents covering means of detection, including the PCR test [widely used today purportedly to diagnose cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection].  

‘The reason why that is a problem is that if you both own the patent on the gene itself, and on its detection, you have a cunning advantage to being able to control 100 per cent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection. Meaning, you have the entire scientific and message control.’

The CDC’s public relations team sought to justify the application on the grounds that it would enable everyone to be free to research coronavirus.

That was a lie, Martin said. The US Patent Office twice rejected the application for the entire SARS sequence, on the grounds that it was already recorded in the public domain, but the CDC started a process to override this rejection. After repeated applications, and paying an appeal fine, they got the patent approved in 2007. They also paid an additional fee to keep the application private. ‘So every public statement the CDC has made that said this was in the public interest is falsifiable by their own, paid bribe to the Patent Office.’

Furthermore, three days after the CDC’s April 2003 attempt to patent the SARS sequence, Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, a private venture-capital funded company founded in 2002, filed a patent application on antiviral agents, treatment and control of infections by coronavirus. This was approved, and published, before the CDC patent was allowed.  

‘So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not been published, because CDC had paid to keep it secret.  

‘This is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering and collusion. This is not theory. This is evidence.’ 

Tomorrow: How SARS-CoV-2 was also patented for commercial exploitation before Covid-19 emerged.

Below is the article translated into Swedish:

Här följer en detaljerad redogörelse för dr. [David Martin]s vittnesmål: “A manufactured illusion. Dr David Martin with Reiner Fuellmich 9/7/21

Artikeln är skriven av Neville Hodgkinson och har titeln “Twenty Year Genetic Trail behind Covid’s Creation”. Den publicerades den 13 juli 2021 på The Conservative Woman

Tjugo år av genetiska patentansökningar ligger bakom skapandet av Covid

Enligt en tysk utredning bevisar ett 20-år långt spår av patentansökningar för det virus som orsakar Covid-19 att viruset varken är nytt eller ett resultat av ett språng från djur till människor, har en utredning fått veta.

Patentspåret visar Istället att ett naturligt virus, som är ofarligt för människor, utsattes för ett flertal laboratorieförändringar som gjorde det till ett “vapen”, så att det kunde ligga till grund för en kampanj där man marknadsför tester och vacciner av tvivelaktigt värde för folkhälsan, men som har visat sig vara en ekonomisk guldgruva för läkemedelsföretagen.

En utredning med bevis som stöder dessa påståenden har lagts fram för den internationella undersökningskommittén [The German Corona Investigative Committee] som leds av [Reiner Fuellmich], en högt uppsatt tysk jurist som specialiserat sig på att avslöja företagssvindlerier. Kommittén har registrerat vittnesmål från forskare och andra experter sedan juli förra året.

Dokumentationen lämnades in förra veckan av dr. David Martin, som leder [M-CAM International], ett amerikanskt företag som övervakar innovationer som är relevanta för finansiella intressen.

När dr. Martins påståenden offentliggjordes för mer än ett år sedan avfärdades de i stor utsträckning som “[konspirationer]” av så kallade [faktagranskare], som vid den tidpunkten förespråkade den av det vetenskapliga etablissemanget främjade uppfattningen att viruset hade ett naturligt ursprung.

Denna åsikt har nu visat sig vara baserad på en konspiration för att vilseleda, ledd av den brittiske forskaren dr. [Peter Daszak], chef för [EcoHealth Alliance] (som har fått tiotals miljoner dollar för att forska på coronaviruset). Daszak utsågs av den medicinska tidskriften Lancet för att leda en undersökning av virusets ursprung.

Förra månaden valde Daszak, utan att förklara varför, att “dra sig tillbaka” från utredningen. Han spelade en ledande roll i en liknande utredning av Världshälsoorganisationen [WHO]. Denna utredning avfärdades allmänt som en skönmålning när den publicerades den 30 mars.

I fredags i förra veckan (den 9 juli 2021) gav dr. Martin en två timmar lång direktsänd intervju med Fuellmich och hans team där han redogjorde för de patentuppgifter som han baserar sina explosiva slutsatser på.

Han sade att “någon visste något 2015 och 2016 som gav upphov till mitt favoritcitat från hela denna pandemi”. Detta var ett uttalande som Peter Daszak gjorde 2015 och som rapporterades i National Academies Press den 12 februari 2016, där han förklarade: “Vi måste öka allmänhetens förståelse för behovet av medicinska motåtgärder, såsom ett pan-coronavirusvaccin. En viktig drivkraft är medierna och de ekonomiska intressena kommer att utnyttja hypen. Vi måste använda denna hype till vår fördel så att vi kan komma till de verkliga frågorna. Investerare kommer att reagera om de ser en vinst i slutet av processen.”

Om sitt eget företag sade Martin: “Vi har sedan 1998 varit världens största försäkringsbolag (underwiters) för immateriella tillgångar som används inom finansbranschen i 168 länder. Våra system för “underwriting” omfattar den totala mängden av alla patent, patentansökningar, federala (statliga) bidrag, upphandlingsregister, register för e-governments (ett sätt att kommunicera med medborgare med digitala identiteter via datorer och Internet) osv. Vi har förmågan att inte bara följa upp vad som händer och vem som är inblandad i det som händer. Vi övervakar också en rad tematiska intressen för en rad olika organisationer och individer samt för vårt eget kommersiella bruk.”

“Vi har granskat över 4 000 patent som utfärdats kring SARS-coronavirus och gjort en mycket omfattande granskning av finansieringen av all manipulation av coronavirus som gav upphov till SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome).”

“Vi tog de faktiska genetiska sekvenser som rapporterades som nya och granskade dem mot de patentregister som fanns tillgängliga våren 2020. Vad vi fann, som ni kommer att se i denna rapport, är över 120 patent som bevisar att påståendet att vi stod inför ett nytt coronavirus var helt och hållet en bluff. Det fanns inget nytt coronavirus. Det finns otaliga och mycket subtila modifieringar av coronavirussekvenser som har laddats upp. Men det fanns inget enda identifierbart nytt coronavirus överhuvudtaget.”

“Faktum är att vi hittade patentregister med sekvenser som har beskrivits som nyheter som ingick i patent som söktes så tidigt som 1999. Det är inte bara så att detta inte är något nytt, det har faktiskt inte varit nytt i över två decennier”.

Martin tog undersökningsgruppen (The German Corona Investigative Committee) med på vad han kallade en “kort resa genom patentlandskapet så att folk kan förstå vad som har hänt”.

Fram till 1999, sade han, var patentering av coronavirus något som endast förekom inom veterinärmedicinen. I januari 2000 ansökte dock läkemedelsföretaget Pfizer om patent på en genetisk sekvens som gav upphov till ett spikprotein på ett coronavirus (exakt det som läkemedelsföretagen påstår att de har skyndat sig att uppfinna” säger dr. Martin), för användning i ett vaccin mot hundpest.

På grundval av patentansökningar från de senaste två decennierna är vare sig konceptet för ett coronavirusvaccin eller principen om coronaviruset som en patogen i sig själva intressanta när det gäller hur ett spikprotein fungerar eftersom det faktiskt inte handlar om ny kunskap.

Än mer problematiskt är att det i patentregistret visade sig att Anthony Fauci, chef för det amerikanska National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), 1999 fann att coronavirusets “formbarhet” gjorde det till en potentiell kandidat för vaccin mot hiv (den påstådda orsaken till aids, för vilket de amerikanska skattebetalarna har bidragit med mer än 300 miljarder dollar i forskning och behandling under de senaste 35 åren).

“Anthony Fauci finansierade forskning vid University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, särskilt för att skapa – och man kan inte annat än beklaga det jag nu ska läsa, säger dr. Martin, för detta kommer direkt från en patentansökan som lämnades in den 19 april 2002 – “ett infektiöst coronavirus som ger en bristfällig replikation”.

Detta virus var särskilt utformat för att angripa människans lungepitel dvs de skyddande cellerna som täcker lungornas ytor, sade Martin.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Neville Hodgkinson
Neville Hodgkinson
Neville Hodgkinson is the former Sunday Times medical and science correspondent who created an international storm by reporting a scientific challenge to the ‘HIV’ theory of Aids. His new book, How HIV/Aids Set the Stage for the Covid Crisis, is an expanded and updated version of his previous book on the controversy. It is available here.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.