The facts surrounding SARS-CoV-2’s
origin just keep getting stranger and more disturbing as time goes on.
From the start, most of the evidence seemed to point to the virus being a
lab creation that somehow escaped the confines of the laboratory. We
really don’t have much of anything to suggest otherwise.
Now, a study1,2
published February 21, 2022, in Frontiers in Virology claims to have
discovered that a sequence of the virus’ spike protein is a 100% match
to a modified messenger RNA (mmRNA) sequence patented3 by Moderna — in 2016.
Some believe this is a smoking gun, proving gain of function research
is at the heart of this mystery. Of course, more research is needed to
verify the findings, but if proven correct, it could be rather
incriminating.
What Did Moderna Patent?
The genetic sequence patented4
by Moderna — and now found to be part of the SARS-CoV-2’s furin
cleavage site in the spike protein that gives the virus access into
human cells — is a 19-nucleotide sequence of a human gene called MSH3,
which is a DNA repair gene.5
Nucleotides code for specific amino acids. The MSH3 gene works with
the part of your immune system responsible for combating cancer by
repairing damaged cells. This pathway has been identified as a potential
target for new cancer treatments.
As noted in the patent application, the gene sequence has been
modified “for the production of oncology-related proteins and peptides,”
ostensibly for use in cancer research. The first name listed on the
patent is Stéphane Bancel, a Frenchman who has been Moderna’s chief
executive officer since 2011.
What’s so curious here is that the scientists of the Frontiers in
Virology paper searched all viral and bacterial databases looking for
matches to the furin cleavage site patented by Moderna, and SARS-CoV-2
is the only pathogen that has this sequence. It’s an absolute match —
100% identical.
What are the chances of a naturally-occurring virus having a rarely
encountered furin cleavage site that is genetically identical to an
engineered and patented one? As noted by the authors:6
"The absence of CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG from any
eukaryotic or viral genome in the BLAST database makes recombination in
an intermediate host an unlikely explanation for its presence in
SARS-CoV-2."
In other words, the sequence being a natural zoonosis is extremely
unlikely. According to the researchers, the chance that SARS-CoV-2 would
have randomly acquired this furin cleavage site through natural
evolution is 1 in 3 trillion.7
They also noted that “Recombination in an intermediate host is an
unlikely explanation.” What’s more, it’s known that inserting a furin
cleavage site on the spike protein of a virus will make it more
infectious.
Moderna CEO Suggests Lab Leak Responsible for COVID-19
One hypothesis raised in the paper is that the matching code might
have been introduced into the SARS-CoV-2 genome through infected human
cells that express the MSH3 gene. The question, then, is how and when
did that happen?
Interestingly, in a February 24, 2022, interview, Fox Business host
Maria Bartiromo questioned Bancel about the finding. He responded saying
their scientists are looking into the claim, adding:
“That it came from a lab is possible. Humans make
mistakes. It’s possible that the Wuhan lab in China was working on virus
enhancement or gene modification and then there was an accident where
somebody was infected in the lab, which affected family and friends. It
is possible. On the claim you just mentioned, scientists will look to
know if it’s real or not.”
Why This Code?
Now, if SARS-CoV-2 was man-made, why would they use this particular
code? As noted in the Frontiers of Virology paper, the MSH3 sequence in
question has been shown to cause mismatch repair in DNA, and faulty
repair of genetic damage can lead to a number of diseases, including
cancer. But overexpression of MSH3 also plays a role in virology:
“Overexpression of MSH3 is known to interfere with
mismatch repair ... which holds virologic importance. Induction of DNA
mismatch repair deficiency results in permissiveness of influenza A
virus (IAV) infection of human respiratory cells and increased
pathogenicity. Mismatch repair deficiency may extend shedding of
SARS-CoV-2 ...
A human-codon-optimized mRNA encoding a protein 100%
homologous to human MSH3 could, during the course of viral research,
inadvertently or intentionally induce mismatch repair deficiency in a
human cell line, which would increase susceptibility to SARS-like viral
infection.”
It’s interesting to note that Moderna did not have a single
successful mRNA product brought to market before the COVID-19 pandemic
allowed them to bypass normal regulatory requirements.
Now, all of a sudden, we’re to believe they managed to throw together
a safe and effective mRNA injection against SARS-CoV-2, a virus that
just so happens to contain one of its own patented components. What are
the odds?
Did Dr. Anthony Fauci, a leading promoter of mRNA technology as a
replacement for traditional vaccines, have anything to do with Moderna’s
sudden “success”? It certainly looks that way. After all, the National
Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an arm of the
National Institutes of Health (NIH), both funded and co-developed
Moderna’s COVID-19 jab.
As explained by the NIH,8 the injection “combines Moderna’s mRNA delivery platform with the stabilized SARS-CoV-2 spike immunogen (S-2P)9
developed by NIAID scientists.” In mid-November 2021, Moderna granted
co-ownership of its COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine” patent to the NIH to resolve
a dispute involving the naming of the inventors.10
Can the COVID Jab Trigger Cancer?
Incidentally, since the release of the mRNA COVID jab, some doctors
have raised concerns about the possibility of the injections to trigger
cancer, largely due to its detrimental impact on your immune function.
For clarity, this may have nothing to do with Moderna’s patented MSH3
sequence specifically, because the RNA code in the jab is not identical
to the RNA code of the actual virus. The RNA in the jab has been
genetically altered yet again to resist breakdown and ensure the
creation of abundant copies of the spike protein.11
So far, the link to cancer post-jab seems to be related to the
downregulation of toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), which is involved in both
infections and cancer. In an October 2021 article, Dr. Nicole Delépine,
a French pediatric oncologist,12 discussed reports of exploding cancer cases post-jab:13
“Several months ago, we expressed at least
“theoretical reservations” about vaccinating cancer patients or former
patients who had been cured, because of the underlying mechanism of the
gene injection on immunity.
Several geneticists had also expressed their concerns
about the possible interference between active or dormant cancer cells
and the activity of gene therapy on lymphocytes in particular. Months
have passed, and the vaccine madness has amplified ... [C]learly there
seems to be three situations:
• The appearance of a cancer rapidly
after the injection (two weeks to a few months) and very progressive, in
a person who was previously free of known carcinological pathologies.
• The resumption of cancer in a patient who has been in complete remission for several months or years.
• The rapid, even explosive, evolution of a cancer that is not yet controlled.
Beyond the testimonies that are pouring in from
relatives and friends and on social networks, a Swiss newspaper has
finally addressed the subject in a broader way. Here are some excerpts
from their article and their references:
‘Can COVID vaccines cause cancer? In some cases, the
answer seems to be yes ... [It] has been shown that in up to 50% of
vaccinees, COVID vaccines can induce temporary immunosuppression or
immune dysregulation (lymphocytopenia) that can last for about a week or
possibly longer.
Furthermore, COVID mRNA vaccines have shown to
‘reprogram’... adaptive and innate immune responses and, in particular,
to downregulate the so-called TLR4 pathway, which is known to play an
important role in the immune response to infections and cancer cells.
Thus, if there is already a tumor somewhere — known
or unknown — or if there is a predisposition to a certain type of
cancer, such a state of vaccine-induced immune suppression or immune
dysregulation could potentially trigger sudden tumor growth and cancer
within weeks of vaccination ...’”
Dr. Ryan Cole, in August 2021, also reported14,15
seeing a significant increase in certain types of cancer, especially
endometrial and uterine cancers, since the start of the mass injection
campaign. Cole runs a large pathology laboratory in Idaho.
Other Key Components of SARS-CoV-2 Have Also Been Patented
Time will tell where this all leads, but clearly, SARS-CoV-2 does not
appear to be the result of natural evolution. The evidence for it being
man-made is simply overwhelming. So far, few in mainstream media have
been willing to touch this story, for obvious reasons.
Finding a key gene sequence of the virus in a patent of one of the
primary vaccine makers is inconvenient to say the least — and this is in
addition to all the other patents relating to the virus.
As previously detailed16
by David Martin, Ph.D., SARS-CoV-2 appears to have been engineered in
the 1990s, perfected in 1999 and patented in 2002. Evidence also shows
that plans for mandatory vaccinations were hatched in 2015. That year,
during an Academies of Science meeting, Dr. Peter Daszak, president of
EcoHealth Alliance stated:
“... until an infectious disease crisis is very real,
present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To
sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase public
understanding of the need for MCM’s [medical countermeasures] such as
pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine.
A key driver is the media, and the economics 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.”
According to Martin, “That’s admission of a felony, and the felony is
domestic terrorism.” In a November 2021 Red Pill Expo speech,17
Martin reviewed the timeline of the COVID-19 jab, which began in 1990
with the first coronavirus vaccine patent for canines (dogs) filed by
Pfizer.
That vaccine was an S-1 spike protein vaccine — just like the current
Pfizer COVID shot, and according to Martin, that S-1 spike protein is a
bioweapon, not a pathogen. Nine years later, in 1999, Fauci, as
director of the NIAID, tasked the University of North Carolina Chapel
Hill with the creation of “an infectious replication-defective
coronavirus” specifically targeted for human lung epithelium.
The patent for that replication-defective coronavirus that attacks
human lung cells, filed April 19, 2002, (Patent No. 7279327), details
the gene sequencing of the resulting virus, and how the ACE receptor,
the ACE2 binding domain and the S-1 spike protein were engineered and
could be synthetically modified in the lab using readily available gene
sequencing technologies.
Basically, computer code is turned into a manmade pathogen, or an
intermediate pathogen. This technology was initially funded in order to
harness the coronavirus as a vector for an HIV vaccine, but it clearly
didn’t end there.
CDC Holds Patents on SARS Coronavirus
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also holds key
patents, including an illegally obtained patent for the entire gene
sequence for the SARS coronavirus (Patent No. 7220852), which Martin
says is 99% identical to the sequence now identified as SARS-CoV-2.
That CDC patent also had several derivative patents associated with
it, including U.S. patent 46592703P and U.S. patent 7776521, which cover
the gene sequence of SARS coronavirus and the means for detecting it
using RT PCR testing. With these two patents, the CDC has complete
scientific control, as it owns the provenance of both the virus and its
detection.
According to Martin, there’s also evidence of a criminal conspiracy
involving the CDC and Sequoia Pharmaceuticals. April 28, 2003 — three
days after the CDC filed its patent for the SARS coronavirus — Sequoia
Pharmaceuticals filed a patent on an antiviral agent for the treatment
and control of infectious coronavirus (Patent No. 7151163).
So, the CDC filed a patent on SARS coronavirus, and three days later
there’s a treatment? This strongly suggests there was a working
relationship behind the scenes. Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, founded in
2002, develops antiviral therapeutics with a special focus on
drug-resistant viruses.18 Its lead investors include the Wellcome Trust.
But there’s yet another problem with Sequoia’s 2003 filing for an
antiviral agent. It was actually issued and published before the CDC
patent on SARS coronavirus had been granted, which didn’t happen until
2007, and the CDC had paid to keep the application private.
So, there is zero possibility for anyone but an insider to have that
information. This is clear evidence of criminal conspiracy, racketeering
and collusion, Martin notes. You cannot develop a treatment for
something that you do not know exists.
Sanofi also owns a series of patents detailing what we’ve been told
are novel features of SARS-CoV-2, namely the polybasic cleavage site,
the spike protein and the ACE2 receptor binding domain. The first of
those patents, U.S. Patent No. 9193780, was issued November 24, 2015.
Between 2008 and 2017, a series of patents were also filed by a long
list of players, including Crucell, Rubeus Therapeutics, Children's
Medical Corporation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in München, Protein
Science Corporation, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, University of Iowa,
University of Hong Kong and the Chinese National Human Genome Center in
Shanghai.
According to Martin, there are 73 patents, issued between 2008 and
2019, that describe the very elements that are said to be unique to
SARS-CoV-2. It’s unclear whether Moderna’s 2016 patent filing is part of
that list.