by Neville Hodgkinson
A 20-YEAR trail of patent applications concerning the virus
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 'weaponized'
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
A dossier of evidence supporting these claims has been presented to
the International Corona Investigative Committee headed by
Reiner Fuellmich, a senior
German lawyer specializing in exposing corporate swindles.
The committee has been
taking testimony from scientists and other experts since July last
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
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
Last month Daszak 'recused himself' without explanation from the
He played a leading role in a similar investigation by the
World Health Organization (WHO), 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,
something in 2015 and 2016 which gave rise to my favorite quote
of this entire pandemic'.
This was a statement made
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,
'We have since 1998
been the world's largest underwriter of intangible assets used
in finance in 168 countries.
systems include the entire corpus of all patents, patent
applications, federal grants, procurement records, e-government
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 organizations 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
Until 1999, he said,
patenting activity around coronavirus applied only within veterinary
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 behavior,
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
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
'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 organization 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
'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.
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
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
This is not theory.
This is evidence...'