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 study 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 patented 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 patented 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. 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.
What are the chances of a naturally-occurring virushaving a rarely encountered furin cleavage site that isgenetically identical to an engineered and patentedone?
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 oficer 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 patented12345
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:
"The absence of CTCCTCGGCGGGCACGTAG from any eukaryotic or viralgenome in the BLAST database makes recombination in an intermediate hostan 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. 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 thatthe Wuhan lab in China was working on virus enhancement or genemodification and then there was an accident where somebody was infected inthe lab, which affected family and friends. It is possible. On the claim you justmentioned, scientists will look to know if it's real or not.”67
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 ... whichholds virologic importance. Induction of DNA mismatch repair deficiencyresults in permissiveness of infiuenza A virus (IAV) infection of humanrespiratory cells and increased pathogenicity. Mismatch repair deficiency mayextend shedding of SARS-CoV-2 ...A human-codon-optimized mRNA encoding a protein 100% homologous tohuman MSH3 could, during the course of viral research, inadvertently orintentionally induce mismatch repair deficiency in a human cell line, whichwould 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, the injection “combines Moderna's mRNA delivery platform with the stabilized SARS-CoV-2 spike immunogen (S-2P) 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.
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. 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, discussed reports of exploding cancer cases post-jab:
“Several months ago, we expressed at least “theoretical reservations” aboutvaccinating cancer patients or former patients who had been cured, because ofthe underlying mechanism of the gene injection on immunity.Several geneticists had also expressed their concerns about the possibleinterference between active or dormant cancer cells and the activity of genetherapy on lymphocytes in particular. Months have passed, and the vaccinemadness 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.8910111213
• 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 onsocial networks, a Swiss newspaper has finally addressed the subject in abroader 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 caninduce 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 andinnate immune responses and, in particular, to downregulate the so-called TLR4pathway, which is known to play an important role in the immune response toinfections and cancer cells.Thus, if there is already a tumor somewhere — known or unknown — or if thereis a predisposition to a certain type of cancer, such a state of vaccine-inducedimmune suppression or immune dysregulation could potentially trigger suddentumor growth and cancer within weeks of vaccination ...'”
Dr. Ryan Cole, in August 2021, also reported 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.1415
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 detailed 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 emergencythreshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond thecrisis, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCM's [medicalcountermeasures] such as pan-infiuenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine.A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to usethat hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond ifthey 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, 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 were1617
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. 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.18
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.
Read the full article at the original website