The Blog

2021-

2021-10-05 d
AS OBVIOUS AS TAN LINES ON A STRIPPER IV

“We made SARS. And we patented it on 19/4/2002, before there was any alleged outbreak in Asia”
David E. Martin testifies at the German Corona Inquiry Committee July 9th, 2021

Dr. Reiner Fuellmich

Dr. David E. Martin

Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg

[...]
Martin- OK, ok. There is a, I did analysis of media reporting here. I can confirm that they give a very onesided account on the pandemic. Everyone who dares to declare the threat less dangerous than the government does will be denounced as conspiracy theorists, tinfoil [hat] and so on. You know, so the media exactly did what you pointed out in the sentence. You repeated it twice before. No, actually, they tell us the story of the Delta variant, which is told to be much more contagious, that everything else. Experts I have spoken to told me that the databases contain as many as more than forty thousand strains.

David- All right.

Martin- So could this Delta variant be some kind of media hype you told us about there.

David- There is no such thing as an alpha or a beta or gamma or Delta variant. This is a means by which what is desperately sought is a degree to which individuals can be coerced into accepting something that they would not otherwise accept. There has not been in any of the published studies on what has been reportedly the Delta variant. There has not been an infection rate calculated, which is the actual replication rate, what has been estimated are computer simulations.

But unfortunately, if you look at GSGIS AID, which is the public source of uploading any one of a number of variations, what you’ll find is that there has been no ability to identify any clinically altered gene sequence, which has then a clinically expressed variation. And this is the problem all along. This is the problem. Going back to the very beginning of what’s alleged to be a pandemic is we do not have any evidence that the gene sequence alteration had any clinical significance whatsoever.

There has not been a single paper published by anyone that has actually established that anything novel since November of 2019 has clinical distinction from anything that predates November of 2019. The problem with the seventy three patents that I described is that those seventy three patents all contain what was reported to be novel. In December and January of 2019 and 2020, respectively.

So the problem is that even if we were to accept that there are idiopathic pneumonia’s, even if we were to accept that there are some set of pathogen-induced symptoms. We do not have a single piece of published evidence that tells us that anything about the sub SARS-CoV-2 has clinical distinction from anything that was known and published prior to November, 2019 in 73 patents dating to 2008.

Viviane- But could it be that the Delta variant sort of is that just the differences, you know, that the clinical symptoms are the same, but that it has, you know, the capability of, like, infecting someone who’d already gone through, like Variant Beta.

David- Well, so this is where we see an enormous amount of response and reflexive behavior to media hype. There is no and I’m going to repeat this, there is no evidence that the Delta variant is somehow distinct from anything else on besides the fact that we are now looking for a thing doesn’t mean that it is a thing because we are looking at fragments of things. And the fact is that if we choose any fragment I could come up with, you know, I could come up with Variant Omega tomorrow.

Martin- Yes.

David- And I could come up with Variant Omega and I could say I’m looking for this substrand of either DNA or RNA or even a protein. And I could run around the world going, oh, my gosh, fear the Omega Variant.

Martin- Yes.

David- And the problem is that because of the nature of the way in which we currently sequence genomes, which is actually a compositing process, it’s what we call in mathematics and interleaving, we don’t have any point of reference to actually know whether or not the thing we’re looking at is, in fact distinct from either a clinical or even genomic sense.

And so we’re trapped in a world where, unfortunately, if you go and look, as I have at the papers that isolated the Delta variant and actually ask the question, is the Delta variant anything other than the selection of a sequence in a systematic shift of an already disclosed other sequence? The answer is it’s just an alteration. And when you start and stop what you call the reading frame. There is no novel anything.

Reiner- Dr. Wolfgang believes that patents are really problematic because it turns out that it is probably five times more expensive to patent drugs as opposed to having public I mean, not public private, but public universities getting the stipends, getting the money that they need in order to develop these vaccines.

David- Yeah, let me I’m going to do something that’s very unfair, but I’m going to hold the document very close to the screen and it’s only for representational purposes. But I want you to see that this is the Baric Patent that NIH needed to have returned to them for mysterious reasons in 2018. This is 7279327. And people can look this up on their own.

But if you actually look at the sequences that are patented, which is one of the things that we’ve done, we actually look at the published sequences and realize that depending on where you clip the actual sequence string, you will have the same thing or you’ll have a different thing based on nothing more than on where you decide to paste the clip. And I want to read you.

I mean, this is something that comes directly from their patent application when they actually talk about the DNA strands, which they call sequence ID numbers, they actually specifically say the organism is an artificial sequence. An artificial sequence meaning that it is not a sequence that has a rule based in nature. It is not something that was manifest for a particular natural derivative protein or natural derivative RNA sequence that was isolated.

Every one of these is, in fact a synthetic artificial sequence. And if you go back and you look at each one of them, which we have done, what you’ll find is that the sequences, in fact, are contiguous in many instances, but are overlapping in others where it is merely a caprice determination that says something is or is not part of an open reading frame or it is or is not part of a particular Ilagan Nucleotide Sequence.

Now, the reason why that’s important is because if we are going to examine what ultimately is being injected into individuals, we need the exact sequence, not a kind of similar to we need the exact sequence. And if you look at the FDA’s requirement and if you look at the European regulatory environment and if you look at the rest of the world’s regulatory environment for reasons that cannot be explained the exact sequence that has gone into what is amplified inside of the injection seems to be elusive.

It seems to be something that someone cannot, in fact, state with a 100 percent certainty. The sequence is X. The problem that presents is that at this point in time, as much as we can be told that there are, you know, clinical trials going on and there are all sorts of other things going on. We have no way of verifying that a complete sequence has been, is or potentially even could be manufactured into what ultimately becomes the lipid nanoparticle that is the carrier frequency into which the injection is delivered.

And it’s important for people to understand that as far back as 2002 and all the way through the patent filings of 2003 and then the weaponization patents that began in 2008, in every one of these instances, fragments are identified, but they are identified without specificity. So we don’t have direct terminal ends of the fragments. We have fragments which have, you know, essentially hypothecated gaps into which anything can be placed.

And that’s the reason why I find the fact checking around the patent situation to be most disappointing, because the reason why fact checkers among their general lazy attributes, the reason why fact checkers are not actually checking facts when it comes to the patent matters is because the actual sequences are not represented in a digital form that makes it easy to do this comparison. We literally had to take images of submitted typed paper and then code those in to do our own assessment.

You cannot do this on the EPOs patent site. You cannot do this with YPO data from Geneva. You cannot do this with the US Patent Office data. You actually have to go in and reconstruct the actual gene sequences by hand and then you compare them to what has been uploaded on the public servers. And that’s where you find that the question of novelty is something that was not addressed. This was a manufactured illusion.

Wolfgang- I have one more question. Is it possible that we will see that the influenza has vanished, is gone. We don’t have influenza anymore. The influenza for sure is the virus is also sequenced. And is it possible that those sequences we now speak about, that they may exist in both of the virus types so that it’s just a matter of testing and matter of instruments to observe what we find, whether we find influenza or whether we find corona. If we have a certain if you have a book, you have a word with five letters. Anyway, there’s five letters in many books.

David- Right, exactly.

Wolfgang- Yeah.

David- Yeah Wolfgang, your question is a beautiful metaphor of exactly the problem. The problem is if what we’re looking for is something we’ve decided we’ve decided is worth looking for, then we’ll find it. And the good news is we’ll find it a bunch of places. And if we’ve decided that we’re no longer looking for a thing, it’s not entirely surprising that we don’t find it because we’re not looking for it.

The fact of the matter is, whether it’s the RT PCR tests that we decided that there are fragments which, by the way, I have looked at every one of the regulatory submissions. That has been submitted to the FDA to try to figure out what was the gold standard to get the emergency use authorization and what fragment of SARS-CoV-2 was officially the official fragment that was the comparator standard.

And the problem is that you can’t get a single standard. So the question becomes, in a world where there is no single standard, what is it that you actually find? Because if I’m looking for and why don’t I just read this, if I’m looking for CCACGCTTTG, do I add the next strand G or do I go, no, no, no. The next bit is a GTTTAGTTCG. And you get the point. The point is that where I choose to start and stop.

I can actually say I found it, oh I didn’t find it here and I didn’t find the match that I projected on to the data because I chose to look at the data in a way that I could not find the match. Influenza did not leave the human population. Influenza was a failed decade long pan-influenza vaccine mandate that was desperately, desperately, desperately promoted by governments around the world, they failed and they decided if influenza doesn’t deliver on the public promise of getting everybody to get an injection, let’s change the pathogen.

Wolfgang- There are many more, they can change.

David- Oh, goodness, we’ve got tons more to come,

Reiner- But now we’re on to them.
(read more)

______________________

Permission is hereby granted to any and all to copy and paste any entry on this page and convey it electronically along with its URL,
______________________