http:\/\/ge.tt\/2rjKFaA3<\/a><\/p>\nThis work was supported, in part, by a fund-raising effort in which approximately 330 persons contributed funds in support of the New Earth technology team and Urban Global Health Alliance. It is released under a Creative Commons license CC- BY-NC-SA. Any derivative use of this dossier must be made public for the benefit of others. All documents, references and disclosures contained herein are subject to an AS-IS representation. The author does not bear responsibility for errors in the public record or references therein. Throughout this document, uses of terms commonly accepted in medical and scientific literature do not imply acceptance or rejection of the dogma that they represent.<\/p>\n
Background:<\/p>\n
Over the past two decades, my company \u2013 M\u00b7CAM \u2013 has been monitoring possible violations of the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous, or other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare (the Geneva Protocol) 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological and Toxin Weapons and Their Destruction (the BTWC). In our 2003-2004 Global Technology Assessment: Vector Weaponization M\u00b7CAM highlighted China\u2019s growing involvement in Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) technology with respect to joining the world stage in chimeric construction of viral vectors. Since that time, on a weekly basis, we have monitored the development of research and commercial efforts in this field, including, but not limited to, the research synergies forming between the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes for Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), Harvard University, Emory University, Vanderbilt University, Tsinghua University, University of Pennsylvania, many other research institutions, and their commercial affiliations.<\/p>\n
The National Institute of Health\u2019s grant AI23946-08 issued to Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (officially classified as affiliated with Dr. Anthony Fauci\u2019s NIAID by at least 2003) began the work on synthetically altering the<\/p>\n
On April 19, 2002 \u2013 the Spring before the first SARS outbreak in Asia \u2013 Christopher M. Curtis, Boyd Yount, and Ralph Baric filed an application for U.S. Patent 7,279,372 for a method of producing recombinant coronavirus. In the first public record of the claims, they sought to patent a means of producing, \u201can infectious, replication defective, coronavirus.\u201d This work was supported by the NIH grant referenced above and GM63228. In short, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services was involved in the funding of amplifying the infectious nature of coronavirus between 1999 and 2002 before SARS was ever detected in humans.<\/p>\n
1 U.S. Provisional Application No. 60\/206,537, filed May 21, 2000
\n2 https:\/\/www.pnas.org\/content\/100\/22\/12995
\nFauci\/COVID-19 Dossier CC-BY-NC-SA Dr. David E. Martin 2<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
Coronaviridae (the coronavirus family) for the express purpose of general research, pathogenic<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
enhancement, detection, manipulation, and potential therapeutic interventions targeting the same. As early as May 21,<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
2000, Dr. Baric and UNC sought to patent critical sections of the coronavirus family for their commercial benefit.1 In one<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
of the several papers derived from work sponsored by this grant, Dr. Baric published what he reported to be the full<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
length cDNA of SARS CoV in which it was clearly stated that SAR CoV was based on a composite of DNA segments.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\u201cUsing a panel of contiguous cDNAs that span the entire genome, we have assembled a full-length cDNA of<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
the SARS-CoV Urbani strain, and have rescued molecularly cloned SARS viruses (infectious clone SARS-CoV)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
that contained the expected marker mutations inserted into the component clones.\u201d2<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Against this backdrop, we noted the unusual patent prosecution efforts of the CDC, when on April 25, 2003 they sought to patent the SARS coronavirus isolated from humans that had reportedly transferred to humans during the 2002-2003 SARS outbreak in Asia. 35 U.S.C. \u00a7101 prohibits patenting nature. This legality did not deter CDC in their efforts. Their application, updated in 2007, ultimately issued as U.S. Patent 7,220,852 and constrained anyone not licensed by their patent from manipulating SARS CoV, developing tests or kits to measure SARS coronavirus in humans or working with their patented virus for therapeutic use. Work associated with this virus by their select collaborators included considerable amounts of chimeric engineering, gain-of-function studies, viral characterization, detection, treatment (both vaccine and therapeutic intervention), and weaponization inquiries.<\/p>\n
In short, with Baric\u2019s U.S. Patent 6,593,111 (Claims 1 and 5) and CDC\u2019s \u2018852 patent (Claim 1), no research in the United States could be conducted without permission or infringement.<\/p>\n
We noted that gain-of-function specialist, Dr. Ralph Baric, was both the recipient of millions of dollars of U.S. research grants from several federal agencies but also sat on the World Health Organization\u2019s International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) and the Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG). In this capacity, he was both responsible for determining \u201cnovelty\u201d of clades of virus species but directly benefitted from determining declarations of novelty in the form of new research funding authorizations and associated patenting and commercial collaboration. Together with CDC, NIAID, WHO, academic and commercial parties (including Johnson & Johnson; Sanofi and their several coronavirus patent holding biotech companies; Moderna; Ridgeback; Gilead; Sherlock Biosciences; and, others), a powerful group of interests constituted what we would suggest are \u201cinterlocking directorates\u201d under U.S. anti-trust laws.<\/p>\n
These entities also were affiliated with the WHO\u2019s Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB) whose members were instrumental in the Open Philanthropy-funded global coronavirus pandemic \u201cdesk-top\u201d exercise EVENT 201 in October 2019. This event, funded by the principal investor in Sherlock Biosciences and linking interlocking funding partner, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation into the GPMB mandate for a respiratory disease global preparedness exercise to be completed by September 2020 alerted us to anticipate an \u201cepidemic\u201d scenario. We expected to see such a scenario emerge from Wuhan or Guangdong China, northern Italy, Seattle, New York or a combination thereof, as Dr. Zhengli Shi and Dr. Baric\u2019s work on zoonotic transmission of coronavirus identified overlapping mutations in coronavirus in bat populations located in these areas.<\/p>\n
This dossier is by no means exhaustive. It is, however, indicative the numerous criminal violations that may be associated with the COVID-19 terrorism. All source materials are referenced herein. An additional detailed breakdown of all the of individuals, research institutions, foundations, funding sources, and commercial enterprises can be accessed upon request.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n