Family to Receive $1.5m+ in First-ever Vaccine-autism Court Award Snopes
A cistron patent is the sectional rights to a specific genetic sequence given by a regime to the individual or corporation who claims to accept first identified that factor segment. Cistron patents accept often resulted in companies having "sole ownership" of genetic testing for patented genes.But what if Big Pharma'south patented viral mRNA genetic sequence vaccine is now merged with your own DNA? Are you at present belongings of Big Pharma?
On June 13, 2013, in the case of theAssociation for Molecular Pathology 5. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the Supreme Courtroom of the United States ruled that"human being genes" cannot be patented in the U.S. because Dna is a"product of nature." The Court decided that because cypher new is created when discovering a gene, there is no intellectual property to protect, and then patents cannot be granted. Prior to this ruling, more than 4,300 human genes were patented. The Supreme Court's decision invalidated those gene patents, making the genes accessible for research and for commercial genetic testing.
The Supreme Court'due south ruling did allow"that Dna manipulated in a lab is eligible to exist patented because Deoxyribonucleic acid sequences contradistinct by humans are not establish in nature."The Courtroom specifically mentioned the power to patent a blazon of DNA known every bit "Complementary DNA" (cDNA). Complimentary Deoxyribonucleic acid (cDNA) is produced from mRNA genetic sequences inside cells, that integrate with cellular DNA; the cells genetic genome.
The Judgement handed downwardly by Justice Antonin Scalia, is at odds with science itself; the cDNA comments brand picayune sense since it'south difficult to distinguish between "natural" DNA and cDNA. It is not correct to insist that cDNA is non a product of nature! There are several examples of cDNA in nature; Retroviruses such as HIV catechumen their RNA-based genomes into cDNA before they integrate into a host genome. So why this sentence in particular? Why not rule all types of man cellular DNA natural and therefore unpatentable? Did Scalia have insight on what was coming down the line with viral mRNA vaccines? Was he aware of the NWO programme involving the mass vaccination of citizens with patented biological material?
Scalia one time told students and staff at a faculty lunch, that internment camps could happen again:
"Simply you are kidding yourself if yous think the same affair will non happen once more," Scalia cited a Latin expression pregnant, "In times of war, the laws fall silent."
Many believe viral mRNA vaccines accept the ability to incorporate themselves into host DNA or the cellular genome. Despite assurances from Government, medical authorities, the CDC, the WHO and the Pharmaceuticals themselves who have repeatedly stated all viral RNA is destroyed past the torso mail-vaccination, in a postmortem report of a patient who had been vaccinated with the Pfizer mRNA vaccine, viral RNA was found in all his trunk cells and there was no evidence what-so-ever that he was infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus!But was this viral RNA genetic fabric located inside the nucleus of the cell where the human DNA is stored?If and so did the viral genetic sequence merge with the host Deoxyribonucleic acid?
The Kickoff Victim of the COVID-19 Vaccine: Patient dies from Antibody-Dependent Enhancement!
Recently, a squad of prominent scientists published a controversial hypothesis that genetic material of the pandemic coronavirus tin can integrate into our chromosomes (Dna) and stick effectually long after the infection is over. If they are right these viral insertions could explain the rare finding that people can recover from COVID-19 but then test positive for SARS-CoV-2 again months later. The researchers emphasized thatviral integration did not hateful people who recovered from COVID-19 remain infectious. The authors were able to demonstrate that the SARS-CoV-2 viral sequence can be copied by an enzyme in homo cells into Deoxyribonucleic acid and and then insert them into our chromosomes. Critics of this research charged them with stoking unfounded fears that COVID-19 vaccines based on messenger RNA (mRNA) might somehow alter human DNA. The bear witness suggests that this is indeed possible!
Viral Vector mRNA vaccines such as AstraZeneca and Pfizer's & Moderna'south mRNA vaccines all have the capacity of"genomic integration" with host DNA. Both useviral mRNA segments that code for"spike protein" and operate on a like delivery principle; AstraZeneca's viral vector vaccine uses a weakened virus devoid of genetic cloth (called a vector) to deliverviral mRNA into human cells thereby initiating an immune response, whereas in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccine, the delivery of theviral mRNAsegment is washed using lipid nanoparticles. It is clearly stated in this tabular array fromSinobiologicals, a pharmaceutical company also producing vaccines, that ane of the disadvantages with viral vector (mRNA) vaccines is the"Possible genomic integration of foreign DNA"; simply put, viral genetic material tin integrate with the genetic material of the host itself…. your Dna! Nosotros believe that the lipid nanoparticle mRNA delivery system used by Pfizer and Moderna would also cause a similar problem!Afterwards all, viral mRNA is viral mRNA… is viral mRNA!
Here is a short video explaining how the unlike vaccines work. At the two infinitesimal marking, the video introduces viral vector mRNA vaccines (AstraZeneca) and mRNA vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna. Notation: They both deliver mRNA vaccines.Odd how NO Ane even mentions viral mRNA when they talk about AstraZeneca?
Now should theviral mRNA vaccine incorporate it's viral genome into your DNA a precedent has already been set and your "tainted" DNA is now considered a biological patent of the Pharmaceutical Company that provided you with the vaccine! Does this ways that everyone who has had the vaccine in now technically endemic and will be defined as "Trans-homo" or "Transgenic"? And as such, do "Transgenic" individuals have rights under the police force?
The idea that advances in molecular genetics would put human individuals or parts of their bodies nether someone else'southward control has been stirring emotions and terrifying people. Information technology was this notion of "patenting humans" that mobilized members of Congress to laissez passer legislation prohibiting the issuance of patent claims "directed to or encompassing a human organism." The values underlying this legislation was amusing, yet its execution was deeply flawed and the potential outcomes, hazardous. The legislation'due south numerous flaws include primarily, the lack of an agreed-upon definition of "human being organism."
The thought of "patenting humans" tends to evoke images of helpless boyfriend humans "tagged" with patent numbers who are the belongings of someone, perhaps a heartless regime or corporate entity. Many believe that patents convey property rights on "human organisms" which would allow the correct to sell, offer for sale, brand, use, and import such "human organisms." On the moral front, critics are concerned with the potential to erode human being dignity and "play God." The affair is… all of this is true!
The U.Southward. Congress responded to the moral concerns with the America Invents Human action (AIA); passed by Congress and was signed into law past Rothschild'south puppet, President Barack Obama on September 16, 2011. Department 33 of the AIA states that "even so any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism." This provision was intended to ban the patenting of "human beings" at any phase of development, including embryos, fetuses, human/non-human chimeras, and clones. However, the vague wording of section 33 and the absenteeism of a definition for "human organism," will give courts wide latitude when interpreting department 33; whereas "human beings" would have had more than of a legal standing the term "human organism" has placed flesh at the same level of an amoeba!
The linguistic communication of section 33 was originally proposed by Representative David Weldon in 2003 as an subpoena to the Commerce-Justice-Country Appropriations Bill. Responding to criticism from lobbyist groups opposing the amendment, Weldon said it was "cool" that "patents on stalk cell lines, procedures for creating homo embryos, prosthetic devices, and . . . whatever drug or product that might be used in or for human beings would exist affected by the amendment. He argued earlier Congress that his amendment did nothing more than provide congressional backing for the USPTO'south (The United States Patent and Trademark Office is an agency in the U.Southward. Department of Commerce that issues patents) policy against patenting human beings. Why did Weldon not define "human beings" in the Bill? The man was a distinguished medical dr. and scientist? He knew at that place was definitely a difference between "man" and "homo organism"; one is Divine whereas the other is a laboratory test beast? Could it be his Jesuit upbringing or the freemason secret societies he was involved with like Phi Beta Kapa?
The Weldon amendment applies to patents on claims directed to or encompassing a "human organism" at any stage of development and includes: a human embryo, fetus, infant, child, adolescent, or adult, regardless of whether the organism was produced past technological methods. This amendment applies to patents on "human being organisms" and every bit such these "human organism" are NOT patentable under the law. The term ''man organism'' includes an organism of the man species that has incorporated one or more genes taken from a nonhuman organism (i.e. viral genetic material). For those that accept been vaccinated with viral mRNA and take viral genomic inserts in their Dna, they would be considered a "human organism," and as such can non be patented. All the same some legal experts say that this is entirely possible and all those containing biologically patented genes tin indeed exist patented! Wonder if "you lot are at present the property of…" that was included in the small-impress on the vaccine medication package insert? Oh snap… there weren't any inserts!
Man Rights laws specifically land that "homo beings" are born human and as such have rights under the constabulary. For a "human organism" who was human at birth and with "human being rights" this definition holds true. However, their "genetically modified offspring" volition technically be born every bit "non-homo" or "transgenic" since their gene pool has been tarnished with viral genetic material! And as "non-humans" they are thus patentable! Congratulations on taking the jab! Your children and hereafter generations will now exist considered the biological patents of Pharmaceutical Companies! In perpetuity!
2013, The U.s.a. Supreme Court Example:Pathology v Myriad Genetics, Inc. "People who are legally identified equally "transhuman" do not have admission to human rights or rights granted by the state. This is because they are not classified every bit 100% biological or human."
Vaccinated will exist considered "Human being Organisms" The UN has already defined "Human being" every bit having a "Human genome" and thus worthy of "Human Rights".
What the NWO did with these vaccines is not only diabolical but also far-reaching. It will not end with humans existence vaccinated against COVID-19. Autonomy is lost in genetically modified embryos and children built-in to vaccinated parents, who are deemed "transgenic". As such they no longer have rights under these patent laws. Should there exist long-term health complications from these vaccines a state may enact laws allowing for the legalization of mandatory abortions, sterilization and even… euthanasia! Eugenics is how Hitler'due south Nazi Federal republic of germany dealt with the "genetically unfit" and for that matter, adults and the elderly were included in their death panels. This is the NWO depopulation agenda; if the jab doesn't kill y'all, they will!
Furthermore, if a "transgenic" organism were patented, the patent owner would have a right to forbid others from interacting with the patented "transgenic" likewise as having the correct to constrain the actions or gratuitous will of the "transgenic." The transgenic would get property of the patent holder and could be transferred to another person through a sale of the patent. Whether a "transgenic" is property under the control of others will affect the likelihood and extent of experimentation performed upon it: because an owner need not ask property for its consent! The patent rights over humans would be equivalent to slavery!
In drawing this line between naturally occurring Dna and cDNA, were the courts trying to encourage innovation within the industry? Or were they already enlightened at the time, that viral mRNA vaccines could exist integrated into the human genome thus making individuals biological patents of Corporations? All premeditated and pre-planned for their "Plandemic"!
Transhumanism Is Eugenics Today
Continued Reading:
Source: https://www.civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2021/07/08/big-pharma-mrna-vaccine-will-be-used-to-patent-humans/
0 Response to "Family to Receive $1.5m+ in First-ever Vaccine-autism Court Award Snopes"
Post a Comment