The Law Says A Virus May Only Be Patented If Created in a Lab
There is a very serious question with regard to patents. How is it possible to patent a virus? Legally, you should only be able to patent something you invent. You cannot patent nature. That would be like filing for a patent on water. This video goes into some of the backgrounds behind this question.
There is a serious question that COVID-19 may have been created, shipped to Wuhan, and someone bribed to release it. It is not really that lethal. Simply washing your hands kills this virus.
The death rate of 175,000 Americans out of 328 million is only 0.0005335%. Yet CNN constantly terrorizes people every day reporting how many cases and deaths. Yet about 647,000 Americans die from heart disease each year—that’s 1 in every 4 deaths according to the CDC. They do not report that every single day.
According to the Association for Safe International Road Travel, about 1.35 million people die in road crashes each year, on average 3,700 people lose their lives every day on the roads. An additional 20-50 million suffer non-fatal injuries, often resulting in long-term disabilities. The U.S. traffic fatality rate is 12.4 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants.
CNN and others refuse to represent the people and prefer trying to indoctrinate them to be mindless drones. Nobody will dare look at these patents and how could Fauci even dare to try to patent any virus? There is no reporting on this very serious question.
Read more at www.armstrongeconomics.com
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
Richard Wakefield
| #
More psuedoscience nonsense.
“There is a serious question that COVID-19 may have been created, shipped to Wuhan, and someone bribed to release it. ”
Nope. It’s own genetics proves it came from the wild. All one has to do is google: sars-cov-2 phylogeny or: sars-cov-2 origin.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9
https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/7/6/1012/5775463
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/09/conspiracies-covid-19-lab-false-pandemic
There are many more.
Clearly this author didnt bother to check.
And then we have this complete nonsense.
“The death rate of 175,000 Americans out of 328 million is only 0.0005335%”
You do not include those who dont smoke in the death rate from smoking.
You do not include those who do not have HIV in the death rate from HIV.
So why is this author including people who do not have the virus in the death rate FROM the virus? To fool you, period.
The death rate varies from country to country from a low of 4% to a high of 15%. You can see those death rates here:
https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&time=2020-03-01..latest&country=MEX~IND~USA~ITA~BRA~GBR~FRA~ESP~PER&cfrMetric=true&interval=smoothed&perCapita=true&smoothing=7&pickerMetric=total_deaths&pickerSort=desc
Reply
Tom O
| #
AH, I see our troll didn’t leave after all. Probably the only time he actually gets noticed. Had you thought through your stupid comment about death rates, Mr Troll, you wouldn’t pretend that your way made sense. We don’t figure the death rate of accidents by only counting the people driving a car, we don’t figure the death rate of cancer by only counting people that had cancer. God, but some times you show such ignorance that it is hard to comprehend. but keep on trying. It gives us something to roll our eyes at.
Reply
Hans M.
| #
Dear Mr Wakefield,
What would be your well-informed and learned comment on the following European Patent Specification? Pseudoscience “from the wild”, perhaps? Please, mark the coincidental (?) date of publication and grant:
http://tinyurl.com/yxvlgz6k
Reply
Finn McCool
| #
Hans,
That is a remarkable find!
I also found this:
https://en.xlpat.com/coronavirus-technology-and-innovation-insights/
Reply
Hans M.
| #
Thanks Finn! Your link provides interesting additional information. Both documents combined underpin Martin Armstrong’s article and constitute nutricious fodder for ‘conspiracy theorists’…
Reply
Phil Inman
| #
175,000/328,000,000=.0005335 as a decimal equivalent. Multiply x 100 for the percent because we want the fraction of 1/100th. Like 1/2=.5 (decimal equivalent) x 100=50%. Or (1×100)/2=50. The percentage value is one hundred times larger than the decimal value because you are comparing a part of the whole with only 1 one hundredth of the whole as opposed to comparing the same part to the whole whole. ha. So gotta move decimal point two places to left. But is still a small number .05335% or better .053%.
Reply