It basically appears to be merely a sort of "high-tech" attempt at the continuing problem of pest control, particularly those insect pests that threaten crop production.
I would provide focus on the dates presented in the patent documentation. I'd also like to note that this level of DNA/genetic science knowledge is FAR beyond the typical layperson's grasp (including myself).
I know from experience with those in the medical profession who related some of the challenges to their education to become an MD that these are some of the most difficult and specialized fields for a scientist to learn. Molecular chemistry (??) or, alternately, "Biological Chemistry" I think described the course's topic.
I saw this claim as well. I had a look at the patent. Basically, in as close to layman's terms as I can get with molecular biology, it appears to be a method for mass-producing a protein that acts as a receptor for an insect hormone called ecdysone.
Ecdysone is a hormone that controls insect moulting (shedding of the exoskeleton, or for example when transforming from larval to adult forms). Some insecticides are designed to interact with ecdysone receptors and disrupt the moulting process, hence killing the insects.
The only thing I can think of is that the patent includes expressing the proteins in "mammalian cells":
The patent covers plant, bacteria, insect and animal. It is not uncommon for patents to cover every related eventuality, just for the sake of completeness. And cultured mammal cells are often used in protein synthesis in this way.
This is new stuff to me (and although I studied chemistry, that is a world away from genetics and biochem!) but it appears that this insect hormone, ecdysone, can be used to trigger protein manufacture in mammal (and human) cells for gene therapy.
Normally, humans don't have a receptor for ecdysone, so it can be used as a targeted "switch". The idea is that you introduce the genetic coding for an ecdysone receptor into the cells, along with the genetic coding to create some other protein which will have therapeutic effects.
When you then introduce ecdysone (or a similar steroid that can bind to an ecdysone receptor), it will act as a switch to turn on production of the other protein.
Yes, ecdysone receptors are being used in gene therapy. But this is just one method of turning on the gene expression, and ecdysone by itself just acts as the switch to cause "a gene" to be turned on. Nowhere in any of this is there any evidence for the supposed artificial gene that is being switched on to cause Morgellons!
If I can suggest an analogy, it is like using a patent for a new kind of surgical scalpel as evidence that mad doctors are going to cut out everybody's livers.
I would also take issue with the use of this very misleading image:
Polynucleotides are indeed DNA and RNA, but in the sense of this patent they are simply genes that express the ecdysone receptor protein. This picture is clearly intended to imply that they are instead some form of polymer fibre such as Morgellons "sufferers" pull from their skin.
Honestly, who sits down and comes up with this stuff, and why?
Exactly. Here it is not only about people misunderstanding information or applying confirmation bias, but about people FABRICATING disinfo. I don't think the author of this claim really believes that this patent is related to morgellons "as a fact". At some point he/she must have decided that the content of this patent was enough inaccessible and with the appropriate jargon to cheat gullible people. This kind of materials are plentiful in the chemtrail hoax. I wonder what is the point of trying to brace a conspiracy theory with easily debunkable fabrications.