https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355979001_DETECTION_OF_GRAPHENE_IN_COVID19_VACCINES " PFIZER 1 (RD1). Batch EY3014. Sealed PFIZER 2 (WBR). Batch FD8271. Sealed PFIZER 3 (ROS). Batch F69428. Sealed PFIZER 4 (ARM). Batch FE4721. Sealed ASTRAZENECA (AZ MIT). Batch ABW0411. Sealed MODERN (MOD). Batch 3002183. Not sealed JANSSEN (JAN). Batch number Not available. Not sealed" Not a single picture of a vial label attached to that. In one case they didnt' even record a lot number for Janssen.
Also from their observational study: "Thus, the mystery of the identity of Raman spectra of GO and rGO remains unsolved. In turn, this problem is the cause of great confusion in the designation of the material used in a large number of articles devoted to 'graphene' application in the field of material science associated with various fields of chemical and biophysical technologies, as is, say the case of Covid vaccines [31]. ..."
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-grapheneoxide-vaccine-idUSL1N2OZ14F> *Same deal as first source: they included pictures of reference standards and not the vaccine vials. No proof of chain of custody and no referenced work section. They included in-text references for photographic evidence of vaccine structures from previous study that had nothing to do with vaccines or structure in similar media. That's not good science at all.
Reuters fact-check de-debunking? Not relevant but I tend to agree: believe the opposite. Yet there's no one that's been able to scientifically prove specific lots of vaccines contain graphene oxide. The first research paper by Campa is an ATTEMPT at characterization of 'graphene oxide' polymers in vaccines. And they admitted they failed to do so: ""Thus, the mystery of the identity of Raman spectra of GO and rGO remains unsolved. In turn, this problem is the cause of great confusion in the designation of the material used in a large number of articles devoted to 'graphene' application in the field of material science associated with various fields of chemical and biophysical technologies, as is, say the case of Covid vaccines [31]. ...""
This Dr. Jane Ruby? "A graduate of the University of Rochester, she holds two doctoral degrees in Education and Psychcology, two Masters Degrees in Nursing and International Health Economics and is highly published in global health economics "
Disregarding for two reasons: a podcast of her saying some words isn't proof of anything. The second is that she's providing no proof of anything. She has no specific GO/rGO or COVID-related affiliated studies to her name. If she has documented findings of graphene oxide in specific vaccines and/or specific lots, she should publish them. And then she can send me the complaint number she received (as is required by law for anyone that reports these) from the manufacturer. Otherwise, she's endangering lives. Safe to say: she's full of shit because she didn't mention who she called and reported it to.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590098621000208 Generic discussion of nanomaterials including Graphene oxide and reduced Graphene Oxide for antiviral effects on specific viruses in Table 1. Agreed in general: they've been thinking about this shit for a while. But there's yet to be documented evidence of anyone analyzing specific vials (pictures of analyte packaging is always required for QC testing in contract labs. this is no different) and determining there's graphene oxide. Given there's an infinite number of arrangements of the C=C lattice and number of double bonds, it will be extremely hard to characterize specific graphene oxide molecules unless they've got an idea ahead of time what material is there. it's not impossible, but I would think it would be very hard to nail down. The lack of picture evidence of the vial makes this very sketchy.
- No doubt they're trying to use graphene for fucking everything. I'm sure they've been planning on it for a long time. It's just not relevant proof of graphene in Pfizer's, Moderna's, Janssen's, NovaVax's, Astrazeneca's vaccines.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355979001_DETECTION_OF_GRAPHENE_IN_COVID19_VACCINES " PFIZER 1 (RD1). Batch EY3014. Sealed PFIZER 2 (WBR). Batch FD8271. Sealed PFIZER 3 (ROS). Batch F69428. Sealed PFIZER 4 (ARM). Batch FE4721. Sealed ASTRAZENECA (AZ MIT). Batch ABW0411. Sealed MODERN (MOD). Batch 3002183. Not sealed JANSSEN (JAN). Batch number Not available. Not sealed" Not a single picture of a vial label attached to that. In one case they didnt' even record a lot number for Janssen.
Also from their observational study: "Thus, the mystery of the identity of Raman spectra of GO and rGO remains unsolved. In turn, this problem is the cause of great confusion in the designation of the material used in a large number of articles devoted to 'graphene' application in the field of material science associated with various fields of chemical and biophysical technologies, as is, say the case of Covid vaccines [31]. ..."
https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-grapheneoxide-vaccine-idUSL1N2OZ14F> *Same deal as first source: they included pictures of reference standards and not the vaccine vials. No proof of chain of custody and no referenced work section. They included in-text references for photographic evidence of vaccine structures from previous study that had nothing to do with vaccines or structure in similar media. That's not good science at all.
Reuters fact-check de-debunking? Not relevant but I tend to agree: believe the opposite. Yet there's no one that's been able to scientifically prove specific lots of vaccines contain graphene oxide. The first research paper by Campa is an ATTEMPT at characterization of 'graphene oxide' polymers in vaccines. And they admitted they failed to do so: ""Thus, the mystery of the identity of Raman spectra of GO and rGO remains unsolved. In turn, this problem is the cause of great confusion in the designation of the material used in a large number of articles devoted to 'graphene' application in the field of material science associated with various fields of chemical and biophysical technologies, as is, say the case of Covid vaccines [31]. ...""
This Dr. Jane Ruby? "A graduate of the University of Rochester, she holds two doctoral degrees in Education and Psychcology, two Masters Degrees in Nursing and International Health Economics and is highly published in global health economics "
Disregarding for two reasons: a podcast of her saying some words isn't proof of anything. If she has documented findings of graphene oxide in specific vaccines and/or specific lots, she should publish them. And then she can send me the complaint number she received (as is required by law for anyone that reports these) from the manufacturer. Otherwise, she's endangering lives. Safe to say: she's full of shit because she didn't mention who she called and reported it to.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590098621000208 Generic discussion of nanomaterials including Graphene oxide and reduced Graphene Oxide for antiviral effects on specific viruses in Table 1. Agreed in general: they've been thinking about this shit for a while. But there's yet to be documented evidence of anyone analyzing specific vials (pictures of analyte packaging is always required for QC testing in contract labs. this is no different) and determining there's graphene oxide. Given there's an infinite number of arrangements of the C=C lattice and number of double bonds, it will be extremely hard to characterize specific graphene oxide molecules unless they've got an idea ahead of time what material is there. it's not impossible, but I would think it would be very hard to nail down. The lack of picture evidence of the vial makes this very sketchy.
- No doubt they're trying to use graphene for fucking everything. I'm sure they've been planning on it for a long time. It's just not relevant proof of graphene in Pfizer's, Moderna's, Janssen's, NovaVax's, Astrazeneca's vaccines.