Pfizer Confirms Via FOIA Graphene Oxide in the Clot Shots
(en-volve.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (18)
sorted by:
They better retract these papers then:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32531395/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26814441/
Oh! You found references to graphene oxide as a potential ingredient in vaccines in the scientific literature! Therefore, obviously all vaccines must have graphene oxide in them! What a stupid argument. It's a red herring.
The expression of the spike protein is toxic enough by itself (and maybe the LNPs themselves), without needing to invoke some other toxic components, yet alone the ludicrous graphene oxide "nanobot" hypothesis (as if humans have technology that advanced).
https://phys.org/news/2021-07-tiny-sensors-brain-surgery-implants.html
This is based on silicon oxide but a working model of such a technology definitely exists.
Not sure why you're mad, I was poking fun at the fact that GO may actually be a better adjuvant. Are you saying that this isn't the case?
Some researchers over-hyping their discoveries with fun-sounding acronyms and lots of language such as "could one day offer" is nothing new. Human hubris knows no limits, but where are our flying cars already?
Two papers you randomly plucked out of the literature regarding graphene oxide say nothing about whether it's a useful adjuvant in the real world. Most likely it's more researchers over-hyping their research using fancy terminology such as "nano-adjuvant", which is laughable since most functional structures within cells are proteins and protein complexes that are already in the scale of nanometers, but that's usually not what people mean when they are talking about "nano" this and that.