[9YearLurker]

Really? I’d practice your Internet search skills if I were you:

https://gloria.tv/post/4Cc3BUFZxcDo4vDsEVWKfD9hQ

https://patents.google.com/patent/CN112220919A/en

[neverevergiveup]

From the paper you linked to:

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT

Next, a microscopic, observational and merely descriptive study of the test sample is presented.

Definitive identification of the dominant material in the sample requires further fractionation and specific spectroscopic analysis to characterize the structure of the material.

Essentially all they did is a microscopic analysis of a single sample of Pfizer vaccine. I wouldn't put a lot of stock in this single study.

[wannabegeek]

You’d practice your Internet search skills if I were you?  I used to attend the SoCal Linux users' group at CalTech when it was just Federa 1 while Red Hat became commercial while Google just starting using Linux, I was harassing a cocky member UnixRabbi, he unmasked me using Google, lol.

That's a good post!  I'll read that further.

[Lazamataz]

Several things:

1) It is incumbent upon the author of the article this freeper posts from, to provide the link for the study for my review.

2) I have some passing acquaintence with scientific documentation, and I read this (for s**ts and giggles). Note that Dr. Campra does not assert that there is graphene oxide in ‘high levels’, only that it is POSSIBLY present. He uses visual evidence, which is not a quantitative measure. Nor do I see any indication or references that this document is peer-reviewed.

3) But okay, let us stipulate that graphene oxide is presentin nominal amounts. So what of it? Graphene oxide has long been mentioned as a possible carrier for vaccines. I recall such talk back in the mid- and early-2000’s.

In short, it appears as though the original article creator is taking a few facts here and there and throwing them together for the most breathless, subscription- and revenue-generating article possible.