I’ve read GO was invented about 10 years ago but there’s few real-world applications because it’s toxic - can’t breathe it and can’t get into bodies of water where it may be ingested. No FDA approval for human use. From one of the articles at the link I put up, the nanoparticle is pictured with its jagged obsidian sharp edges.
If you’re talking about the internet hoax about research on GO and covid vaccines, or GO secretly being included in certain vaccines, that for some reason keeps popping up, it’s fake. Even so far as to the University mentioned as being involved posting a formal disclaimer on their Facebook have no association with any such research or claims.
Even so far as to the University mentioned as being involved posting a formal disclaimer on their Facebook have no association with any such research or claims.
Who cares? Evidence for or against the claim is what matters.
If you’re talking about the internet hoax about research on GO and covid vaccines, or GO secretly being included in certain vaccines, that for some reason keeps popping up, it’s fake.
**********************************************************************************
No I am NOT referring to that. I actually had in mind this study that ransomnote posted. Did you even read it, or did you just assume it was the same as the “hoax”?
This study is on using GO for bio-medical nanotechnology. Apparently they think it has uses, even if it is toxic.
Short summary:
GO has been studied quite often for bio-medical nanotechnology use. Nanotechnology has been studied for use in corona viruses . Applications to explore include ability to act both within and outside the cells.
This study was to see how effective it is against the RONA. Testing included the spike - open and closed, the ACE2 receptor, as well as the Bound ACE2 receptor. It reacts with all 3. But less with the bound ACE2.
The impact of GO on 4 different infectious virus were studied. Thin, biological‐grade GO nanoscale sheets are able to significantly reduce copies for three different viral clades. I’m not sure which was the 4th viral clade for which it wasn’t effective.
More study is proposed:
GO nanosheets are proposed to be further explored as a nanoscale platform for development of antiviral strategies against COVID‐19.
Even so far as to the University mentioned as being involved posting a formal disclaimer on their Facebook have no association with any such research or claims.
Are you certain that FakeBook “FAT” checkers (paid by BigPharma) aren’t the ones who posted the disclaimer? Or, didn’t insist on the disclaimer, or the University would be banned?
Who believes anything involving China flu shots disclaimers, from Fakebook?
If you re-read the (translated) version from the University, it looks like legal cover-your-ass-boilerplate: not so much, “we absolutely and definitively reject and refute the idea that any such experiments ever happened” but “we have no knowledge of any such experiments nor any official blessing or authorization of them”.
Nice try, though.
I still rate it “weakly plausible” at best so far.