Too many banned researchers hare demonstrating this stuff. Besides, if you like graphene oxide in your body then by all means get the clot shot and all the boosters they are now recommending.
Human blood has formaldehyde, acetone, ethanol, dihydrogen, tryptophan, and about a dozen other elements that, if present in sufficient levels, will kill you. If you want to protect yourself from every trace element like that then by all means drain your body of blood and you'll be safe, right?
There seems to be two types of people refusing to believe the dangers of these experimental shots.
First are those who have a strong normalcy bias - they have hard time accepting that there are people in the world who would promote something that is at best ineffective, and at worse, dangerous. It is hard to open people’s eyes because those ideas at one time seemed to be in the conspiracy theory realm. What the end game is, I don’t know - depopulation, eugenics, control, destruction of business and healthcare, all of the above...
I used to be more of a skeptic myself, but I cannot deny what is happening. The more I see ideas being censored and ridiculed, once-highly respected and credentialed doctors and scientists being threatened, legitimate, effective treatments being denied, the more I believe that evil is afoot. Anyone who questions the status quo is ridiculed, silenced, shamed and their livelihoods threatened. The gaslighting is in our face.
These days, I am choosing to keep an open mind. I believe we should be considering all possibilities. The threat is real and there is too much at stake. There are very bad players behind all of this and I put nothing past them. Nothing.
The second group are part of those working to shut down free discussion on the shot, interestingly, also do the same with election fraud and other situations we are facing which threaten our freedoms.
I don’t know what their end game is or who they work for, but they do not come here with studies and data. They do not try to debate the substance of the articles, only ridicule the authors and posters. They descend on every thread exposing the potential dangers of the shot, and cheer each other on.
They refuse to look at any evidence you put in front of them. If you show them a study, they tell you it’s not peer reviewed, you show them peer reviewed research they tell you it’s not a randomized control trial. You show them a RCT, and they tell you it’s not double blind, you post double blind studies and they still find some reason to play it off as conspiracy or they ridicule you. If you show them concrete evidence where they are wrong, they ignore you. They expect to be followed for their expertise and despite their own anonymity, they have no issue questioning the credentials of others.
If they think something is too far out there, they could just scroll past like others do. When I see them descend on a thread en masse, with the same narrative, I tend to think that there is something in the data that they don’t want us looking at. That makes me pay closer attention to things I might otherwise file away as an interesting idea.
There are two things every conservative should asking right now - is the shot safe, and is it effective. We are seeing more and more evidence it is neither - some of the evidence is easier to defend than others, but nothing should be off the table for discussion. The stakes are too high.