What this paper is what the C_A calls a limited hangout. They are admitting graphene oxide was used as a lab tool during development so that the people will stop looking at how the graphene was used in the vaccine in the creation of self assembling micro electronics.
If you read a lot of scientific papers then you'll see for yourself that every experiment calls for a graphene oxide-coated nanomesh. It's just a very common protocol. Seriously. But to your point, yes, you're not wrong, if they were poisoning us with graphene oxide they would make sure every experiment used a protocol employing it.
If your talking about engineering or physics papers, I can understand it. Medical? I read the abstracts and conclusions and browse the research. I am just not medically literate enough to fully understand the terminology and processes. I do get the gist of the papers though and I do read them when presented.
This is the reason I havent argued further in this thread. The people pointing out where I am wrong seem to have a better base than I, so I will take these responses and incorporate them into my imperfect understanding.
The way I interpret this is that they were using graphene oxide to help them align and anchor the spike proteins so that they could study them.
I don't see where it says that graphene oxide was included or expected to be included in the vax.
It is interesting that the graphene oxide interacts with the spike proteins and changes their behaviour.
That’s what I got out of it too. Graphene was a lab tool only
What this paper is what the C_A calls a limited hangout. They are admitting graphene oxide was used as a lab tool during development so that the people will stop looking at how the graphene was used in the vaccine in the creation of self assembling micro electronics.
If you read a lot of scientific papers then you'll see for yourself that every experiment calls for a graphene oxide-coated nanomesh. It's just a very common protocol. Seriously. But to your point, yes, you're not wrong, if they were poisoning us with graphene oxide they would make sure every experiment used a protocol employing it.
https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&q=graphene%20oxide%20mesh
If your talking about engineering or physics papers, I can understand it. Medical? I read the abstracts and conclusions and browse the research. I am just not medically literate enough to fully understand the terminology and processes. I do get the gist of the papers though and I do read them when presented.
This is the reason I havent argued further in this thread. The people pointing out where I am wrong seem to have a better base than I, so I will take these responses and incorporate them into my imperfect understanding.