Pfizer Documents Confirm Graphene Oxide In COVID Vaccines

@wildgrass said
200 million people died during the black death plague and they collectively complained a lot less than these conservative snowflakes from their air conditioned hospital beds.

60,000,000 Murdered in the Soviet Gulag State, they're not complaining either.

@divegeester said
You’ve started lots of threads about covid vaccines being gene therapy.

From the 2019 SEC filing from BioNTech page 16:

"Currently, mRNA is considered a gene therapy product by the FDA. Unlike certain gene therapies that irreversibly alter cell DNA and may cause certain side effects, mRNA-based medicines are designed not to irreversibly change cell DNA. Side effects observed in other gene therapies, however, could negatively impact the perception of immunotherapies despite the differences in mechanism. In addition, because no mRNA-based product has been approved, the regulatory pathway in the United States and may other jurisdictions for approval is uncertain."

https://investors.biontech.de/node/7381/html

This proves gene therapy does not have to change DNA. The fact checkers lied and people like you had a hard time accepting that. It was necessary to snuff out the dogmatic fools who refused to accept the covid vaccines utilize gene therapy technology.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33772572/

@soothfast said
It's in the portion of the Pfizer document depicted in your own link, dumbass. Highlighted in blue, with a big yellow arrow pointing at it.

Trash-peddling douchebags like you are why we can't have nice things.

Do you think we are all stupid? The only thing highlighted in blue with an arrow pointing to it is "graphene oxide". Show me where in the Pfizer document it says what you claimed. Stop pretending the fake fact checkers don't lie. They lie and plagiarize each other rather than do their own research.

@metal-brain said
Do you think we are all stupid? The only thing highlighted in blue with an arrow pointing to it is "graphene oxide". Show me where in the Pfizer document it says what you claimed. Stop pretending the fake fact checkers don't lie. They lie and plagiarize each other rather than do their own research.

Moron,

It's your own link. In that article, in your own link, it shows a snapshot of a page from a Pfizer document that mentions graphene oxide. The document, the article states, is about the Covid vaccines. Hmm...graphene oxide...vaccines...graphene oxide...vaccines...all there.

What's known is that graphene oxide was used to test the vaccine. Apparently it does not occur to you to read even the tiny snapshot of the actual document shown in the article. Why is that? You are hapless, helpless, and hopeless.

You are the kind of reader the article was written for: the dupe who will be impressed that even a piece of a scientific paper is included in it, and who will not bother to read it, or reflect for even a moment on why, if the paper has truly been made public and states that graphene oxide is an ingredient of the vaccines, that somehow the news hasn't been splashed all over headlines around the world. That's some tight conspiracy there, and apparently every major newspaper, news outlet, and government in the world is in on it somehow. Wow.

Anyway, the snapshot of the document is talking about the "kinetics and affinity of binding" of some laboratory sample. For the experiment, gold mesh was overlaid with graphene oxide, and the sample was blotted using some laboratory apparatus. Funny, I don't recall the crazies talking about gold being in the vaccines. Of course it's not, but if such a rumor had gotten out the rubes in MAGA land would have lined up to get a 100 shots in a day with dreams of an early retirement.

And it's not I who need prove anything. As usual you have it all backwards. If you say you found a way to square a circle (proven impossible in 1882), it is not my job to prove you wrong. You would need to do the proving. And you have proven nothing here.

You and your lap-dancing poodle Wajoma are fools who have swallowed a pack of lies from Day One. To believe your blather would be to believe in a vast global conspiracy involving tens of thousands of scientists, lab technicians, journalists, doctors, government regulators, and on and on. Total madness. Absolute, raving lunacy. But such is the gullibility of the human mind when it so wants to believe something that simply isn't true, as demonstrated time and again by psychologists and neuroscientists over decades, and physicians and philosophers across centuries.

Ta.

@sh76 said
All 5 of those statements are actually inarguably true, but it's also a good example of how one can mislead with mathematically true statements.

The reason for that is #3. The vaccine didn't "stop" people from getting extremely sick. but it dramatically decreased the likelihood that one would get extremely sick.

And that's really all that matters. Once covid isn't deadly ( ...[text shortened]... e and maybe a 1 in 100,000 chance of killing you. That's pretty good in the risk/benefit department.

1/ Didn't stop you from catcing wuflu.
2/ Didn't stop you from passing wuflu on.
3/ Didn't stop you from getting extremely sick from the wuflu
4/ In some cases was more harmful than wuflu
5/ Was actually fatal for some people

Sh76 said:

"And that's really all that matters. Once covid isn't deadly (which it isn't for vaccinated people 99.99% of the time), nobody cares about 1 and 2."

#2 is important because they used it in their propaganda to try to guilt people into the shot i.e. "Take the juice to protect you and your family" and it is a lie.

About all they can claim now is if you take the juice you might not get as sick as if you didn't take the juice. After all the claims of safety and effectiveness that's all they have left.

Not much.

Edit: Here's another catch phrase from NZ Health "Protect them for life. Immunise" Sounds like a line out of the snake oil salesmans handbook. If it were so great why does the goobermint need to lie about it.

@soothfast said
Moron,

It's your own link. In that article, in your own link, it shows a snapshot of a page from a Pfizer document that mentions graphene oxide. The document, the article states, is about the Covid vaccines. Hmm...graphene oxide...vaccines...graphene oxide...vaccines...all there.

What's known is that graphene oxide was used to test the vaccine. Apparently it does ...[text shortened]... hologists and neuroscientists over decades, and physicians and philosophers across centuries.

Ta.

You are a liar. The link says nothing of the sort.

"What's known is that graphene oxide was used to test the vaccine."

For the last time, what is your source of information? It most certainly is not from the link I posted. You have not even explained why graphene would be needed for testing, let alone what they are testing for.

STOP LYING!

@metal-brain said
You are a liar. The link says nothing of the sort.

"What's known is that graphene oxide was used to test the vaccine."

For the last time, what is your source of information? It most certainly is not from the link I posted. You have not even explained why graphene would be needed for testing, let alone what they are testing for.

STOP LYING!

Sorry: the burden of proof is now on you.

Didn't you know that?

@soothfast said
Sorry: the burden of proof is now on you.

Didn't you know that?

You have the proof and you are lying about it.
Did you even download the document from Pfizer? Nope.

You are just a jabbed person that doesn't want to accept they injected you with a toxic substance much like tiny little razor blades. And you wonder why people call it the clot shot. Graphene used in vaccines is not a new idea. Look up the patent from China.

There are known poisons in vaccines. This is a fact. Poisons are allowed if the amount of the poison is small enough. Formaldehyde is in some vaccines, for example. Mercury has been used in vaccines for decades and that is a known neural toxin.

Graphene is just another toxin in vaccines. Toxins have always been allowed in vaccines. This is nothing new.

@metal-brain said
You have the proof and you are lying about it.
Did you even download the document from Pfizer? Nope.

You are just a jabbed person that doesn't want to accept they injected you with a toxic substance much like tiny little razor blades. And you wonder why people call it the clot shot. Graphene used in vaccines is not a new idea. Look up the patent from China.

There ...[text shortened]... is just another toxin in vaccines. Toxins have always been allowed in vaccines. This is nothing new.

Sorry: the burden of proof is now on you.

Didn't you know that?

@soothfast said
Sorry: the burden of proof is now on you.

Didn't you know that?

You claimed the article said something it did not. You made the claim so the burden of proof is on you. You are also asking me to prove something does not exist. You are fooling nobody.

You don't have an honest bone in your body. You are habitually deceitful.

@metal-brain said
You claimed the article said something it did not. You made the claim so the burden of proof is on you. You are also asking me to prove something does not exist. You are fooling nobody.

You don't have an honest bone in your body. You are habitually deceitful.

Well no, buddy, it's not my job to research your wacko conspiracy theories. The Pfizer document in question is out in public in its entirety. It is found to mention graphene in relation to testing the efficacy of the vaccine, and says nothing about graphene being IN the vaccine.

There you go. Of course you could say the document is a fake, but again, it's the selfsame document that your link in the OP holds up as "proof" that graphene is in the vaccines.

So, you've not made your case. Not even close. Sorry.

Not everything is a conspiracy, man. You've got to get perspective.

@soothfast said
Well no, buddy, it's not my job to research your wacko conspiracy theories. The Pfizer document in question is out in public in its entirety. It is found to mention graphene in relation to testing the efficacy of the vaccine, and says nothing about graphene being IN the vaccine.

There you go. Of course you could say the document is a fake, but again, it's the selfsa ...[text shortened]... . Not even close. Sorry.

Not everything is a conspiracy, man. You've got to get perspective.

" It is found to mention graphene in relation to testing the efficacy of the vaccine"

What is your source of information? The documents I posted do not say that. Either you got that information from a completely different source or you made it up. Which is it?

@metal-brain said
" It is found to mention graphene in relation to testing the efficacy of the vaccine"

What is your source of information? The documents I posted do not say that. Either you got that information from a completely different source or you made it up. Which is it?

No, YOU get the Pfizer document that that link in your OP is on about, and YOU find where it says that graphene is put into the vaccines.

See, I'm content to let the experts read these documents and tell me that graphene is not an ingredient of the Pfizer Covid vaccine. If a document really said graphene was in the juice, someone would long ago have flagged that part of the document for all the world to see. Because the document is public. That means anyone can read it.

YOU say—and your link says—that Pfizer puts graphene in its vaccines. YOU have to prove it, because I'm on the side of the sane world that says that is rubbish. Get these Pfizer docs and POINT OUT where it says that graphene is in the vaccine. Your OP link claims it's all in the Pfizer docs, so bring 'em out and highlight the relevant sentences.

Can you do that? And if not, why not?

@metal-brain said
" It is found to mention graphene in relation to testing the efficacy of the vaccine"

What is your source of information? The documents I posted do not say that. Either you got that information from a completely different source or you made it up. Which is it?

Do you not read your own links? And I don't mean all the way to the bottom where talk turns to cosmic energy or whatever.

This is your link:
https://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/breaking-confidential-pfizer-documents-confirm-graphene-oxide-in-covid-vaccines

Have you looked at the title? It's in the URL above, even: "Confidential Pfizer Documents Confirm Graphene Oxide In COVID Vaccines"

Then it says a little ways in: "Here’s a snapshot of some of the evidence contained in the previously confidential Pfizer documents handed to the FDA."

It's a portion of a Pfizer document, and the article highlights "graphene oxide" in blue, and points to this highlighting with a big yellow arrow. Okay. So that is the "proof" apparently.

Except that it is not proof. It is clear the document is talking about some kind of laboratory experiment that uses graphene oxide and gold foil. All sorts of chemicals are used to test products that do not actually go into the product. You understand that, right?

Pfizer has stated that graphene oxide has been used to test the vaccine, and is not put into the vaccine. I accept that, because it would be easy to catch them at a lie by taking a vial of vaccine to a forensics lab and testing it for graphene oxide. Jesus.

So if that's the best you've got, then you've got nothing.

@soothfast said
No, YOU get the Pfizer document that that link in your OP is on about, and YOU find where it says that graphene is put into the vaccines.

See, I'm content to let the experts read these documents and tell me that graphene is not an ingredient of the Pfizer Covid vaccine. If a document really said graphene was in the juice, someone would long ago have flagged that part ...[text shortened]... cs, so bring 'em out and highlight the relevant sentences.

Can you do that? And if not, why not?

Experts? Who are the experts?
You are relying on opinion pieces calling themselves fact checkers again. They are not experts at anything but plagiarism. That is why they all tell the same lies.