Graphene Oxide in Covid Vaccines?
Professor Campra at the University of Almeria in Spain has all but confirmed the existence of the semimetal in a purported sample of the vaccine.
The use of four types of laboratory equipment all pointed to the same conclusion: Graphene or one of its derivatives1, all considered semimetals, was present in a sample of the Covid vaccine.
Is the report authentic? What are the author’s conclusions and how did he get there? What action should be taken as a consequence of this information? are questions we seek to answer in this article.
The professor published the potentially earth-shattering finding on June 28 2021 in a report he uploaded to ResearchGate - the widely used social networking site for researchers and academics - at researchgate.net. He did it from his own account, and each page has markings that indicate that he is the author and is working on behalf of the University of Almeria.
The report has the form of a presentation where he outlines the tests he has carried out on a single sample of the Corona vaccine from Pfizer. All the available evidence point to graphene oxide, in considerable concentrations, and inexplicably being part of the sample. He concludes:
Microscopic study of the sample provides strong evidence for the probable presence of graphene derivatives […]
Professor Campra, however, goes out of his way to say that the study fell one step short of providing conclusive proof that there was graphene oxide in the sample, because the amount of liquid in it was not sufficient to carry out the final, required test to confirm that the compound indeed was graphene oxide.
He also stresses that there were some uncertainties with the traceability of the sample, and that even if the sample was genuine and proven to contain the material, one could not infer that the vaccines in general were contaminated.
The presentation of 26 pages has been translated to English in its entirety, and published by Dagslys here.
The presentation describes the methods and the key results from the study. Reference is made to a number of slides (26-47), that are supposed to contain more evidence of imagery that compares the detected substance with standard images of the semimetal.
The presentation is quite straight forward and easy to absorb. Nevertheless, in the following we present a layman’s reading of the report. (That should count as a disclaimer. We will update if we are alerted to where the layman got it wrong.)
According to professor Campra, the study was set off by one D. Ricardo Delgado Martín who commissioned the university to study a sample of the vaccine in his possession. The task was very specific: To find graphene in the sample. No explanation is made as to why there were suspicions about this compound being an ingredient in the vaccine in the first place. The sample was contained in a vial that was sent to the university by courier.
The courier had adhered to conservation protocols by keeping the vial refrigerated. Crucially, the vial was sealed and had a label with instructions, batch number and expiration date. Although this presumably could trace the vial back to its source, the professor notes that there was no documentation that could attest to its traceability and quality control since then. The label also included the word “COMIRNATY”, which is the name of the Corona vaccine by Pfizer and BioNTech.
The professor outlines three methods to conclusively determine if there is graphene or one of its derivatives present in the sample.
First, measure the wavelength at which a solution absorbs the maximum UV- or visible light. This is done by a spectrophotometer and is done to determine the molecules in the solution as each molecule absorbs light in a specific way. A fluorometer can then be used to corroborate the identification done by the spectrophotometer. The fluorometer can furthermore determine the amount of a substance in a medium according to wikipedia.
Second, study the sample under both an electron and optical microscope and compare images of a detected compound with standard images from literature.
Third, and the most crucial one, is through “EDS”, which presumably means Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy.
These methods would divide the study in three parts. The object of the study: The hand-delivered sample, now codenamed RD1.
In the first part, Professor Campra starts off by using both the spectrophotometer, NanoDrop 2000, and the fluorometer, QuBit2.0, to identify the molecules in the sample. The most surprising - and possibly alarming - result is that it contains an unexpected substance or substances.
While the expected substance - the RNA - is found in low concentrations in RD1 at 6 ng/µl2, an unexpected substance is found in far greater concentrations (747 ng/µl).
The measurements with the spectrophotometer and the fluorometer show wavelengths from 260-270 nm. 260 nm is consistent with RNA, 270 nm is not. The report points to graphene oxide being the most likely candidate. From the report:
Reduced graphene oxide (RGO) shows absorption maxima at 270 nm, compatible with the spectra obtained3.
Professor Campra insists that RNA only accounts for a small percentage of the substances in the sample, and thus it cannot be ruled out that the large quantity of molecules absorbing maximum light at wavelengths of 270 nm is due to the presence of graphene oxide.
Moving on to the second part of the study, the sample is put under two types of microscope, an electron and an optical.
When comparing the images obtained with the electron microscope, with images of graphene oxide in literature, the key conclusion is this:
The TEM4 images of the RD1 sample in general SHOW A HIGH RESEMBLANCE to literature graphene oxide images obtained by the same TEM technique, at similar magnifications.
Professor Campra points out that the particular electron microscope he uses, the TEM, is the standard equipment scientists go to when they want to observe graphene in a lab.
Campra is able to corroborate his conclusion with the less powerful optical microscope by employing an appropriate technique for the purpose. The images produced again bear resemblance to the graphene oxide derivative rGO - or reduced graphene oxide:
Optical images of […] sample RD1 reveal great similarity with the […] rGO5 standard.
This observation brings the Spanish professor to the following conclusion.
Microscopic study of the sample provides strong evidence for the probable presence of graphene derivatives […]
The third part of the study was supposed to be the last pillar that could support an unequivocal identification of the alien substance in the vial. Campra cites a number of spectroscopic techniques that would characterise the structure of the molecules and thus identify the substance beyond any doubt. The professor points to insufficient amounts of the liquid as the main reason why he is unable to do this.
For the layman, the evidence professor Campra has provided, already seems strong enough to ask whether health authorities around the world have done their due diligence when it comes to the contents of the vaccines. As Campra recommends, a significant number of vials should be studied to draw a general conclusion as to whether an alien substance is part of any vials.
The professor’s disclaimer at the end of the presentation suggests that he is keen to avoid any controversy that could arise from his study. After all, he has only rendered a routine service to a client. However, he deserves credit for probably being the first to provide tangible evidence on a subject where there, until then, only had been rumours and speculation.
No one is speculating about intent at this point - least of all professor Campra - who is adamant that the report does not imply any position outside what is explicitly stated in the text.
Still, this is evidence that something might be terribly wrong with the vaccines - in the worst case scenario - of biblical proportions. If there is a chance only some of them have been contaminated, this must be thoroughly checked by health authorities, and the public reassured.
Let’s hope this was a one-off.
I.e. graphene in its pure form, or a “derivative”, a compound derived from graphene in a chemical reaction like graphene oxide or reduced graphene oxide.
Nanogram/microliter
The report cites Thema et al, 2013. Journal of Chemistry ID 150536.
Transmission Electron Microscope
Reduced graphene oxide