David A. Hughes, PhD
Senior Lecturer in International Relations, University of Lincoln, Brayford Pool, Lincoln LN6 7TS, England email@example.com
Between February 2021 and August 2022, evidence of undisclosed ingredients in the COVID-19 “vaccines”was published by at least 26 researchers/research teams in 16 different countries across five continents using spectroscopic and microscopic analysis. Despite operating largely independently of one another, their findings are remarkably similar and highlight the clear and present danger that the world’s population has been lied to regarding the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”. This raises grave questions about the true purpose of the dangerous experimental injections that have so far been shot into 5.33 billion people (over two thirds of the human race), including children, apparently without their informed consent regarding the contents.
Surprise findings include sharp-edged geometric structures, fibrous or tube-like structures, crystalline formations, “microbubbles”, and possible self-assembling nanotechnology. The blood of people who have received one or more COVID-19 “ vaccines”appears, in case after case, to contain foreign bodies and to be seriously degraded, with red blood cells typically in Rouleaux formation. Taken together, these 26 studies make a powerful case for the full force of scientific investigation to be brought to bear on the COVID-19 “vaccine” contents. If the findings of these 26 studies are confirmed, then the political implications are nothing short of revolutionary: a global crime against humanity has been committed, in which every government, every regulator, every establishment media organization, and all the professions have been complicit.
Keywords: COVID-19 vaccines, electron microscopy, foreign biological entities, nanotechnology, Nuremberg violations, self-assembling components, undisclosed metallic components,violations of informed consent
Within the space of 18 months (February 2021–August 2022), material evidence of undisclosed ingredients in the COVID-19 “vaccines”was made publicby independent researchers in Spain (Pablo Campra, reports hereand here; La Quinta Columna, reports here, here, here, and here), the United States (Carrie Madej, Robert O. Young, his report here, here, here, here and here) “Andy Vie”,and an anonymous researcher), South Africa (Zandre Botha), Poland (Franc Zalewski), Austria (here), Australia (anonymous scientists, doctors, and researchers), Israel (Shimon Yanowitz), New Zealand (Robin Wakeling, follow-up here, and anonymous group Life of the Blood), Germany (Bärbel Ghitalla, Andreas Noack, Holger Reissner, and the Vaccines Education Working Group), Argentina (Martin Monteverde and colleagues), Chile (report here), the UK (Philippe van Welbergen, Richard D. Hall, and Robert Verkerk), Canada (Daniel Nagase), France, South Korea (here and here), and Italy.
This is more than enough evidence, from at least 26 separate researchers/research teams in 16 different countries across five continents, to highlight the clear and present danger that the world’s population has been lied to regarding the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”.
What is the true purpose of the dangerous experimental injections that have so far been shot into 5.33 billion people (70 percent of the human race), including childrenand infants?
Examined under powerful magnification, the contents of the vials appear to contain a variety of unusual objects and structures for which the declared “vaccine” ingredients do not account. These include sharp-edged geometric structures, fibrous or tube-like structures, crystalline formations, and“microbubbles”. The blood of people who have received one or more COVID-19 “vaccines”appears, in caseaftercase (94 percent of cases according to Giovannini et al. 2022), to contain foreign bodies and to be seriously degraded, with red blood cells typically in Rouleaux formation. The effects on blood are so pronounced that one studyfinds that artificial intelligence can be trained to detect the difference between “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” blood with an accuracy rate of over 98 percent.
Some researchers claim that the undisclosed artefacts contained in the COVID-19 “vaccines”self-assemble into nanotechnology. Although this sounds preposterous at first, consider some of the highest magnification imagery we are about see:
Source: Life of the Blood(4,000x magnification)
Source:La Quinta Columna(1,200x magnification)
It is unclear what we are looking at here, but prima facieit does look likesome kind of circuitry.
Such imagery demands explanation.The findings presented in this paper shift the debate about COVID-19 “vaccines”into new territory. The dangers of the injections lie not only in the declared ingredients —the toxic PEG of lipid nanoparticles, mRNA that programmes the human body to produce harmful spike proteins, etc. (cf. Seneff & Nigh,2021) — but also, and perhaps to a far greater extent, in the undisclosed ingredients. In what follows, over 100 pages of microscopic imagery will demonstrate beyond reasonable doubt that the COVID-19 “vaccines”are not what we were told they are, i.e. safe and effective means of preventing disease. On the contrary, they appear to be heavily loaded with foreign bodies, as well as instructions for human cells to manufacture foreign bodies, that prove profoundly harmful to human health.
Those foreign bodies are present in all the major brands: BioNTech-Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, and others. It therefore appears, from what we know so far, that all the manufacturers, all regulators, and all governments, with the support of establishment media, are complicit in, and must actively have conspired to commit, what would amount to the gravest crime against humanity of all time, i.e. the attempted injection of the entire human race (apart from the perpetrators) with undisclosed toxic substances/technologies without anyone’s informed consent. There can be no more urgent investigation in our time than of the COVID-19 “vaccines”.
IMPEDIMENTS TO INVESTIGATION
Who will undertake such an investigation, however? Certainly the regulators cannot be trusted to do so, since they all appear to have deliberately ignored evidence that can, in some cases, be detected by even an optical microscope. Universities would be the obvious candidates, yet many, particularly in North America, have mandated COVID-19 “vaccines”, so cannot be expected to meet their obligation to society by investigating what is actually in those shots which they havecoerced staff and students to take. Other universities, especially in Europe, are too dependent on government funding to jeopardize their relations with the state by doing the right thing. As a result, there is a dearth of peer-reviewed research in this field: universities are compromised. It seems unlikely that the medical profession will step up, as it has been at the forefront of administering the injections; it also removes the licences to practice of any member who speaks out against them. Meanwhile, military-grade propaganda, rampant censorship, nastiness and aggression from those deceived by the official narrative, and a political climate of fear and intimidation intentionally stoked to dissuade dissidents all act as powerful disincentives for anyoneto ask the questions that matter most. Indeed, several of the researchers and research teams below have chosen to remain anonymous for precisely such reasons.
Yet, beyond the technocratic totalitarianism that is now seeking to eclipse liberal democracy, beyond the incessant fear propagation and the rampant corruption, the question of what is really in the COVID-19 “vaccines”is ultimately an empirical one. It can be solved by scientists of integrity who possess the right equipment and who are willing to adhere rigorously to the correct methods. In principle, any self-respecting laboratory with the right equipment, expertise, and motivation should be able to contribute to solving the problem. There is no need for idle speculation or unsubstantiated claims and rumours. The problem is solvable if people are brave, honest, and truthful enough to address it, like the researchers presented in this paper.
In the other corner, the perpetrators of this apparent global crime against humanity have gone to great lengths to conceal their tracks. If undisclosed nanotechnology is indeed present in the COVID-19 “vaccines”, then it is invisible to the naked eye and will not show up under conventional toxicology tests. Who would even think to look for it in the first place given the relentless propaganda about a virus and spike proteins? The very idea of undisclosed self-assembling nanotechnologies in the “vaccines” seems, on the face of it,so far-fetched that most people will refuse to entertain it in the first place. Even critical bodies, such as Doctors 4 COVID Ethics, refuse to address that possibility, instead preferring to stick to their relevant areas of medical expertise. The Vaccines Education Working Group does address, rigorously, the issue of undisclosed ingredients in the COVID-19 “vaccines”, yet even it does not entertain the possibility of the presence of nanotechnology. It would seem that if the lie is big enough, it becomes incomprehensible to all but the very worst people in society, as Hitler realized a century ago (Hughes, 2022b).
Even for those who arewilling to conduct a proper investigation of theCOVID-19 “vaccine” contents, further major obstacles present themselves. For a start, because we may be dealing with nanotechnology here, specialist high-power microscopes are needed. Life of the Blood was able to procure a dark field microscope with 4,000x magnification to produce the incredible images above, yet no other researcher or research team discussed in this paper was able to achieve anywhere close to the same level of magnification. Most images shown are between 400x and 1,000x magnification. The required equipment may be prohibitively expensive for individuals. For example, a new scanning electron microscope can cost $70,000 to $1,000,000. Given that different types of microscopic and spectroscopic equipment are needed, this is work that really needs to be done at an institutional level, returning us to problems of reputational risk, loss of funding, being forced to close, having careers and reputations trashed, or worse.
Even where adequate equipment and procedures are in place, the next problem is how to obtain a vial for analysis, demonstrating a secure chain of custody, and keeping it maintained at the required temperatures until it is opened. The vials themselves are strictly guarded. According to a pharmacologist working for the NHS:
"I’ve been working with the NHS on [mass vaccination] since January 2021 in a lot of roles. [...] Every mass vaccine centre in the UK and other sites e.g. Boots [the retail pharmacy equivalent of Walgreens in the US] has a National Vaccine protocol to destroy every vial with two different senior staff at the end of each day. The systems are also in place for counting in and out every single vial that arrives and leaves every site. All vials are disposed daily into a locked coded clinical incinerator waste system or stored again coded locks for an NHS contractor to pick up daily the clinical waste! [...] If you want to get hold of vials your best bet is to seek out independent pharmacies doing COVID jabs."
It is hard to see how it is possible to obtain a COVID-19 “vaccine” vial legally given the state’s tight control over them. It was never possible to buy a COVID-19 “vaccine” privately in the UK, for instance: “vaccinations” were only available through the NHS. Thus, it becomes very difficult to establish a secure chain of custody without exposing illicit means of acquisition. Researchers who claim to have obtained unopened vials never seem to indicate where they got them from; at best,they were “sent” or “given” them.
Alternatively, some researchers claim to have obtained used vials; after all, only a small droplet is required for analysis.
However, this then introduces problems of potential contamination and samples no longer being atthe required storage temperatures. So,we are left in a catch-22, whereby a full and transparent investigation requires vials being made freely available by the manufacturers or the state for that purpose, yet the terms of the investigation imply that those very entities cannot be trusted.
There are also high personal risks involved in doing this kind of work in a climate of mounting authoritarianism. State propagandists (including networks of academics and journalists), intelligence agencies, “fact checkers” (flak machines), and other organizations such as the Cabinet Office Rapid Response Unit and 77th Brigade in the UK, will move to close down any such investigation, resorting to thought-terminating clichés such as “misinformation”, “disinformation”, and “conspiracy theory”, as well as censorship, hit pieces in the establishment media, ad hominemattacks, allegations of anti-semitism, calls for the investigators to be fired, etc. This has all been seen before, and it testifies to the desperation of a power structure so premised on lies that it cannot defend itself honestly and truthfully. It may not be long until dissent itself is criminalized, with so-called “anti-vaxxers” (a propaganda term used to demonize political opponents) already being branded as terroristsin readiness for new legislation apparently intended to turn liberal democracies into dictatorships (Davis, 2022).
Investigators may even be murdered. Andreas Noackin November 2021 died within days of claiming that graphene hydroxide in the “vaccines” acts like tiny, non-biodegradable razor blades that cut up blood vessels; the circumstances of his death are disputed. In September 2021, Carrie Madej went public with her findings regarding COVID-19 “vaccine” contents; in June 2022 she was involved in a suspicious plane crash that nearly killed her. Perhaps there is no connection, but the pharmaceutical industry has a known history of persecuting and allegedly murdering whistleblowers, as cases such as Andrew Wakefield, Judy Mikovits, and the late Brandy Vaughanshow. “With thistype of research,” Daniel Nagase warns, “it has to be kind of clandestine, because there’s a lot of money behind not letting anyone know what’s in these injections.” Thus, fear, intimidation, and a range of dirty tactics are used to cow researchers into silence.
The Establishment’s attack dogs, as well as certain victims of the propaganda, will almost certainly resort to the usual smears to dismiss the evidence presented in this paper without doing the work needed to engage with the research seriously.
There will doubtless be disingenuous claims that the images shown below could mean anything, that we have no way of verifying their authenticity, that they may have been photoshopped for sensationalist or fraudulent purposes, that the samples were not properly prepared, allowing for contamination (a sleight on the professionalism of the researchers, some of whom have decades of experience), etc. Such intellectually lightweight claims founder on the fact that at least 26 different investigations of the “vaccine” contents (almost entirely unrelated to one another) from 16 different countries on five continents converge on remarkably similar findings. The investigations are mutually reinforcing, mitigating against possible fraud or human error. Researcher after researcher claims to have never seen anything like this before in their career.
Given that 5.33 billion people have received the injection, and given the apparent evidence of foul play involved, no amount of bullying, coercion, and threats of violence seems likely to stop the investigation that must now take place.
As we are already seeing, scientists from across the world are doing the necessary work anyway, and once the scale of their effort is understood, more and more research teams will be spurred into action, networking with one another rather than producing isolated, yet strikingly similar, findings of the type shown below. It is no exaggeration to claim that the fate of humanity is on the line now that more than two thirds of it has taken one or more of these shots. Because the stakes are sky high, the truth will come out sooner rather than later. If suspicions regarding undisclosed ingredients in the “vaccines” are confirmed, especially those regarding nanotechnology and degraded blood, there will be hell to pay for everyone involved in the COVID-19 “vaccination” programme. It is the authorities who should fear the people, not the other way around.
SPECTROSCOPIC ANALYSIS OF COVID-19“VACCINES”
I have seen claims that we are looking at nothing more than salt crystals (which can appear spectacular beneath the microscope), calcium pyrophosphate (which causes pseudogout), rod-shaped bacilli, ammonium biurate crystals (found in acidic urine), etc. in the COVID-19 “vaccines”—in other words, that there is nothing special or unusual about these images.
There is partial truth to such claims: the Vaccines Education Working Group, for instance, finds that certain crystals formed from a dried out sample of Moderna are likely sodium chloride based on spectroscopic analysis. However, alternative spectroscopic analysis suggests that something very strange is going on. Daniel Nagase, an Alberta ER doctor disgracefully put on involuntary leave for treating “COVID-19” patients with Ivermectin, discovered the following structures in the Moderna and Pfizer “vaccines”:
The reason that these structures are significant, according to Nagase’s spectroscopy, is that they contain neither nitrogen nor phosphorus, two of the six “building blocks of life” along with carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and sulphur. Nitrogen is a component of all proteins. The absence of nitrogen and phosphorus, in Nagase’s view, means that these structures cannot be biological. This leaves open the possibility that they are synthetic biology, i.e. non-living structures designed to imitate natural biology. If so, what are they doing in the COVID-19 “vaccines”?
Nagase claims that the above artefacts are predominantly made of carbon and oxygen; and x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy cannot test for hydrogen, which could therefore also be present. The molecular structure of graphene oxide consists of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen. Nagase acknowledges the possibility that these artefacts could be graphene oxide, but claims that this lies outside his field of expertise. He does make the interesting suggestion, however, that because there is plenty of carbon and oxygen in the human body, perhaps this is being used to aid self-assembly of structures post-injection. This is only a hypothesis, but in light of the evidence we are about to see, scientists need to address it.
Dr. Robert Young, in contrast, does find traces of nitrogen in the Pfizer “vaccine” when analysing suspected particles of reduced graphene oxide/hydroxide using energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, but he does not find phosphorous or sulphur (see his Figures 7 and 7a).
Energy-Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) Reveals rGO or Graphene Hydroxide in Pfizer Vaccine
The Pfizer vaccine liquid fraction was then analyzed for chemical and elemental content using Energy-Dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) as seen in Figure 6. The EDS spectrum showed the presence of Carbon, Oxygen verifying the rGO or graphene hydroxide elements and Sodium and Chloride since the sample shown in Figures 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 7a were diluted in a saline solution.
[Figure 7 shows a spectrum of a Pfizer “vaccine” under an ESEM microscopy coupled with an EDS x-ray microprobe (X axis =KeV, Y axis = Counts) identifying Carbon, Oxygen, Sodium and Chloride. ]
[Figure 7a shows he spectrum of a Pfizer “vaccine" nanoparticulates of reduced graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide, magnesium, aluminum, silicon, chloride and calcium identified under an ESEM microscope coupled with an EDS x-ray microprobe. (X axis =KeV, Y axis = Counts)]
One sample reveals high levels of carbon, oxygen, sodium, and chloride, while another sample lacks the sodium but includes carbon, oxygen, magnesium, aluminium, silicon, chloride and calcium. A further sample (his Figure 15 16 &), reveals the presence (in order of quantity) of bismuth, carbon, oxygen, aluminium, sodium, copper and nitrogen.
Figures 15 and 16 below show a micrograph of different micro and nano particulates which have been identified and analyzed under an Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) coupled with a nanoprobe using Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy(EDS). (The white 2-micron-long particulate is composed of bismuth, carbon, oxygen, aluminum, sodium, copper and nitrogen.
[Figure 15 shows nano and micron particulates identified in the Pfizer “vaccine”. The white 2 micron long particulate is composed of bismuth, carbon, oxygen, aluminum, sodium, copper and nitrogen.]
[Figure 16 shows that the white 2 micron particulate found in the so-called Pfizer 'vaccine' is composed of bismuth, carbon, oxygen, aluminum, sodium, copper and nitrogen.]
Another sample (his Figure 17 & 18) shows “an organic (Carbon-Oxygen-Nitrogen) aggregate with embedded nanoparticles of bismuth, titanium,vanadium,iron, copper, silicon, aluminum”. Dr. Young infers that graphene oxide/hydroxide is present because of the high carbon and oxygen levels in these samples, but the unexpected presence of a range of metallic elements also requires explanation.
Figures 17 and 18 show the identification of organic carbon, oxygen and nitrogen particulates with an aggregate of embedded nanoparticles including bismuth, titanium, vanadium, iron, copper, silicon and aluminum which were all found in the so-called Pfizer “vaccine.”
[Figure 17 - shows an organic (Carbon-Oxygen-Nitrogen) aggregate with embedded nanoparticles of bismuth, titanium. vanadium. iron, copper, silicon, aluminum embedded in Pfizer “vaccine!”]
[Figure 18 - shows an organic (Carbon-Oxygen-Nitrogen) aggregate with embedded nanoparticles of bismuth, titanium. vanadium. iron, copper, silicon, aluminum embedded in Pfizer “vaccine!”]
MICROSCOPIC ANALYSIS OF COVID-19 “VACCINES”: A WORD ON METHOD
The rest of this paper compiles evidence from microscopic analyses of COVID-19 “vaccines” from as many studies as I have been able to find. In the era of COVID censorship, the sample will probably be incomplete, for the simple reason that it is difficult to track down such information.
 Indeed, just before this article went to press, I found another such studyfrom the UK, which was submitted to police in early2022as charges of corporate manslaughter and gross criminal manslaughter were laid against AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Moderna, the NHS, the JCVI, the MHRA, and Her Majesty’s Government. Two vials of Moderna, one of AstraZeneca, and one of Pfizerwere found to contain undeclared inclusions, “with a focus on graphene and carbon related nano structures in form of carbon or graphene composites, graphene in association with polyethylene glycol,.graphene oxide, iron oxide compounds, and calcite”.These appeared as “ribbon forms,” “sheet forms,” “tubular forms,” “nano dots,” and “nano scrolls” (p. 42).
Nevertheless, the list is far more extensive than I imagined it would be when I began this project. It came asa great surprise to me —as I am sure it will to many readers, including those aware of some of these studies —to discover just how many independent investigations of the COVID-19 “vaccines”have already taken place. Nowhere is all this information centrally compiled (an obvious job for someone to do online, in a format as censorship-proof as possible). Therefore, one original contribution of this article is simply to bring it all together for the first time. Seen as a whole, the picture is compelling.
When I say “studies”, I do not mean peer-reviewed academic journal articles. As far as I am aware, only four peer-reviewed journal articles involving microscopic analysis of the COVID-19 “vaccine” contents exist, two of them published in this journal (Jeon, 2022; Lee et al. 2022; Giovannini et al. 2022). This is despite abundant evidence of serious injury and death caused by those “vaccines” (Seneff & Nigh, 2021; Broudy, 2021, p. 102; Blaylock,2022; Oller & Santiago 2022; Fraiman et al. 2022; Exposé, 2022a). One source, from February 2022, compiles over 1,000 peer-reviewed articles on the harms arising from the “vaccines”. Data leaked from the US Defense Medical Epidemiology Database reveal shockingly high figuresregarding the surge in a range of illnesses post-injection. The more “vaccines” taken, the higher the chance of death (Exposé, 2022b). Particularly troubling are the risks to otherwise fit and healthy young people, including athletesand children (Hughes, 2022a). Finally, Dr. Robert O. Young's peer-reviewed article, "Scanning and Transmission Electron Microscopy Reveals Graphene Oxide in CoV-19 Vaccines", ACTA Scientific Medical Sciences, Vol. 6, Issue 8, August, 2022.
Download PDF • 1.19MB
Scanning & Transmission Electron Microscopy Reveals Graphene & Parasites in CoV-19 Vaccines
Scanning and Tranmission Electron Microscopy in the Identificaiton of the Non-disclosed In
Download • 1.00MB
DR. YOUNG REVEALS GRAPHENE, ALUMINIUM, LNP CAPSIDS, PARASITE IN 4 VACCINES
Despite all this, for some indefensible reason, academia has shown very little interest in what is actually in the injections based on independent analysis of their contents. The current paper seeks to address that situation and promote more research in this area.
Even when academics such as Camprado produce research in this area, they and their universities are quick to distance themselves from one another, and the research remains non-peer-reviewed, presumably because it is more important to the researchers to get their findings out to the public than to wait for a corrupt scientific journal community to refuse to publish it on non-scientific grounds. How corrupt is that community? Even itsown editors have long admitted that “journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry” (Horton, 2004); that “medical journals are an extension of the marketing arm of pharmaceutical companies” (Smith, 2005); that “it is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines” (Angell, 2009); and “the case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue” (Horton, 2015). Indeed, one of the most widely read scientific papers of all time is titled, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False” (Ioannidis, 2005).
According to Mikovits (2020): “The journals are part of the plague of corruption. In fact, they drive it. It is propaganda masquerading as science.” Once the “pandemic” hit, the journals’ information-laundering role became stunningly obvious. “Until this pandemic event,”notes Blaylock (2022), “I have never seen so many journal papers being retracted —the vast majority promoting alternatives to official dogma, especially if the papers question vaccine safety.”
Because academia has failed to perform basic due diligence regarding COVID-19“vaccine” contents, the quality of research that does exist on those contents varies. At one end of the spectrum, Campraand the Vaccines Education Working Groupproduce carefully documented, methodological research that one suspects probably would pass peer-review in an honest system, albeit with a few tweaks. At the other end of the spectrum, important findings by, for instance, Bärbel Ghitallaare packaged in a quasi-documentary short video format that provides no scientific detail at all regarding level of magnification, size of objects detected, length of time after opening the vial, etc.
Indeed, many of the researchers who have conducted this type of research appear to be so shocked by what they have seen that they feel an urgency to publicize their findings without always providing the level of detail that would be helpful to make the most sense of it.
Some researchers provide just a few images; others provide many dozens. I have therefore had to be selective in which images to show. In addition, I have cropped numerous images to focus on what I deem to be their most important features and to save space. These elements of subjective judgment mean that the reader should refer to the original sources for a fuller picture. In addition, I have resized certain images (without altering their proportions) to make them fit the page better. The scale of these images was not always evident in the original research, so it is not always clear how big certain artefacts are. It is possible that some artefacts placed side by side that appear to be roughly the same size are in fact different sizes. This is precisely why more rigorous lab research is needed —toeliminate possible sources of confusion and help clear up what it is that we are looking at.
A further methodological problem is the technical quality of the imagery. The large majority of this imagery originates from online videos from which I have taken screen grabs using the snipping tool on Windows. Really, repositories of high quality imagery taken directly from the microscope need to be made available online, but I have done my best with what is currently available. I think it is more than enough to merit further investigations of the COVID-19 “vaccines”.
For the novice reader, there will be problems with knowing how to interpret different types of microscopy. For example, there are different branches of microscopy: optical, electron, scanning probe, and X-ray. Within optical microscopy alone, there are different techniques for improving the quality and usefulness of the image: bright-field, dark-field, phase contrast, and cross-polarized light illumination. Each works in a different way and produces different kinds of imagery, meaning that it is possible for the same object to appear differently depending on the technique used (each has its own advantages and drawbacks). Different approaches also generate different color imagery, sometimes to generate better contrasts. The colors of the images shown in this article should therefore be ignored, as they do not represent the true colors of the objects seen. For example, the La Quinta Columna imagery above does not really show objects “lighting up” dark green surroundings; rather, the light/dark contrasts are generated to enhance the sharpness of the image in key places. The imagery presented in this article is a hodgepodge of different microscopy types and techniques. Better scientific analysis would be systematic and thorough in its application of different microscopic types and techniques, labelling each one clearly.
Because the primary purpose of this article is to present evidence for specialists in such fields as biochemistry and nanotechnology to analyze and build upon, I have elected to present that evidence in the chronological order in which it appeared, rather than structurally imposing my own interpretation. This will also, hopefully, help the reader to understand the way in which findings have developed over time and to establish a counter-narrative ofgenuine scientific discovery, juxtaposed to the anti-scientific cult mentality embodied in The Science.™The running order is, therefore, as follows: van Welbergen (July 2021), Ghitalla (August 2021), anonymous US researcher (August 2021), Madej (September 2021), Austrian researchers (September 2021), Botha (October 2021), Campra 1 (October 2021), “Andy Vie” (October 2021), Young (February 2021 ongoing), Noack (November 2021), Campra 2 (November 2021), Reissner (December 2021), Jeon (January 2022), Life of the Blood (January 2022), Monteverde et al. (Feburary 2022); Hall (February 2022), La Quinta Columna(December 2021–March 2022), Lee et al. (March 2022), Australian scientists (April 2022), Yanowitz (April 2022), Wakeling (May 2022), the Vaccines Education Working Group (July 2022), and Giovannini et al. (August 2022).
Working study by study helps to address copyright issues. All the researchers cited in this paper want their work to be shared and spread widely in the public domain in order to raise awareness. At the same time, there should be correct attribution of images to give credit where credit is due. Rather than labelling every single image with the name of the researcher or research team that took it (a laborious exercise for the hundreds of images shown, and one which distracts from the imagery itself), I have made explicit where each image comes from by grouping images according to their source and providing one or more hyperlinks to the original work. I trust that this will satisfy the original content creators, as it is intended in the spirit of transparency and fairness. However, I would remind readers who wish to republish any of these images that they, too, should give credit to the creators of those images and provide links to the original work.
Most of what follows consists of visual imagery. I think that readers will agree that imagery speaks far more powerfully than words in the case of what they are about to see.
COVID-19 “VACCINES” CONTENTS: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE
The main body of this article works through the microscopic evidence that has come to light since July 2021 regarding the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”. It moves chronologically, trying to portray the findings of the researchers as faithfully as possible. There are 26 researchers and there work, research and findings can be found by reading the entire article in the attached PDF file below:
Download PDF • 14.96MB
The Hard Evidence of Lipid Nano Capsid Containing Graphene Ferric Oxide, GMO Parasites and Directed to Specific Organs and Glands of the Body as a Directed Targeted BioWeapon
The observations under a pHase Contrast, Dark-Field, Bright-Field microscopy, Transmission and Scanning Electron microscopy of the vaccine product by Pfizer, including vaccine products of Moderna, Astrazeneca and Janssen revealed some entities that can be graphene strips, ribbons and/or tube's and paras as seen below in Figures 2 and 3 with nano lipid dots in Figure 4 containing the nano GO or graphene oxide and Trypanosoma parasite eggs directed to targeted organs of the body including the reproductive glands, heart and brain.
[Figure 2 shows an aqueous fraction image from Pfizer vaccine sample (left) and from reduced Graphene Oxide (rGO) standard (right) (Sigma-777684). Optical microscopy, 1000X magnification]
[Figure 2a is a 0.5ml aqueous fraction image from Pfizer vaccine sample viewed under pHase contrast microscopy at 1000x, showing a symplast of graphene oxide (upper left) next to a Trypanosoma cruzi parasite (lower right). Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, September 11th, 2021]
[Figure 2b is a 0.5ml aqueous fraction image from Pfizer vaccine sample viewed under pHase contrast microscopy at 1000x, showing a symplast of graphene oxide (upper left) and an unidentified parasite (lower right). Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, September 11th, 2021]
[Figure 2c is a 0.5ml aqueous fraction image from Pfizer vaccine sample viewed under pHase contrast microscopy at 1000x, showing a graphene oxide ribbon. Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, September 11th, 2021]
[Figure 3 - Aqueous fraction images containing reduced graphene oxide from Pfizer vaccine sample (left) and sonicated reduced graphene oxide (rGO) standard (right) (Sigma-777684). Optical pHase contrast microscopy, 600X magnification. In addition, the Muestra RD1, La Quinta Columna Report, June 28, 2021; Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension; Delgado Martin, Campra Madrid confirms our findings. https://cen.acs.org/articles/86/i4/Graphene-Ribbons.html and https://cen.acs.org/articles/86/i4/Graphene-Ribbons.html  ]
[Figure 4 shows the liposome Capsid containing GO that Pfizer uses for its product to vehiculate the graphene oxide by attaching the Liposome capsid or nano dots to specific mRNA molecules for driving the Liposome contents of GO to specific organs, glands and tissues, namely the ovaries and testes, bone marrow, heart and brain. The image was obtained by a SEM-Cryo preparation.]
For a definitive identification of graphene by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM), it is necessary to complement the observation with the structural characterization by obtaining a characteristic electron diffraction standard sample (as seen in the figure 'b' shown below).
The standard sample corresponding to graphite or graphene has a hexagonal symmetry, and generally has several concentric hexagons.
[Figure 4b Reveals X ray Diffraction Pattern of the Graphene Particles. Matéria (Rio J.) 23 (1) , 2018. Characterization of Reduced Graphene Oxide or Graphene Hydroxide nanosheets obtained by a modified Hummer's method. Renata Hack et al. ]
Using Scanning Electron (SEM) we observed an intricate matrix or mesh of folded translucent flexible rGO or Graphene Hydroxide sheets with a mixture of darker multilayer agglomerations and lighter colored of unfolded monolayers as seen in Figure 5. 
[Figure 5 shows a cluster of reduced graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide nanoparticles in a Pfizer vaccine. They appear to be aggregated.]
The darker linear areas in Figure 5 appear to be local overlap of sheets and local arrangement of individual sheets in parallel to the electron beam.
After the mesh, a high density of unidentified rounded and elliptical clear shapes appears, possibly corresponding to holes generated by mechanical forcing of the rGO or Graphene Hydroxide mesh during treatment as seen in Figures 6, 6a, 6b, and 6c
[Figure 6 shows a TEM microscopy observation where particles of reduced graphene oxide or graphene hydroxide in a Pfizer "vaccine” are present. The X-ray diffractometry reveals their nature of crystalline Carbon-based nanoparticles of rGO. This evidence was intitially found by Muestra RD1, and published in the La Quinta Columna Report, June 28, 2021; Reduced Graphene Oxide Detection in Aqueous Suspension; Delgado Martin, Campra Madrid and . ]
Graphene Bubbles Observed in CoVid - 19 Vaccines
[Figure 6a Reveals Graphene Bubbles Found in the Pfizer and Moderna So-Called CoVid - 19 Vaccines Viewed Under pHase Contrast Microscopy at 1000x Magnification. Copyright Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, March 10th, 2022.
Figure 6b Reveals the Self-Assembling Graphene Bubbles in the Pfizer and Moderna So-Called CoVid - 19 Vaccines Observed Under TEMS Microscopy. The X-ray Diffractometry Reveals Their Nature of Crystalline Carbon-based Nanoparticles of rGO -. Copyright Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, March 10th, 2022
Graphene Bubbles, Graphene Threads, Ferritin Oxide and Heinz Bodies or Hemaglobin Chelated Graphene as Observed in the CoVid - 19 Vaccinated Unchanged Unaltered Live Blood
Figure 6c Reveals Graphene Nano and Micron Bubbles, Graphene Threads, Graphene Ribbons and Black Red Blood Cells or Heinz Bodies Observed Under pHase Contrast Live Blood Microscopy in the Live Unchanged Unaltered Blood of a 56 Year Old Male Inoculated with the Pfizer Boosted CoVid - 19 So-Called Vaccine. The X-ray diffractometry reveals the nature of Crystalline Carbon-based Nano and Micron Particulates of Graphene - Copyright Dr. Robert O. Young, Hikari Omni Publishing, March 10th, 2022
Read Dr. Robert O. Young's entire article by clicking on the PDF file link below:
Scanning and Tranmission Electron Microscopy in the Identificaiton of the Non-disclosed In
Download • 1.00MB
This article has presented evidence from 26 studies of the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”conducted in16 different countries across five continents within a 13-month time span from July 2021 to August 2022. All converge on similar findings pointing towards undisclosed ingredients in the “vaccines”. Pfizer followed by Moderna appear to be the worst culprits, although all COVID-19 “vaccines”fit the pattern. The unavoidable conclusion is that the publics of all countries have been systematically lied to about the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”.
Taken together, these 26 studies make a powerful case for the full force of scientific investigation to be brought to bear on the COVID-19 “vaccine” contents. As Lee et al. put it, “Further studies including the full force of the tools of nanoscience, synthetic transworm hybrid nano-engineering, and other approaches should be carried out as soon as possible” (2022, 260). More and better work needs to be done. There is, to quote Wakeling, “lots more scope for more work for more people [...] Much more citizen research, robust debate & due diligence is needed before we reach conclusions or make decisions”.
Still, the signs look grim. Most troubling of all is the bloodwork. In study after study, from country after country, exactly the same results appear in “vaccinated” blood, i.e. giant, ugly, unnatural, translucent tubes sitting grotesquely among decimated red blood cells that have been sent into Rouleaux formation. Merriam-Webster defines a poison as “a substance that through its chemical action usually kills, injures, or impairs an organism”.That seems to be the case here. There seem to be very fewexceptions. Virtually everysample of “vaccinated” blood examined across these multiple studies seems to have succumbed to the same fate, whereas no “unvaccinated” sample (other than a handful claimed by van Welbergen) appears to show anything other than healthy red blood cells. Given that Rouleaux formation of red blood cells is normally associated with chronically ill patients, “results in impaired perfusion and tissue oxygenation”, and can lead to potentially fatal blood clots (Kibria et al. 2014; Wagner et al. 2013), these findings are devastating, especially in view of the fact that 5.33 billion people —over two thirds of the world’s population —have received the injection. What does the future hold for these people?
Lee et al. (2022, pp. 258-9) cite studies demonstrating serious harms caused by the COVID-19 “vaccines”,including Vaccine Induced Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (VAIDS), increased susceptibility to various infections and cancers, myocarditis, and neurological abnormalities. Data from various militaries also reveals increases inheart attacks, up by 269%; cancers up by 300%; pericarditis up by 175%; pulmonary embolism increased by 467%; Guillain-Barre Syndrome up by 250%; menstrual irregularities up by 476%; multiple sclerosis increased by 487%; reports of chest pain were up by 1,529%; observed labored breathing increased by 1,052% —all of this compared to baseline data obtained before any COVID-19 vaccines were administered (Lee et al. 2022, p. 258; also see Salazar, 2022).
Again, what does this portend for the future? Are we looking at chronically disease-ridden societies wherever there has been a high uptake of the “vaccine”,in the context of already overburdened healthcare systems?
Large sample-size studies of the blood of patients who have received one or more COVID-19 “vaccines”,as well of “unvaccinated” blood and the “vaccine” contents themselves, now need to take place as a matter of top priority. In terms of the former, sufficiently powered studies are needed that record the number of shots received and when, manufacturer(s), time since last injection, patient age and sex, presence of underlying health conditions, nature and extent of blood deformities, etc. It is imperative to establish the extent to which the bloodwork signature identified above presents across the population of “vaccinated” people.
Is it true that there is a qualitative difference between the blood of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” patients?
If there is, then big ethical questions arise, such as whether there should be separate supplies of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” blood and who gets to receive which kind in the event of a transfusion?
What are the large translucent “fibres” that seem to show up in almost every blood sample of “vaccinated” patients but not “unvaccinated” patients?
Where have they come from?
How did they get to be so large (some apparently approaching 1mm), given that no item found in the “vaccines” themselves is this big?
Do they continue to grow? How is it possible for one or more 0.25 mL shots of “vaccine” to create so many foreign bodies in the blood?
Is the mRNA programming not only spike protein production, but also the production and self-assembly of other structures?
Most importantly, do the foreign objects shown above stay in the human body, or are they eventually filtered out?
If the contaminants do contain graphene oxide, a substance 100 times stronger than steel with a melting temperature four fifths as hot as the surface of the sun, it seems unlikely that the immune system will be able to deal with them, as we have seen with bursting neutrophils. Carefully designed and adequately powered studies are therefore needed to test “vaccinated” blood over time. If the foreign bodies are gradually filtered out, then is the “booster programme” intended to condition the population into accepting regular injections so that the technology can be “topped up”?
Can any remedies or treatments be found to help get rid of those foreign bodies?
Can anything be done to reverse the Rouleaux and burr formations of red blood cells seen above?
The Answers to all of these questions can be found in the articles and videos shared by Dr. Robert O. Young below!
How Do You Keep Your Body Ocean, Rivers and Streams Clean From Graphene, Parasites, GMO RNA & DNA
These now appear to be some of the most urgent medical questions of our time. It is important to carry out extensive studies of “unvaccinated” blood. If van Welbergenis correct that even “unvaccinated” people can display the kind of bloodwork signature seen in “vaccinated patients” (he is the only scientist in this paper to make that claim), then either shedding of contaminants is real, or people are being poisoned by means other than the “vaccine”.
In terms of analysing the contents of the COVID-19 “vaccines”, the first priority must be to use the most advanced microscopy and spectroscopy equipment available in order to confirm or discredit the extraordinary images produced by Life of the Blood at 4,000x magnification. If it is true that every drop of “vaccine” contains a fleet of apparent nanoantennas, “cords” and “motherboards”, then further analysis is needed to confirm what these are. We need to know if the foreign bodies present in the injections are indeed a form of nanotechnology, whether self-assembly of components is indeed taking place and, if so, how this is being achieved.
If nanotechnologies are involved, why are there so many objects in the “vaccines” measuring in the micron range?
We need confirmation of whether or not graphene/graphene oxide/graphene hydroxide, as well as other metals including bismuth, titanium, silicon, and antimony, are present in the “vaccines”.
We need to know if the “vaccines” contain parasites and other living organisms.
We need to know what the “pods”,“shards”,and “eggs” identified above are. And, in light of Wakeling’s analysis of the Afluria Quad “vaccine”,we need to examine other, non-COVID“vaccines” to discover in which other types of “vaccine” these undeclared components are present.
If the above findings are confirmed, we need to know who is responsible for the undisclosed ingredients in the “vaccines”, where their laboratories are, and we need to pick those laboratories to pieces.
The role of the regulators in all this, epitomized by their mantra that the COVID-19 “vaccines”are “safe and effective”, is gruesome. As the Austrian researchers note, simple light microscopes with relatively low magnification are sufficient to capture evidence of over-sized particles.
Why, therefore, did the Paul Ehrlich Institute not detect those particles?
La Quinta Columna similarly asks: given that there are “multitudes of microscopically sized particles” in the COVID-19 “vaccines”, why did the EMA not pick up on this?
It is the same all across the world. The Korean doctors, for instance, write: It is amazing to us, as practicing medical clinicians and researchers, that there was no intensive microscopic evaluation right down to the nanoscale prior to the marketing authorization for COVID-19 vaccines at the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety in South Korea [...] and elsewhere throughout the world (Lee et al. 2022, p. 261).
Van Welbergenpoints to the role of Dame June Raine as head of the British MHRA: she approved EUA for the Pfizer “vaccine” despite admitting on the BBC that she had no idea what was in it. When pressed to ask Pfizer about the ingredients, Pfizer simply refused to disclose them, yet Raine publicly defended Pfizer.
The US CDC insists, contrary to the spectroscopic evidence above, that COVID-19 “vaccines have undergone —and continue to undergo —the most intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history” and that they contain “no metals such as iron, nickel, cobalt, titanium, rare earth alloys, or any manufactured products like microelectronics, electrodes, carbon nanotubes or other nanostructures, or nanowire semiconductors”.
Proven safe and effective alternatives to “vaccines”, such as Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin, have been rigorously suppressed. Robert Verkerk puts it simply: the regulators are “in deep”.
It is not just the regulators, however. As Wakeling observes, “Evidence has been presented to governments, regulatory agencies, and courts, with absolutely no effect. It is not looked at seriously.” Virtually every government in the world, especially in the West, has gone to overwhelming lengths to get the “COVID-19” injections into as many people as possible, including extending the rollout to children in the absence of any credible scientific evidence for doing so (Hughes, 2022).
In some countries, “vaccination” was made a condition of employment in certain professions, or of receiving education.
A transnational attempt is still underway to introduce “vaccine passports” that would make everyday participation in society dependent on taking these poisons on a regular basis (Tony Blair is the champion of this in the UK and was awarded the rare honour of Order of the Garter for his efforts).
The legal profession has had virtually nothing to say about the unlawful, unconstitutional attempts by government after government to coerce mass “vaccination”.
The establishment media facilitated a 24/7 propaganda onslaught, terrorizing and shaming the public into compliance and demonizing the “refuseniks” allegedly responsible for a “pandemic of the unvaccinated”.
The medical profession has been responsible for administering the shots (British GPs incentivized by £12.58 per shot) and for not providing the information necessary for informed consent.
Academia has maintained its usual rigorous silence when it comes to really speaking truth to power.
In sum, all of the professions have failed simultaneously in their duty towards the public. All are complicit in what is now playing out. Unless the 26 researchers and research teams discussed in this article are all very much mistaken, we are looking at what New Zealand doctor Matt Sheltoncalls “the biggest crime in history, surely”,i.e. the injection of billions of people, without their informed consent, with undisclosed substances that are demonstrably causing harm and whose covert purpose can only be nefarious. At the very least, we are looking at the most egregious ever violation of the Nuremberg Code and what Richard D. Hallcalls “the biggest crime ever committed against humanity”, certainly in terms of the number of people affected. Furthermore, according to Holger Reissner (at 42 minutes, echoing Andreas Noack’s “micro razor blade” metaphor), the shrapnel-like nature of the alleged graphene oxide inside the body causes unnecessary suffering and so, if its presence is proven, constitutes a war crime in violation of the Geneva Conventions.
According to Maria Zee, if the regulators knew that graphene oxide, a toxic substance, was present in the “vaccines”, they are responsible for genocide.
“Viruses Don’t Exist” Explained, Nanotech Inside People is a Bio-Weapon
Allegations of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide necessarily direct attention towards the military and raise dark questions regarding the true purpose of the “vaccines”,which we know prevent neither transmission nor infection of “SARS-CoV-2” (Subramanian and Kumar, 2021; Wilder-Smith, 2021). Even the British Prime Minister claimed, “It doesn’t prevent you from catching the disease and it doesn’t protect you from passing it on.” In other words, the COVID-19 “vaccines”are not in fact vaccines, because they fail to confer immunity and promise merely to reduce symptoms, like a drug or a treatment.
Only by changing the definition of “vaccine” was the CDC able to include them under that category (Hughes, 2022, p. 210).
Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci, and others admitted the efficacy of “COVID-19” vaccines wears off within months, yet rather than abandoning a defective product, they used this as the pretext for pushing “booster shots” —more and more injections into more and more the population (Loffredo, 2021).
What is the real agenda here?
IN ANSWER TO ALL OF THESE QUESTIONS PLEASE WATCH: Part 1 on the Root Cause Of ALL Disease and GMO parasites:
Dr. Robert Young and Dr. Ariyana Love: “The root cause of disease & GMO parasites." We followed up with a second broadcast for a patent review on the messenger RNA vectors being genetically modified parasites. These GMO parasites are mRNA vectors of deadly synthetic biology that’s being used by Moderna, Pfizer, Novavax, Janssen (J&J), Oxford, and more, to transform the human genome and turn humans into synthetic biology. That’s right, pharmaceutical companies are now using deadly parasites as mRNA vectors for delivering artificial genetic sequences into the human genome through the COVID “VAXXXination”.
PLEASE WATCH: MEGA BOMBS! Deadly GMO Parasites are the mRNA Vectors: Patent Review with Dr. Young & Dr. Love
You can read the entire article at the following link - MEGA BOMBS! GMO Parasites Are The mRNA Vector!
by Dr. Ariyana Love & Dr. Robert Oldham Young