Astroblog

 The idea that COVID vaccines contain the nano-particle material graphene is a particular myth that refuses to go away. While graphene has a number of desirable properties in biomedical applications, it is not yet used in vaccines. 

However, a new "report" claims that they have found "graphene" in vials of Pfizer, Moderna and Astra-Zenia COVID vaccines. TL;DR this is nonsense on stilts. Why? let me explain.

As a bit of background, I am a biomedical scientist. I have a lot of expertise in optical microscopy (bright field, fluorescence) and some expertise in electron microscopy. I also have expertise in UV-visible spectroscopy and experience with Nuclear magnetic Resonance and Mass Spectroscopy (although the latter is usually me nodding at my collaborators spectra trying to look intelligent).

With that background, let look at the "report", "Qualitative Evaluation of Inclusions In Moderna, AstraZeneca and Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines.". It uses two techniques to find "graphene" in the vaccines, optical microscopy and Raman spectroscopy.

Optical microscopy:

The problem with optical microscopy is that nano-materials are, well, nano, with sizes typically below the resolution threshold of optical instruments. The "report" says that aliquots of vaccine were placed on "clean" slides, dried, then cover slips placed on them. No details are given on how the slides were cleaned, if the cover-slips were cleaned, and what mounting medium was used. 

Looking at the images I see the typical junk that ends up on slides (even cleaned ones and we use acid washing with ethanol rinses on the slides and cover-slips). Stray fibers and the agglomerations you get from drying complex solutions (particularly with lipids, the lipid nano-particles will aggregate as they dry into little blobs of fat). The "carbon nano-ribbons" (Figure 3.1) are not nano (approximately 7 µm in diameter), and the images in 3.2 are definitely not nano (15 µm across) and are the typical junk that accumulates of slides and cover-slips. 

Figure 3.7 from the report, this is the typical non-nano junk every optical microscopist is familiar with.  

These random blobs and fibers are all (aside for some described as calcite) described as graphene with out any good evidence.  Which brings me to Raman spectroscopy.

 

Raman Spectroscopy:

Spectroscopy of any sort of complex mixtures, like vaccines, is fraught with difficulties. Multiple components can interfere with each other and you can find peaks where you don't expect peaks. The "report" shows numerous Raman spectra, but they are all uniformly awful.

in this image (click to embiggen) I have posted the best spectrum from figure 3.11 (labelled "graphene with polyethylene glycol") above the spectra for polyethylene glycol (the PEG used in vaccines is PEG2000) and Graphene and graphene oxide (GO). The scales for the Raman shift are different in all the images, I can't do much about that. But the main thing is too look at the patterns.

The reports figure is very poor quality, so being sure of the peak locations is difficult but there are peaks around 800, 1100 and 1400 Raman shifts (cm-1) the may correspond to the 830, 1108 and 1470 peaks for PEG. There are a bunch of other peaks that don't quite fit with PEG (eg the peak around 1700 cm-1).

Graphene and Graphene oxide (GO) have distinct peaks at 1354 and 1591 (cm-1). There is a peak in the mess that is around 1600 cm-1 but the 1354 peak is missing.

So, no graphene.

The other images are worse. The Graphene nanoform from figure 3.11 (click to embiggen), clearly has no Graphene spectral characteristics. Likewise the graphene nano-objects in figure 3.18 have no spectral signatures of Graphene. 

Summary:

The "evidence" for graphene in the vaccines is random fibers and blobs which are not nano-scale, and poor resolution Rama spectra which don't show the spectral signature of graphene.

So no graphene in vaccines.

Given the poor image resolution the amateurish backgrounds and the obvious artefacts, the heading of "Global Humanitarian Crisis Prevention and Response Unit" on every page with a terrible graphic logo, I can't help but wonder if this is some sort of joke.

Labels: Pseudoscience, public outreach, science matters, vaccines

I graphed the data from the abstract, it doesn't support the claims, basically, the inflammatory markers are not elevated. Look at the error bars, they are very wide and overlap substantially between pre- and post- vax measures, which means there is no meaningful difference between the figures, indeed for IL-16 there is a possibility that the real postvax value is actually lower than prevax). 

Labels: Science Blogging, vaccines

You may have heard of people offering "Detoxes" to"remove" the COVID vaccines. These range from "Detox" baths of Epsom salts and/or Borax, to snake venom removal kits, to the ancient technique of cupping.

None work, some are dangerous and all are based on a complete misunderstanding of how vaccines work.

The currently available vaccines are mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna), and adenovirus vector vaccines (AstraZeneca, Jannsen). In the first two, the mRNA from the spike protein is encapsulated in a lipid shell, in the latter two this is carried in a viral particle.

Labels: science matters, vaccines

Just to give you a feeling for the degree of misinformation presented on the Australian Vaccine Networks website, consider this entry on the Diphtheria Tetanus Pertussis Vaccine:

The pertussis or whooping cough vaccine has been cited as the cause of a great deal of suffering and death since the report by Madsen et al in 1933. Despite the more than 70 years ofcontroversy since that time, this vaccine continues to be used.

Well, if you consider a serious adverse effect rate (encephalitis not death) of 0-10 incidents per million injections "a great deal of suffering" when compared to an actual death rate from pertussis infection at 1-3%. Of course, what the AVN doesn't mention is this is the old style vaccine, the new vaccines we use have a negligible serious adverse event rate.

All whole cell DTP vaccines contain mercury in the form of thiomersal. Mercury is one of the most toxic (poisonous) substances known to man and has been linked with forms of brain damage including Autism.

Actually, while mercury is quite toxic, it is nowhere near as toxic as the pertussis toxin, which is 50% lethal at 429 or 546 ng per mouse, while Thiomersal is 50% lethal at 9 mg per mouse (the pertussis toxin is a million fold more lethal than mercury). As well, we have known that since medieval times that it is the dose that makes the poison, and the amount of Thiomersal in Thiomersal containing vaccines is negligible from a toxicity point of view. Thiomersal is NOT associated with autism. This has been shown again and again.

And most importantly, there is no Thiomersal in the modern vaccines. The Australian Vaccination Network uses fear inducing language (suffering and death, toxic) to scare people about vaccines which have prevented thousands of deaths and much suffering in Australia alone, without out indicating that these scare phrases don't even apply to the vaccines actually in use.

More mindbogglingly, from the 7:30 report transcript:

Meryl Dorey [of the Australian Vaccine network] says while Dana McCaffery's death was a tragedy, she rejects low vaccination rates played any part.

This astounding statement shows complete ignorance of the way immunity works, if you drop the immunization rate, the degree of immune coverage falls below levels that can prevent transmission, and epidemics can explode, as they have done every time vaccination rates fell (eg the epidemic of pertussis in 1978-79 that produced 1000,000 cases and 36 deaths when vaccination rates fell).

The mother of four [Meryl Dorey] has written about her own family's experience with whooping cough, describing it as a storm in a teacup, which was treated with homeopathy.

Great, just because they were lucky enough to have a mild case, they think the rest of the cases aren't a big deal. The major failure of logic here is unbelievable. And treating infectious disease with homeopathy, ineffective woo at its very best, makes me lost for words.

Pseudoscience peddlers who use scare tactics to frighten vulnerable people, families with young children, away from the simplest, most effective ways of controlling lethal infectious diseases are at the moment controlling our health. Be very, very afraid.

Labels: miscelaneous, Pseudoscience, vaccines

Last night I watched the 7:30 report on the whooping cough epidemic in New South Wales. While the NSW one is the most serious, there are also epidemics in Victoria and Queensland.

What is appalling is that vaccination rates have fallen below unsustainable levels, at least in part due to the actions of the antivaccination group the Australian Vaccine Network spreading fear and disinformation. For example see the http://avn.org.au/library/index.php/vaccination-information/dtp.html site, where they raise the specter of thiomersal (thimerosal), even though it isn't in the majority of vaccines Australians would be exposed to, and even though thiomersal isn't a problem anyway see http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2007/06/the_autism_omnibus_when_you_dont_have_sc.php and http://scienceblogs.com/angrytoxicologist/2007/10/thimerosal_better_late_than_ne.php.

Obviously governmental sources are not able to combat this disinformation. I can (and will) start my own blogging campaign to try and address the issues but given my (and others) experience in the long term fight against creationism and HIV denialism, I have little hope I can make a big impact even if high profile pro-science bloggers have had little impact on the Australian conciousness ( see Respectful Insolence as a prime example ). Still, as one of the hats I wear professionally is that of toxicologist, and as the anti-vaccination movement relies on an inchoate fear of "toxins", I'll do my best. In this day and age kids shouldn't be dying of preventable diseases like Whooping Cough.

Labels: miscelaneous, Pseudoscience, vaccines