I first became aware of this paper through a series of Rumble videos by Dr. Jane Ruby. She is gullible enough to believe every word of the report and even had an extended interview with Dr. Lee. Dr. John Campbell on Youtube discussed the paper and seemed alarmed by its contents. He subsequently withdrew the video because he was persuaded the paper had little merit. Dr. Susan Oliver (Back to the Science channel on Youtube) did an amusing video on Dr. Campbell and some of the sillier aspects of the paper.
The study conditions don't seem to replicate in any respect what would happen when the vaccine is injected. Given the extremely poor experimental design It seems incredibly futile to extend the study to such great lengths (in the Dr. Ruby interview Dr. Lee said some of the samples have been monitored for close to 2 years!).
As a youngster I had an inexpensive microscope and spent a lot of time viewing various types of crystals. I remember epsom salt, sodium chloride and urea in particular. In my later work I examined topical formulations for crystal formation. The crystals Lee and Broudy observed are very ordinary looking crystals that can be expected as a solution reaches saturation due to evaporation. I see nothing suggesting robotics or circuitry.
I had initially thought the ribbons and spirals were due to contamination or microbial growth. When Dr. Ruby asked Dr. Lee about the structures she said they might be "a kind of bio-nano robot or neural link". I was pleasantly surprised to see a response to the Lee and Broudy paper published by the same journal. The title is "No Nanobots in Vaccines — Just Lipids on the Loose: Commentary on Lee and Broudy (2024)" The author explains that the lipids used for the lipid nanoparticles can form the ribbon and spiral structures. She provides a number of references. The link is:
Thanks, Marty. Informative and insightful as always. Of course, Jones won’t touch this. I only came across it by chance and felt the need to cover it because the claims were so outrageous. After reading through a large part of the paper, I realized the same things you did. It’s far too long and relies on far-fetched conclusions with no real evidence—just pure assumption. On top of that, it shows a fundamental ignorance of how computer chips and circuits actually function, and what they need to look like to be operational. The idea that the human body could produce a functional chip circuit is ridiculous. In short, the entire ‘study’ rests on a false premise from the beginning. I also seen those ribbons and circular phenomena in other studies' micrographs, like cholesterol crystals, etc. So, it very well could be a multitude of things. Above all, none of them resemble circuitry.
Graphene oxide isn't in any of the vaccines. What foreign looking clots are you referring to? If you mean the ones in the pictures in the article, those are just normal red cells dying and clotting.
I first became aware of this paper through a series of Rumble videos by Dr. Jane Ruby. She is gullible enough to believe every word of the report and even had an extended interview with Dr. Lee. Dr. John Campbell on Youtube discussed the paper and seemed alarmed by its contents. He subsequently withdrew the video because he was persuaded the paper had little merit. Dr. Susan Oliver (Back to the Science channel on Youtube) did an amusing video on Dr. Campbell and some of the sillier aspects of the paper.
The study conditions don't seem to replicate in any respect what would happen when the vaccine is injected. Given the extremely poor experimental design It seems incredibly futile to extend the study to such great lengths (in the Dr. Ruby interview Dr. Lee said some of the samples have been monitored for close to 2 years!).
As a youngster I had an inexpensive microscope and spent a lot of time viewing various types of crystals. I remember epsom salt, sodium chloride and urea in particular. In my later work I examined topical formulations for crystal formation. The crystals Lee and Broudy observed are very ordinary looking crystals that can be expected as a solution reaches saturation due to evaporation. I see nothing suggesting robotics or circuitry.
I had initially thought the ribbons and spirals were due to contamination or microbial growth. When Dr. Ruby asked Dr. Lee about the structures she said they might be "a kind of bio-nano robot or neural link". I was pleasantly surprised to see a response to the Lee and Broudy paper published by the same journal. The title is "No Nanobots in Vaccines — Just Lipids on the Loose: Commentary on Lee and Broudy (2024)" The author explains that the lipids used for the lipid nanoparticles can form the ribbon and spiral structures. She provides a number of references. The link is:
https://www.ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/106
I wonder if Alex Jones and Dr. Jane Ruby will cover this new information in detail? I'm not going to hold my breath.
Thanks, Marty. Informative and insightful as always. Of course, Jones won’t touch this. I only came across it by chance and felt the need to cover it because the claims were so outrageous. After reading through a large part of the paper, I realized the same things you did. It’s far too long and relies on far-fetched conclusions with no real evidence—just pure assumption. On top of that, it shows a fundamental ignorance of how computer chips and circuits actually function, and what they need to look like to be operational. The idea that the human body could produce a functional chip circuit is ridiculous. In short, the entire ‘study’ rests on a false premise from the beginning. I also seen those ribbons and circular phenomena in other studies' micrographs, like cholesterol crystals, etc. So, it very well could be a multitude of things. Above all, none of them resemble circuitry.
Good read. So, what abt the graphene oxide claims? Also, those foreign looking clots?
Graphene oxide isn't in any of the vaccines. What foreign looking clots are you referring to? If you mean the ones in the pictures in the article, those are just normal red cells dying and clotting.