Is graphene the new Teflon: A highly hazardous compound

by Nathan Barnard

The reality of Graphene Oxide (GO) within all the covid-19 vaccinations has been proven from scientific studies.[1] [2] But why have the manufacturers sought to keep the inclusion of GO and graphene-based materials (GMBs) within the vaccinations from people? Furthermore, is graphene the new Teflon[3] and thus should such omission be concerning?

What are Graphene-based materials?

Graphene, first isolated from graphite in 2014, is a flat monolayer of carbon atoms that are tightly packed within a 2-D honeycomb lattice structure.[4] GMBs have attracted significant scientific interest, especially in the medical field, due to their optical, thermal, mechanical and electronic properties.[5] [6] The unique properties of GMBs make their medical applications highly desirable due to that they offer a plethora of uses from biosensors, imaging, diagnosis, cancer therapy, photodynamic therapy, regeneration and tissue engineering.[7] [8] [9] Consequently, GMBs application as biosensors have been utilised and thus proven to assist with early detection of and early identification of genetic diseases such as Alzheimer’s and cystic fibrosis.[10] [11] [12] Additionally, GMBs exhibit excellent energy transfer systems[13] and facilitate in increasing the optical, electrical and mechanical properties of nanostructures.[14]

The inherent self-assembly potential of the nanostructures of the Graphene family has been extensively investigated to form three-dimensional skeletons that may be useful in the biomedical field.[15]

Thus, due to their mechanical properties, Gurcan et al. (2020) assert that GMOs provide excellent potential as scaffoldings in regenerative medicine.[16] Wang et al. (2015) argue that graphene nanoparticles are key nanomaterials for treating neurodegenerative diseases by delivering drugs to neuronal cells,[17] but do such possibilities come at the detriment of one’s health?

Do GMBs present any dangers, and should we be concerned?

Marzi et (2014) found that graphene is highly toxic to human biology – a consequence of GMBs ability to stimulate the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which damages certain biomolecules, including lipids, proteins and DNA. [18] ROS act as a secondary messenger and have important roles in cell signalling and homeostasis.[19] ROS also contribute to the cellular processes and metabolism, such as DNA fragmentation; thus, the increase in ROS damages proteins and DNA that leads to cell death through apoptotic (programmed cell death) and necrotic (premature cell death) pathways,[20] [21] an example of which is seen in Duch et al. (2011)  who found that graphene caused apoptosis and inflammation of lung tissue.[22] This is similar to what is being seen within covid-19, referred to as covid lung. Thus, is covid lung caused by covid, or is it caused through graphene? Furthermore, did the flu vaccine administered in 2019-2020, which contained graphene, assist in covid-19 symptoms?[23]

Jastrzebska et al. (2012) [24] and Want et al. (2013)[25] research concurs with Duch et al. (2011) findings that graphene nanoparticles induce severe cytotoxicity and lung disease. Similarly, Dervin et al. (2017) found high levels of alveolar (small structures within the lung) cell toxicity after exposure to graphene nanoparticles.[26] Additionally, graphene exposure induces an inflammatory response due to the excessive increase in ROS. Bianco (2013) found Graphene-Family Nanoparticles, on the whole, to be highly toxic, causing extensive pulmonary thromboembolism, chronic toxicity and death, damage to the lung, spleen and liver, chronic inflammation and acute pulmonary inflammatory response, increase in tumours.[27]

Furthermore, Akhavan et al. (2013) found that low exposure to GMBs in vitro studies on stem cells showed DNA fragmentation and chromosomal abnormalities.[28] Furthermore, even at very low levels, GMBs triggered significant cell destruction and produced substantial cytotoxic effects. [29]  Likewise, Wang et al. (2015) and Li et al. (2018)[30] found that graphene quantum dots cause DNA cell damage.[31] Additionally, Hashemi et al. (2016) found that GMBs significantly increased oxidative stress and DNA damage on cells within 24hours of exposure which led to significant toxicity.[32] However, Akhavan et al. (2013) found high levels of cytotoxicity and DNA fragmentation after a mere 1hr exposure time.[33]

Nasirzadeh et al. (2019) found graphene nanoparticles to be highly toxic and increased cytotoxic potential for pheochromocytoma (a tumour originating in the adrenal gland cells) – symptoms of which include, but are not limited to, headaches, tachycardia, high blood pressure, heavy sweating and tremors.[34] Liu et al. (2013) found that graphene oxide induced mutagenesis at the molecular level in both vitro (cells) and vivo (living) studies. Similarly, Lu et al. (2017) concur that graphene oxide induces DNA damage within both vitro and vivo studies, inducing cancer with chronic exposure.[35]

What is further concerning is that graphene nanoparticles, after being injected into the bloodstream, bond with the proteins in the blood, causing an immediate and dramatic change in the biological identity of the graphene nanoparticles as a protein layer encapsulates the graphene. The protein layer that now covers the graphene nanoparticles is referred to as the protein corona or the biomolecular corona (BC).[36] This biomolecular corona assists with breaching the blood-brain barrier (BBB) that allow targeted therapies.[37] Furthermore, polyethylene glycol (PEG) is utilised to assist in protein absorption,[38] which PEG is also a key ingredient within the covid-19 vaccinations.

The graphene corona can be useful for overcoming the blood-brain barrier and targeting the cerebrovascular endothelium for neurological disease treatment.[39]

Magro et al. (2018) concur, highlighting that the addition of PEG within the graphene nanoparticle enhances the bonding that produces the protein corona allowing the specific targeting of the cerebrovascular endothelium allowing the breaching of the blood-brain barrier.[40] Consequently, through combining GMBs and PEG, one is offered a mechanism to breach the BBB and thus achieve what was once unachievable. Furthermore, cerebrovascular endothelium cell dysfunction occurs before Vascular dementia and cognitive deterioration.[41]

Furthermore, Kucki et al. (2018) highlighted the dangers graphene oxide presents to pregnant women due to its potential impact on the placenta, a transient and multifunctional organ that enables successful pregnancy.[42] Graphene oxide, due to its ability to breach the BBB, could also breach the placental epithelial trophoblast barrier. Consequently, one should be gravely concerned at the plethora of opportunities graphene offers, as while they are immense, they are highly hazardous to human biology and not all benign. Furthermore, while research attests to the many dangers of GMBs, especially with regards to DNA damage and its ability to breach the BBB, the long-term effects have not been studied and therefore raise concerns regarding DNA damage, especially within pregnancy and foetal development.

There is a wealth of academic literature that attests to the many dangers of GMBs to biological organisms – especially the human body. However, it is clear from those used within this article that GMBs are hazardous and should not be used within the human body, regardless of the benefits they offer. Thus, one has to question, why have they been included within the covid vaccinations and the flu vaccines? Is it due to that GMBs and PEG, which are also in the covid vaccinations, can breach the BBB?

Furthermore, Prof. Campra findings, after analysing the Pfizer covid-19 vaccination, is highly concerning. Not only did he find graphene oxide, but he also showed how the nanoparticles are forming motherboards that transmit Bluetooth readable signals.[43] A reality that others have been exposing with the magnetism at the injection site. However, while many consider such thoughts as conspiratorial academic literature attests to the reality of such phenomena.

 Colombo et al. (2012) researched the biological application of magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs) and their medical application in capturing proteins, DNA and entire cells that allows DNA and RNA to be isolated, concentrated and programmed.[44] Furthermore, Xiang et al. (2010) research showed how MNPs offer an effective delivery for DNA vaccines,[45] consequently, Islam and Ahsan (2020) proposed that MNPs be utilised within covid-19 vaccinations,[46] to mention a few.

Thus, what we see through utilising GMBs and PEG is a mechanism to breach the blood-brain barrier while also offering the possibility of utilising magnetic nanoparticles to formulate in the injected host nanocircuit boards that avail, whoever has the key, not only the ability to covertly monitor a person but also programme them.

Now, for some, what I have said in the above paragraph will seem not only conspiratorial but impossible. However, it is not! But, for it to be effective, it requires a further component – that of 5G.[47]

Furthermore, while some argue that the covid-19 vaccination is the ‘mark’ of the beast, I do not see it fulfilling the criteria outlined in Revelation 13. However, I do see it as a technology of the beast system. Furthermore, I believe that the antenna and circuitry that is implanted within the vaccinated person could be incorporated with the ‘mark’ of the beast – let me explain.

DARPA has invented a nonbiological sensor that is implanted and then read via a device on the skin or clothing.[48] This is achieved as the implanted sensor communicates to the external device, which in turn relays information to a phone or computer. Therefore, if we apply such thought, the vaccination has implanted the biosensor, then when a person takes the ‘mark’, it authenticates and allows for more detailed information to be collated and transmitted – a process that would be heightened via 5G. In effect, it allows full integration to the noosphere of the beast system. The person becomes a node on a globally interconnected, what I refer to as a chimaera-biosphere, which can programme or deprogrammed, excluded or excluded a person/node from society.

Thus, once a person takes the ‘mark’, they are no longer human. They have been transformed into the image of the beast and thus cannot gain salvation. However, it is not my intention to expound such concepts as it is outside of the scope of this article, but nonetheless a reality.

Presently there is still time for people to repent from taking the vaccine and take action to remove the nanoparticles and prevent their condition from worsening. One thing I will state is that someone I know who took the vaccine and then repented felt the LORD instruct them to take honey regularly. To me, this sounded futile, and I questioned if it was the LORD. However, Ansari et al. (2019) study show that honey reduces the risk of Graphene Oxide by preventing it from forming within the body and thus making it less toxic.[49] Likewise, there are many protocols a person can take. However, that is for the person to research, as I am not offering medical advice but rather showing the possible dangers of using GMBs on human biology. Additionally, I seek to focus on the spiritual aspect; however, prior to looking at the spiritual, it must be noted that graphene nanoparticles are used within geoengineering and are thus ubiquitous within the biosphere. Consequently, it is not just the vaccinated who need to seek detoxification from GMBs. However, it is presently unclear what type of GMBs are used within geoengineering. Nonetheless, the damage to human biology and DNA remains.

Furthermore, within the academic literature, there is a wealth of research that shows that GMBs damage the gut and cause inflammatory responses, which could provide a rationale to why we see an increase in IBS type and allergy type incidence due to GMBs ability to breach the gastrointestinal (GI) barrier.[50]

However, what is clear is that not only is humanity is under attack, but the attack seeks to damage or change our DNA. However, while such an attack is real, it is the outworking of a spiritual battle that has been waged since before time. Thus, while I have highlighted the dangers of graphene, which I encourage people to seek means of detoxification from GMBs, the main concern is the spiritual battle being fought.

Furthermore, if all a person does is seek to take physical steps to promote optimal health but neglects spiritual factors, then such endeavours are futile. For what does it profit a man who gains the world but loses their soul? Thus, I urge you to seek the LORD, to draw close to God as you submit your life to the Living God.

The world is being terraformed so that the rise of the antichrist can commence, a system that will see demonic hordes unleashed upon the earth. However, there is a means of enduring and overcoming what is transpiring. It is found through humbly walking before God, as you confess your sin and accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour. For we overcome by the blood of the Lamb – Jesus – the word of our testimony and not loving our lives unto death.

The first step towards optimum health is to confess your sin and seek to make the LORD your focus. Then once this has been done, ask the LORD to guide you and heal you as you speak life over your body by declaring the scriptures over yourself – a process that will transform you and your surroundings through the frequencies within the word of God. For more on frequencies, see Dr Emoto’s water experiments.

It is clear the battle is on; the question is, are you prepared and will you fight and overcome or will you lay down and allow yourself to be ravished by the accuser – the devil?

I pray you to choose life and seek the LORD.



[1]Daniel, I.R. (January 28, 2022).  The Jerusalem Report Season 2 Episode 3: Graphene Discovery and The Fall Of Democracy. Childrens Health Defense, online, available from

[2] Laquinta Columna. (November 2, 2021). DETECTION OF GRAPHENE IN COVID19 VACCINES BY MICRO-RAMAN PECTROSCOPY. Online, available from [once downloaded it will need to be translated into English].

[3] Teflon was ubiquitous in its applications, however, it was latter found to be highly carcinogenic. For a more informal, yet informative explanation see the film Dark Waters

[4] Liu, Y., Luo, Y.L., Wang, Y., Yang, W., Yang, R., Wang, B., Yang, J., & Xhang, N. (2013). Graphene oxide can induce in vitro and in vivo mutagenesis. Scientific Reports, 3, pp. 1-8. DOI:10.1038/srep03469

[5] Gurcan, C., Taheri, H., Bianco, A., Delogu, L.G., & Yilmazer, A. (2020). A closer look at the genotoxicity of graphene based materials. Journal of Physics: Materials. 3(1).pp.1-12.

[6] Krishna, K.V., Ménard-Moyon, C., Verma, S., & Bianco, A. (2013). Graphene-based nanomaterials for nanobiotechnology and biomedical applications. Nanomedicine. 8(10).pp. 1669–88.

[7] Gurcan et al. (2020)

[8] Tiwari, J.N., Vij, V., Kemp, K.C., & Kim, K.S. (2016). Engineered carbon-nanomaterial-based electrochemical sensors for biomolecules. ACS Nano. 10(1). Pp.46-80.

[9] Singh, Z. (2018). Applications and toxicity of graphene family nanomaterials and their composites. Nanotechnology, Science and Applications, 9. pp.15–28.

[10] Gurcan et al. (2020)

[11] Bonanni, A., & Pumera, M. (2011). Graphene platform for hairpin-DNA-based impedimetric genosensing. ACS Nano. 5(3).. pp.2356–2361.

[12] Giovanni, M., Bonanni, A. & Pumera, M. (2012). Detection of DNA hybridization on chemically modified graphene platforms Analyst 137 pp.580–3.

[13] Kishna et al. (2013).

[14] Reina, G., Gonzalez-Dominguez, J.M., Criado, A., Vazquez, E., Bianco, A., & Prato, M. (2017). Promises, facts and challenges for graphene in biomedical applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. 46(15). pp. 4400–4416.

[15] Gurcan et al. (2020).

[16] Ibid.

[17] Wang, D., Zhu, L., Chen, J.F., & Dai, L. (2015). Can graphene quantum dots cause DNA damage

in cells?. Nanoscale, 7, pp. 9894-9901.

[18] De Marzi, L., Ottaviano, L., Perrozzi, F., Nardone, M., Santucci, S., De Lapuente, J., Borras, M., Treossi, E., Palermo, V., & Poma, A. (2014). Flake size-dependent cyto and genotoxic evaluation of graphene oxide on in vitro A549, CaCo2 and vero cell linesJ. Biol. Regulators Homeostatic Agents, 28. pp.281–289.

[19] Marzi et al. (2014).

[20] Li, Y., Liu, Y., Fu, Y., Wei, T., Le Guyader, L., Gao, G., Liu, R.S., Chang, Y.Z., & Chen, C. (2012). The triggering of apoptosis in macrophages by pristine graphene through the MAPK and TGF-beta signaling pathways. Biomaterials 33(2). pp.402–11.

[21] Lalwani, G., D’Agati, M., Khan, A.M., & Sitharaman, B. (2016). Toxicology of graphene-based nanomaterials Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 105(B). pp.109–44.

[22] Duch, M., Budinger, G.R.S., Liang, Y.T., Soberanes, S., urich, D., Chiarella, S.E., Campochiaro, L.A., Gonzalez, A., Chandel, N.S., Heram, M.C., & Mutlu, G.H. (2011). Minimizing oxidation and stable nanoscale dispersion improves the biocompatibility of graphene in the lung Nano Lett. 11(12). pp.5201–7.

[23] Daniel, I.R. (January 28, 2022).  The Jerusalem Report Season 2 Episode 3: Graphene Discovery and The Fall Of Democracy. Childrens Health Defense, online, available from

[24] Jastrzebska, A.M., Kurtycz, P., & Olszyna, A.R. (2012). Recent advances in graphene family materials toxicity investigations. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 14(12), 1320.

[25] Wang, A., Pu, K., Dong, B., Liu, Y., Zhang, L., Zhang, Z., Duan, W., & Zhu, Y. (2013). Role of surface charge and oxidative stress in cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of graphene oxide towards human lung fibroblast cells. Journal of Applied Toxicity, 33, pp. 1156-1164.  

[26] Dervin, S., Murphey, J., Aviles, R., Pillai, S., & Garvey, M. (2017). An in vitro cytotoxicity assessment of graphene nanosheets on alveolar cells. Applied Surface Science, 434, pp. 1274-1284.

[27] Bianco, A. (2013). Graphene: Safe or Toxic? The two faces of the medal. Angewandte Chemie: International Edition, 52(19), pp. 4986-4997.

[28] Akhavan O, Ghaderi E, Emamy H and Akhavan F. (2013). Genotoxicity of graphene nanoribbons in human mesenchymal stem cells Carbon 54. pp.419–31.

[29] Akhavan, O., & Ghaderi, E. (2010). Toxicity of graphene and graphene oxide nanowalls against bacteria ACS Nano 4. pp. 5731–6.

[30] Li, M., Gu, M.M., T. X., Xiao, B.B., Lu, S., Zhu, W., Yu, L., & Shang, Z.F. (2018). Hydroxylated-Graphene Quantum Dots Induce DNA Damage and Disrupt Microtubule Structure in Human Esophageal Epithelial Cells. Toxicological Science, 164(1), pp.339-352.

[31] Wang, et al. (2015).

[32] Hashemi, E., Akhavan, O., Shamsara, M., Daliri, M., Dashtizad, M., & Farmany, A. (2016). Synthesis and cyto-genotoxicity evaluation of graphene on mice spermatogonial stem cells Colloids Surf. B, 146. pp. 770–6.

[33] Akhavan et al. (2013).

[34] NHS. (n.d.). Phaeochromocytoma. Online, available from

[35] Lu, C.J., Jiang, X.F., Junaid, M., Ma, Y.B., Jia, P.P., Wang, H.B., & Pei, D.S. (2017). Graphene oxide nanosheets induce DNA damage and activate the base excision repair (BER) signalling pathway both in vitro and in vivo. Chemosphere, 184, pp.795-805.

[36] Palmeiri, V., Perini, G., De Spirito, M. & Papi, M. (2018). Graphene oxide touches blood: in vivo

interactions of bio-coronated 2D materials. Nanoscale Horizons, pp.1-19. DOI: 10.1039/c8nh00318a

[37] Mendonca, M.C.P., Soares, E.S., de Jesus, M.B., Ceragioli, H.J., Ferreira, M.S., Catharino, R.R., & de Cruz-Hofling, M.A. (2015). Reduced graphene oxide induces transient blood–brain barrier opening: an in vivo study. Journal of Nanobiotechnology, 13(78), pp.1-13. DOI 10.1186/s12951-015-0143-z

[38] Palmeiri et al. (2018).

[39] Palmeiri, et al. (2018).

[40] Magro, R., Albertini, B., Beretta, S., Rigolio, R., Donzelli, E., Chiorazzi, A., Ricci, M., Blasi, P., & Sancini, G. (2018). Artificial apolipoprotein corona enables nanoparticle brain targeting. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology, and Medicine, 14, pp. 429-438.

[41] Wang, F., Cao, Y., Pei, h., Rausch, W.D., & Li, H. (2018). Dysfunction of Cerebrovascular Endothelial Cells: Prelude to Vascular Dementia. Frontiers in Aging and Neuroscience, 10(376), pp. 1-23.

[42] Kucki, M., Aengenheister, L., Diener, L., Rippl, A.V., Vranic, S., Newman, L., Vazquez, K., Kostarelos, K., Wick, P., & Buerki-Thurnherr, T. (2018). Impact of graphene oxide on human placental trophoblast viability,

functionality and barrier integrity. 2D Materials, pp.1-18.

[43] Daniel, I.R. (January 28, 2022).  The Jerusalem Report Season 2 Episode 3: Graphene Discovery and The Fall Of Democracy. Childrens Health Defense, online, available from

[44] Colombo, M., Carregal-Romero, S., Casula, M.F., Gutierrez, L., Morales, M.P., Bohm, I.B., Heverhagen, J.T., Prosperi, D., & PArak, W.J. (2012). Bological applications of magnetic nanoparticles. Chemical Society Review, 11(41), pp. 4306-4334.

[45] Xiang, S.D., Selomulya, C., Ho. J., Apostolopoulos, V., & Plebanski, M. (2010). Delivery of DNA vaccines: an overview on the use of biodegradable polymeric and magnetic nanoparticles. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Nanomedicine and Nanobioltechnology, 2(3), pp. 205-218.

[46] Islam, M., & Ahsan, Z. (2020). Possible Therapeutic Approach Against Covid-19 by

Application of Magnetic Field. American Journal of Nanoscience, 6(3), pp. 18-23. doi:10.11648/j.ajn.20200603.11 

[47] Parsons, J. (February 6, 2022). Vax creates antenna in your body. Countdown Radio, online, available from

[48] DARPAtv. (October 11, 2018). DARPA SBIR: Profusa Implantable Biosensors – Col Matt Hepburn. YouTube, available from

[49] Ansari, M.Z., Wahid, M., Johari, R., Qureshi, M.A. & Siddigi, W. (2019). Novel honey mediated green synthesis of Graphene@Ag Nanocomposite and its two-dimensional application in photovoltaic and anti-microbial activity. Materials Science, 6(11).

[50] Fadeel, B.,m Busy, C., Merino, S., Vazques, E., Flahaut, E., Mouchet, F., Evariste, L., Gauthier, L., Koivisto, A.J., Vogel, U., Martin, C., Delogu, L.G., Buerki-Thurnherr, T., Wick, P., Beloin-Saint-Pierre, D., Hischier, R., Pelin, M., Carniel, F.C., Tretiach, M., Cesca, F., Benefenati, F., Scaini, D., Ballerini, L., Kostarelos, K., Prato, M., & Bianco, A. (2018). Safety Assessment of Graphene-Based Materials: Focus on Human Health and the Environment. ACS Nano, 12, pp. 10582 – 10620.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please reload

Please Wait