That paper is strictly about the wild type virus. It has nothing to do with the mRNA being used in the vaccine. As I said, viruses can have the other machinery to make this happen. I am extremely surprised that this particular coronavirus has such machinery, and I am not certain that it does. I need to look very closely at that preprint article to make sure the science was done correctly and that their conclusions match the science (those things are far from certain, especially from a preprint article). Regardless, even if the virus does get written to DNA more often than the average virus, it is not something you can transfer over to the vaccine in any way.
"Synthetic" RNA doesn't really mean anything special. It was most likely made in a bacteria, such as E. coli or some other similar in vitro method. Molecules made in such procedures are identical to molecules made anywhere else. A molecule is a molecule. In the case of the mRNA in the vaccines they have modified bases that are signals used to reduce the probability that they will be degraded by the machinery that is designed to perform that function within a human cell. This is not anything new, but is instead using known biological tools that normal human mRNA already uses.
Is it possible it has other signals that help it get written to DNA? Sure, but the vaccines don't contain the OTHER mRNA that are necessary to make that process happen outside of a one in a quadrillion or so chance. I mean, maybe they do, but it is not one of the listed ingredients. Frankly, if they are putting in things and not listing them in the ingredients, there are much, MUCH better things they could add if they wanted to intentionally alter the DNA (such as all the CRISPR-cas9 associated tools).
That paper is strictly about the wild type virus. It has nothing to do with the mRNA being used in the vaccine. As I said, viruses can have the other machinery to make this happen. I am extremely surprised that this particular coronavirus has such machinery, and I am not certain that it does. I need to look very closely at that preprint article to make sure the science was done correctly and that their conclusions match the science (those things are far from certain, especially from a preprint article). Regardless, even if the virus does get written to DNA more often than the average virus, it is not something you can transfer over to the vaccine in any way.
"Synthetic" RNA doesn't really mean anything special. It was most likely made in a bacteria, such as E. coli or some other similar in vitro method. Molecules made in such procedures are identical to molecules made anywhere else. A molecule is a molecule. In the case of the mRNA in the vaccines they have modified bases that are signals used to reduce the probability that they will be degraded by the machinery that is designed to perform that function within a human cell. This is not anything new, but is instead using known biological tools that normal human mRNA already uses.
Is it possible it has other signals that help it get written to DNA? Sure, but the vaccines don't contain the OTHER mRNA that are necessary to make that process happen outside of a one in a quadrillion or so chance. I mean, maybe they do, but it is not one of the listed ingredients. Frankly, if they are putting in things and not listing them in the ingredients, there are much, MUCH better things they could add if they wanted to intentionally alter the DNA (such as all the CRISPR-cas9 associated tools).