The DS had the mRNA jab prepared for years. If Trump pushed back, they'll declare he's crazy and letting people die. So he pushed a 'safer' vac and got it out to compete with the bad Jab.
Now he has to push the J&J so people understand there's a difference, learn which is 'his' and which is 'theirs'. This negated the 'we had no other choice' and will sink the CDC/WHO pushing the wrong vac.
How can you dismantle such well known orgs to the unaware masses?
Optic-wise, Trump pushed the safer vac to strike back against evil, not much else can prevent the jab push on the unwitting mass. Every J&J jab could be a life saved.
There is absolutely zero reason to assume the J&J vaccine is safer than the Pfizer/Moderna vaccines.
Zero reason.
On the contrary, there is reason (biologically) to be even more suspect of it. There is also anecdotal evidence that it is harmful, just like the others.
When (if) we get better data we can make better judgements, but at the moment assuming the J&J is safer is you allowing authority figures to think for you, which is how we got in this mess to begin with.
Never forget, this is a disinformation war. Never stop thinking for yourself.
That doesn't even mention the fact that the vaccines seem to be completely unnecessary since we have really good therapeutics, and covid just ain't that deadly.
The big difference is that the J&J one is NOT mRNA. Prob why the DS is killing it. The mRNA injections (they do not meet criteria to be called a vax) include nanotech that targets the brain and DNA.
These statements are predicated on the vaccines being what they say they are, and containing the ingredients they say they do.
The statement that the mRNA vaccines target the brain more than the adenovirus vaccines is not credible without sufficient evidence on both sides. By looking at the tech, my estimation is they they are both transcytosed through the brain microvascular endothelium (BBB) at similar rates. If you have evidence to the contrary, please show me.
As for the mRNA vaccines targeting DNA...
I have posted many times on why this is unlikely. Think of it this way:
Every cell that exists or has ever existed (all life for all of time) is full of mRNA. In the case of eukaryotes (includes humans) our DNA is strictly separated by a gated structure called the nucleus. Once mRNA leaves the nucleus it is never allowed back in. Is it impossible for it to get back in? No, but it is incredibly unlikely. Even if it does, writing mRNA to DNA is even more unlikely.
There are enzymes that write mRNA to DNA but such systems are strictly regulated, both in expression of the enzymes, location of the enzymes on the DNA and what RNA is accepted. It is virtually impossible for mRNA to be written to DNA unless other tools are included with it.
It is for these reasons that even though all cells are full of mRNA at all times, not a single one of them gets written to DNA ever (on human time scales), unless they are of the exact type designed to do so (the specific RNA sequence for telomerase e.g.).
None of those other required tools are listed ingredients in any of the vaccines.
The adenovirus on the other hand is designed to inject dsDNA (double stranded DNA, the same type our chromosomes are made of, aka, our hard drive) INTO the nucleus. That's what adenoviruses do, which is why they are a common tool for altering gene expression in experiments. Now, injecting dsDNA into a nucleus is unlikely to get incorporated into the genome unless it is of a specific sequence designed for that purpose. But it is possible, even if unlikely.
So your assessment of which one is likely to "target DNA" is the opposite of the truth from the perspective of molecular biology. In truth NEITHER target DNA, but the adenovirus vector is many, many times more likely to alter DNA than the cytosolic mRNA of the other tech.
Your assessment of which is more likely to cross the BBB may be correct, but it would require evidence to support it. From just looking at the tech, and having knowledge of what it takes to induce transcytosis through the endothelium I think both are probably the same order of magnitude. I welcome evidence to the contrary (science papers only please, or articles with links to them).
Im no doc or science brain, so I bow to your clearly superior knowledge.
Takeaway? They are ALL unsafe and to be avoided. (IMHO of course.)
You will find no disagreement from me on this statement.