My boss asked me, he's heard it from me and now his brother-in-law and he tried googling it and of course sees all the "fact check" stuff that no, mRNA doesn't change your dna.
There are a lot of Mikovitz and Tenpenny videos out there but he'd probably be more receptive to something in print.
They (the MSM etc) are actually saying that mRNA doesn't change your DNA.
The mRNA is released into the cytosol (not the nucleus, which it can't get to from the cytosol). The ribosomes attach to the mRNA and make the spike protein. No DNA is involved in this process whatsoever.
No DNA is involved in this process whatsoever (for the mRNA vaccines).
More like a temporary software change. Its important to understand that there are thousands of these programs running at any one time in all of our cells. The vaccine just adds one more to this mix. It stops running after a few days (the mRNA gets degraded with a half-life of about a day in the case of the vaccines).
This one software program from the mRNA really doesn't interfere with normal cell operations in any meaningful way (at least not as you are suggesting here). It will likely ultimately result in the cells death because of the intended immune response, but the protein being created is a transmembrane protein. It doesn't interact with the internal operations directly at all.
Its not as "hacked" as this statement makes it sound, but its not entirely wrong either. I'll give you this one.
Yes
Sometimes. Mostly they get the actual biology just plain wrong. Regular doctors don't have to understand the minutia of cell and molecular biology to be doctors, so they don't. Even a geneticist doesn't have to know this stuff. Even a molecular biologist doesn't have to know cell biology that well (though they are the most likely subcategory to do so other than cell biologist). Cell biologists know this stuff because that's the focus of our study. It is many years of study just to get a basic grasp of all the interactions, and even then its quite complicated and much remains unknown.
So here's a question, do you think these covid vaccines are safe, in that the benefits outweigh the risks?
I see no benefits to the vaccines. Vitamin D and Zn are likely all one needs to survive unless you are already on your death bed. Ivermectin and HCQ (both together is good) seem to be excellent if you do get sick (along with the vitamins).
The data suggests the risks from the vaccines on the other hand are very real. There is about a 1:4,000 to 1: 20,000 chance of death (depending on how accurate the VAERS data is) and about a 1:500 chance of serious side effect (subject to that same condition). These are not HUGE, but they're no joke either. I think it is likely that every age group takes less risk from the virus than the vaccine. And that's just the short term effects.
We don't know what the long term effects might be. Pathogenic priming could be a very serious issue. One data set I saw suggested its probably less than 1% death rate from this potential long term effect. It could even be much less than 1%, we won't know until we get more data. But if its 1% that's millions of people across the world. I hope it's not that bad, but it could be. There could be other long term effects. This is an experiment. No one knows for certain.
There are genuine fears from the vaccines. I am only trying to alleviate those that have no basis. I can't alleviate all of them, some are quite genuine, even if overblown to an extent. For example, even if the short term death rate is on the high end 1:4,000 that's still a 99.98% survival rate, most in people over 60. It's not actually that bad, but it is legit.
Then there's what I consider to be an even bigger risk from the vaccines than the potential health issues. The voluntary (or forced) removal of our inalienable rights. This could literally destroy the world; this simple act.
So no, the benefits (none) do not outweigh the risks (eternal slavery).