On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject does get broken down and is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines. It takes it from basically impossible (cytosolic mRNA) to not very likely (viral injected dsDNA).

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject does get broken down and is still very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines.

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.

On the contrary, J&J and AZ are more likely to alter DNA because they inject actual dsDNA (a new hard drive) into the nucleus. They also do just as much to alter mRNA (the software).

This dsDNA that they inject does get broken down and is very unlikely to get incorporated into the cells DNA before it is broken down. HOWEVER, it is much, MUCH more likely to be mutagenic than the mRNA from the Pfizer/Moderna (P/M) vaccines.

P/M inject the mRNA into the cytosol where it makes the protein.

J&J and AZ inject an adenovirus, which attacks the cells, gets into the cells, then attacks the nucleus. It injects the spike protein DNA into the nucleus. The nucleus makes the mRNA, that gets carried out into the cytosol, and then it makes the spike protein, just like the Pfizer and Moderna.

Anyone who thinks the J&J/AZ are less invasive are completely clueless. As to which is safer, if I had to guess it would be P/M, because of the fewer steps, less invasive nature and much less likely chance of altering the DNA.

However, only data could really tell us, and that is being hidden.