mRNA vaccine doesn't fit the definition you supplied for #1.
#2 Agreed, if you believe what they say about the injection.
#3 While I agree for the most part, are you 100% certwin that the piece of RNA can't make it into the nucleus, for example if it's injected into a cell that's undergoing a split.
You need a metric ton of different enzymes to transport genetic material into the nucleus and to incorporate it into the DNA. This is too complicated for a simple mRNA sequence, but some viruses can do the trick. The AstraZeneca vaccine uses viruses to produce RNA in the nucleus, so it has walked half of the way. Scientists use viruses to cure hereditary diseases. This is were the danger comes from, because some scientists will not stop there. First they will try to keep the body young forever. Then they will create super soldiers. Then they will use the virus to sterilize a selected group of people. Then they will use viruses that replicate in humans, so they don't need the injections. Better keep an eye on this development and don't cry wolf too early.
I see. I've heard of horizontal gene transfer so I know it's possible, if unlikely. For example there could be another virus in the cell that will somehow insert that piece of mRNA into the DNA.
But even then - the cell does not survive anyway. The mRNA produces material that is presented by the cell to the immune system, so the immune system learns to fight against it. The first action in this fight is to kill the cell (before the cell can produce whole viruses) (this is why the vaccine has some side effects like itching).
#1
or of a portion of the pathogen's structure
That's what it creates.
#2 Thousands of people would all have to be lying. If you're that distrustful, there are other things you should be worrying about before you worry about this.
#3 So what if it does? It won't be replicated. It'll stay with the original cell until it dies. It also won't have any effect in the nucleus, protein synthesis takes place in the ribosomes.
(post is archived)