Which vaccine would you get if your power was being turned off?

submitted by Blackbrownfreestuff from self.debatealtright

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Are u sure that retroviruses are the same as mRNA?

[–]Nombre27 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

They are and are not the same. They're both RNA, messenger RNA (mRNA) is simply a designation for RNA that is supposed to be converted into a protein. RNA viruses behave exactly the same when they infect a cell. They either have their own polymerases that replicate their genome or they hijack our polymerase. After infecting a cell, the viral genome also has it's proteins produced. Whether it's from DNA or RNA is largely irrelevant, if it's RNA then it skips transcription and can immediately produce proteins that are then packaged and put together as virions which usually go on to lyse or leak from a cell. Although this depends on whether it's a positive or negative sense RNA virus. Overall the variations from DNA or RNA and positive or negative sense simply mean a few more steps, but the end result is the same. For positive sense RNA viruses, they're basically mRNA.

Yes mRNA often has modifications at the beginning and end to make it more stable, signaling sequences, and other features relevant for whatever protein is encoded, but given what I've described above regarding how RNA viruses, and viruses in general, behave, the differences between a retrovirus and mRNA is pretty much taxonomical.

Retroviruses are RNA viruses that are capable of inserting themselves into a DNA genome. By doing this they allow the usually permanent propagation of themselves.

One of the more well-known retroviruses that does this is HIV.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/11/051128010951.htm

Does that answer your question?

[–]Blackbrownfreestuff[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ok so keep it simple, is the mRNA vaccine going to change my DNA, yes or no?

What about johnson & johnson vaccine, yes or no?

[–]Nombre27 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Depends on if the ingredients, primarily the RNA sequence, are actually what is listed in the vaccine. I'm pointing out that RNA can alter DNA and that what the OP said is factually incorrect.

Article from May 12 2021: Strongest Evidence Yet Shows SARS-CoV-2 May Insert Itself Into The Human Genome

The study cited:

SARS-CoV-2 RNA reverse-transcribed and integrated into the human genome

Prolonged SARS-CoV-2 RNA shedding and recurrence of PCR-positive tests have been widely reported in patients after recovery, yet these patients most commonly are non-infectious1–14. Here we investigated the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 RNAs can be reverse-transcribed and integrated into the human genome and that transcription of the integrated sequences might account for PCR-positive tests. In support of this hypothesis, we found chimeric transcripts consisting of viral fused to cellular sequences in published data sets of SARS-CoV-2 infected cultured cells and primary cells of patients, consistent with the transcription of viral sequences integrated into the genome. To experimentally corroborate the possibility of viral retro-integration, we describe evidence that SARS-CoV-2 RNAs can be reverse transcribed in human cells by reverse transcriptase (RT) from LINE-1 elements or by HIV-1 RT, and that these DNA sequences can be integrated into the cell genome and subsequently be transcribed. Human endogenous LINE-1 expression was induced upon SARS-CoV-2 infection or by cytokine exposure in cultured cells, suggesting a molecular mechanism for SARS-CoV-2 retro-integration in patients. This novel feature of SARS-CoV-2 infection may explain why patients can continue to produce viral RNA after recovery and suggests a new aspect of RNA virus replication.

Supposedly they think this might be incorrect and due to genetic artifacts, but who knows. It's molecular biology and requires further study and validation to determine what is happening. Obviously those people are still shedding the virus despite no longer being infectious, so the question is why.

https://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/releases/2021/Q2/the-covid-19-virus-may-not-insert-genetic-material-into-human-dna,-research-shows.html