Can mRNA COVID-19 vaccines alter your DNA? Here’s what the CDC and ‘Fact-Checkers’ got wrong.

Summary of Key Points

• The entire “public health” establishment and the mainstream media’s censorship-promoting “fact checkers” have maintained since even before mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines were available that scientists know with absolute certainty that the mRNA from the vaccines cannot alter human DNA. However, the arguments used to support that conclusion consist of factual and logical errors.
• One argument presented by the establishment is that the mRNA (and spike protein) from COVID‑19 vaccines is eliminated from the body within hours or days at the most. But that is false. Scientists have shown that the mRNA (and spike protein) can persist in the body for months.
• The main argument used by the CDC and others is that the mRNA does not enter the cell nucleus, where the DNA is located, and therefore it is impossible for the genetic instructions from the vaccine to be integrated into the DNA of the vaccinated person. But that is a non sequitur fallacy. In fact, there is a mechanism, long understood by scientists, by which mRNA is “reverse transcribed” into DNA, which then is potentially capable of entering the cell nucleus and being incorporated into the host DNA.
• While the CDC and most “fact checkers” contented themselves with that non sequitur, a few prominent sources did acknowledge the ability of mRNA to be changed into DNA via the enzyme reverse transcriptase. They argued that the vaccine mRNA does not encode for that enzyme and therefore it is impossible for the mRNA to be reverse transcribed into DNA. But that is another non sequitur fallacy. It overlooks the fact that the body makes its own reverse transcriptase, and thus the theoretical possibility remains.
• A study published in February 2022 demonstrated reverse transcription of COVID‑19 vaccine mRNA into DNA in human cells in a lab. This study did not prove that this occurs in the living body. The researchers also did not go so far as to determine whether that DNA could then integrate itself into the DNA of the cell line they used for the study. What it proved, however, is that the key claims made to deny the biological plausibility of this outcome, which we have been constantly bombarded with by the establishment, are false.
• In another study that has not yet been peer reviewed, another group of scientists reported the finding that mice exposed to the mRNA-encapsulating lipid nanoparticles from a COVID‑19 vaccine had altered gene expression that was inheritable by their offspring. This does not mean that the vaccine altered the DNA of the mice because alteration of DNA is not necessary for genetic traits to be inheritable. The field of science known as “epigenetics” is dedicated to understanding how gene expression is altered by environmental factors such as heavy metals, pesticides, bacteria, viruses, and vaccines.
• The media’s “fact checkers” have claimed that mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines are not gene therapy while self-contradictorily attempting to reassure the public that the technology used in these vaccines is not new, which alludes to years of prior research and development of mRNA technology for gene therapy.
• Correcting for the errors made by the CDC and others leads us inescapably to the conclusion that scientists do not yet know whether a consequence of mass vaccinating billions of people will be inheritable alterations to genes or gene expression. They do not know because it has not been studied. The “public health” establishment has instead been acting on faith that this will not occur with these mRNA products.
• While the sheer number of hoax “fact check” articles has lent an appearance of numerous media outlets all independently investigating and arriving at the same conclusion, in fact, many are partnered with the Poynter Institute and social media companies like Facebook and Twitter in an organized effort to suppress certain information. The criterion for whether information is to be suppressed is transparently not factual accuracy but whether it aligns with the certain government policies, such as the policy goal of increasing demand for COVID‑19 vaccines.
• The Poynter Institute has received funding for its ostensible fact-checking efforts from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is dedicated to promoting global vaccination campaigns and has partnered with Moderna, the manufacturer of one of the two mRNA COVID‑19 vaccines used in the US. The US government, too, is partnered with Moderna and even claims joint ownership of its COVID‑19 vaccine. The “fact check” industry consists of a web of such conflicting interests, with the illusion of “independent” fact checkers being heightened by their reliance on each other’s ostensible journalism and incessant repetition of the same government-sanctioned disinformation.

Introduction

Ever since the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were first authorized for emergency use by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the government’s mass vaccination agenda got underway, we have been repeatedly told by the “public health” establishment and the mainstream media that it is a “myth” that the messenger RNA from the vaccines could become incorporated into human DNA. It is a “fact”, we are told, that since the mRNA from these pharmaceutical products never enters the cell nucleus, where the DNA resides, it cannot be integrated into the host genome.

That argument, however, is a non sequitur fallacy: the conclusion that mRNA cannot be integrated into the DNA does not logically follow from the premise that the mRNA never enters the cell nucleus. What that argument overlooks is that scientists have long understand that mRNA can be “reverse transcribed” into DNA—and then that DNA could in turn theoretically be integrated into the host DNA.

In fact, the PCR tests that have been so widely used to diagnose COVID‑19 work by using reverse transcription. While oftentimes referred to simply as “PCR” for short, they are technically known as reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction assays, or “RT‑qPCR”.[1] SARS‑CoV‑2, the coronavirus that causes COVID‑19, is an RNA virus. Fragments of viral RNA, if present in the patient sample, are first reverse transcribed into DNA, and then the DNA is cyclically amplified. This process mimics the reverse transcription that occurs in nature.

There are viruses known as retroviruses that are known to incorporate genetic material into the human genome. In fact, scientists estimate that about 8 percent of our DNA consists of remnants of ancient viruses, and an additional 40 percent is believed to have a viral origin. The mechanism by which this occurs with some RNA viruses is reverse transcription.[2]

In February 2022, a lab study was published in the journal Current Issues in Molecular Biology showing that the mRNA from the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 vaccine was reverse transcribed into DNA in a human liver cell line. The study is titled “Intracellular Reverse Transcription of Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 In Vitro in Human Liver Cell Line”.

As stated in the title, the study authors demonstrated this in vitro, meaning outside of the body in an artificial environment, so their findings do not prove that the vaccine mRNA can be reverse transcribed into DNA in vivo, or in the living body. Furthermore, they did not demonstrate that the reverse transcribed DNA incorporates itself into the DNA of the host cells.[3]

Consequently, we cannot draw the conclusion that the vaccine mRNA can become incorporated into human DNA. Nevertheless, the study proves how the “fact checkers” have been relying on a logical fallacy and falsifies their conclusion that scientists know this to be impossible. Notably, in perpetrating this deception, the media are simply following the example set by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

In short, the mainstream media’s self-described “fact checkers” have been hypocritically propagating misinformation, which content is then used by social media companies like Facebook to suppress truthful information about COVID‑19 vaccines.

A review of what the CDC and the media’s “fact checkers” have been saying in comparison with what we know from the scientific literature is instructive, as is an examination of the conflicting interests of the “fact check” industry.