Well even if it were. Possible something doesn’t mean the same as actual something. Hence why I said there is no evidence saying it IS happening.
Discussion
You're seemingly just a step away from coming to terms with the likely reality. I understand that in order to get something reviewed and published they have to skirt around making certain declarations, but if we have DNA contamination (confirmed as far as I'm concerned), a mechanistic pathway for that to get into cells with a carrier (also confirmed), and the expected outcomes from this (a rise in cancers and autoimmune conditions), I don't need another "peer reviewed" study to recognise what is probably going on. The same way we could use logical deduction to heed caution without a deep understanding of the science involved when this was all first introduced.
Retrospective analysis will determine what is happening, but let's be honest here, the mounting evidence isn't looking good right now. The claims may be proven to be inaccurate, but they are far from baseless.
That’s the issue. You say it’s confirmed. It’s not. There is no evidence showing it DOES happen. You’re taking a potential and assuming an actual.
My concern is how people just take a risk. A speculation. A concern. And then leap to that thing happening. It may well be, but there are many life risks which equally turn out to be nothing. The world has lost respect for knowledge and scientific pow.
The risk here was trusting the government with a new, undertested and rushed product which people were largely coerced into taking.
Scientific work turned into consensus rather than transparent methodology, that is how we ended up here in the first place. "All the experts agree" is fallacious reasoning and not proof of anything other than a demonstration that people's opinions can be bought, and it is the baseline reasoning for all the claims the establishment makes.
A year ago, or two, or three, the risk was almost entirely speculation, and (warranted) skepticism. Now we have a lot of verifiable data which has confirmed some of the speculation. Other confirmations one way or another will come with time.
DNA contamination IS confirmed. Integration within the carrier for delivery IS apparent. Genomic alteration and integration is a logical outcome from this. I guess it's up to you to decide what is sufficient evidence, although you may have to come to terms with how the data is/has been manipulated when it comes to an increase in cancers and a decline in birth rates.
Nothing you have shown confirms dna contamination of the subject.
The paper I linked to doesn't confirm DNA contamination in the Pfizer shot? You're sure?
You’re doing it again. It’s not about contamination of the shot. It’s about if that can rewrite peoples dna. You’re either deliberately conflating these two or you misunderstand there is a distinction.
Sure, the presence of all the required mechanisms for DNA integration, doesn't guarantee integration. Perhaps someone will fund a formal study on this.