Will you get covid vaccine

The concern these mRNA vaccines could alter DNA evidently has been making its away around various communities.

RNA can potentially alter DNA in a certain set of narrow circumstances. This is the pathway of a retrovirus. A retrovirus is equipped with mechanisms by which to translocate from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. Additionally, a successful retrovirus would have an upstream primer for reverse-transcriptase enabling it to potentially hijack nuclear DNA and replicate with a potential for altering the host DNA.

These mRNA vaccines do not have a mechanism by which to translocate from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. In addition they do not have primers for reverse-transcriptase or any other enzymes which may be necessarily to gain access to the anti-sense strand of the DNA double helix and allow for reverse transcription with a potential DNA alterations.

It is important to remember these vaccines consist of a small mRNA fragment. They are not a RNA genome as one would expect to find in a retrovirus. These strands are very fragile, so fragile they require cold storage and must be encased in a lipid bubble just to stay together long enough to make its way into the cellular cytoplasm. Once there, the fragment survives long enough to act in concert with tRNA and rRNA to construct a spike protein before it succumbs to intra-cellular conditions.

First dose. Everyone can debate vaccines, but I am happy to get it.

What is the minimum time for vaccine development with which you are comfortable? Eg 2yrs, 5, 10, etc...

What will these effects be? How long will it take for these effects to surface? How much time must pass to alleviate such a concern if these effects are not observed in any meaningful way?

This is interesting and seems to be a rather common minority sentiment. Is there something scientific or magical about a period of 1,826 days? Would you expect vaccine development today to take the same amount of time as in the first historical efforts? Are the vaccines which averaged a 5 year development the same type of vaccines we see here, namely mRNA or could the very nature of the present vaccines reduce the amount of time needed for development?

The sentiment seems to be those vaccinated should expect some type of unspecified side effects over an indefinite period of time. Would you attribute the development of any adverse medical conditions in a vaccinated person to the vaccines in perpetuity? If not, which should be ascribed to the vaccines?

Essentially this is science turned on its head. A conclusion is reached and evidence/results will have to be cherry picked to support the forgone conclusion.

mRNA vaccine research has been ongoing since the 1980’s. Have you considered the development of a specific mRNA vaccine may require less time to develop than more traditional vaccines, particularly when done so in the context of a worldwide effort aided by governments, quasi-government institutions, charitable organizations, and private corporations?

Concluding there will be widespread, unspecified adverse effects and using caution with an open mind are two entirely different undertakings. Concluding widespread adverse effects will occur and cherry-picking evidence/data to support a forgone conclusion is certainly turning science on its head.

I do not understand why having covid a few weeks ago would be a problem.

"There is merely commentary on a certain line of thinking and its generally necessary end."

Considering mine is the position you have been peppering with questions, you need to be more specific about this "certain line of reasoning" lest you come across to others as accusing people falsely.