[amirkdv]

> Just wait for antivaxers to hear 'DNA' and go wild.

Sure the already anti-vaccination crowd will have more reasons to be peeved and more talking points to scream about. But would it mean new people would turn against vaccines because they hear "DNA"?

It seems to me like the big divide in the general population is over people who are open to their conceptions of nature be challenged and corrected (this whole pandemic has been a mini science course for a lot of people: exponential growth, conditional probability, mRNAs, to name a few) and those who just are not. Any other pre-existing opinion/ideology ("I just don't do vaccines") is probably unaffected by technical details.

[yyyk]

As I mentioned the West already has existing vaccines and the worst stage is (I believe) ending. The new people will hear 'DNA' and instead of turning against vaccines, take the existing vaccines. Health authorities will be wary of mixing (so no use as boosters) and accusations of going too fast, will take their time with DNA vaccines.

There was an opening for new tech to win acceptance and mRNA won the race, I doubt there's room for DNA vaccines this time. Maybe if the tech could be used for some other disease.

[vanderZwan]

Because the DNA has to go into the nucleus maybe? That's even more easily misunderstood in an "oh no what if it messes with my genetic make-up" way than mRNA.