A Reader's Story on her concerns about the mRNA vaccines

And why she decided to skip them

NE - nakedemperor.substack.com

I recently saw a comment on the Insights from Beyond the Grave substack, from a reader expressing her concerns about the Covid vaccines. This person is highly qualified and I have looked at 14 of her published articles online (not related to Covid). She said she had documented her thoughts at the time and I asked if I could read what she had written. I have left her anonymous for now but she is free to make herself known if she wants to in the comments below. Her story (with her permission) is below.

I am a scientist. I have a BSc in Biochemistry and a PhD in Human Genetics. My PhD thesis was the epidemiology of genetics variants of folate metabolism in the population and the possible link to neural tube defects and other complications of pregnancy. I also did a postdoctoral fellowship in innate immunology in pregnancy and the connection between infection and preterm labour. I also worked as a research associate in biostatistical analysis of gene arrays. I am also more vaccinated with standard vaccines than most members of the public because my work required I attend autopsies. I retired from active university life and have since worked writing and publishing and doing occasional short term consulting position with Virtual Ability and Gulf Specimen Marine Laboratory in the USA.

Just before the outbreak was declared a friend’s mother came to visit from China and stay. Just before she left China, relatives from Wuhan came to visit her to see her off. She arrived feeling ill on arrival. We very soon had a very nasty flu circulating in our community. The Chinese woman’s grandson became so ill he required antibiotic and antiviral treatment for pneumonia. My husband and I also got very sick. I did call about getting testing. We ere not eligible for testing because we did not have any direct connection to Wuhan. I was bedridden for five days. My husband was mildly affected but he developed what we later found out matched the description of “COVID toes”. He went on to have a mild stroke and ended up in hospital for five days. I therefore suspect we both already had the virus but none of the doctors who were involved in his care took this idea seriously.

When the Sars-CoV-2 pandemic was declared I was deeply concerned by the government response. It seemed very strange to me to shut down the entire economy to deal with a virus that appeared to be highly transmissible respiratory virus that was a cross over from an animal reservoir. (if they come from an animal reservoir you can't ever hope to eradicate them in humans.) While the media reports were extremely concerning, factually the disease seemed to be relatively mild about twice the fatality rate of flu and largely impacting the elderly population and those with comorbidities.

However, at that point I still trusted the authorities and I did my best to follow their directions. As the lock downs continued it seemed to violate the basic principal of not making the cure worse is than the disease. I eventually joined those signing the Great Barrington Declaration. I wrote to government officials, my MLA and MP and directly to members of the health department. I got back platitudes, was referred to the official government web pages or I was ignored.

Like most members of the public I was eagerly awaiting the vaccines. My husband and I probably had natural immunity but the vaccines seemed to be a miracle. When they first came out we were eager to get in line for our own chance to get vaccinated. I was not familiar with the mRNA technology so I began reading what I could find on it. What I read made me uneasy. Why introduce an mRNA vector into our own cells to force them to express the spike protein? The immune system can have a very strong response to fragments of antigens. why introduce this new technology? How were the quantities of antigen produced by the introduction of mRNA going to be controlled? What was to prevent a reverse transcriptase accidental insertion into the DNA if there was coinfection with another virus or just some of the other weird things that happen in cells.

These are very rare but if you vaccinate millions of people you are going to get some very rare incidents. The literature I read assured me that any expressed spike protein would remain in the membrane of the cells involved but having a strong understanding of the enzyme mutations of genetic storage disease, I was dubious. There are multiple enzymes out there and some of them are not very specific. What if the spike protein was clipped by one of them and began circulating? Also, if we had our own cells expelling a foreign antigen, what would happen if the immune system was accidentally primed to attack all the cell types expressing that foreign antigen? Gene therapy was still in its infancy and there have been some real unforeseen catastrophes including unexplained sudden death in test subjects because we simply don’t understand all the workings of the cell. “Safe and effective” felt a bit too glib. I just did not feel comfortable with this new mRNA therapy. I decided to read the Pfizer Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for an Unapproved Product Review Memorandum.

As I read the document I quite literally felt the hairs on the back of my neck rise. There were, in my opinion, red flags all over the study. I was specifically concerned about the following points. Pfizer reported four cases of Bell’s Palsy among the vaccinated but none among the controls. They stated that this rate of bell’s Palsy was within the normal rates that would occur in the population and was therefore not statistically significant nor a concern. It seems to me to be red flag indicating more study was required with a larger group. Since Bell’s Palsy is an infection related neurological phenomena it also seemed to me it would have been prudent to expand the study to a larger group before continuing population wide application. 40,000 would not be enough to pick up rare side effects. The study should also have been longer. Two months is just not long enough to pick up longer term adverse effects. I assumed since this was an emergency authorization there would be ongoing safety monitoring.

The first real red flag can be found in Table 2, page 18. There were 311 cases excluded for protocol deviations. only 60 placebos were excluded. Fives times as many cases had been excluded. Those two numbers should have been the same. Why were five times as many cases excluded as controls for protocol deviation? I recall thinking at the time ‘What was the protocol deviation? Did they die?”

My second concern was Table 4 (page 20) showing demographics of the study participants. Although the disease primarily effects older individuals most of the study participants (79%) were under the age of 65. Since those under 65 are unlikely to have severe disease and were reportedly often having near to asymptomatic reactions on encountering the virus, it seemed to me many infections could potentially be missed which would skew the results in favour of the vaccine.

My third concern was the possibility of antibody dependent enhancement which is a common occurrence in past attempts to create a coronavirus vaccine. Pfizer only reported “nonclinical studies.” I have no idea what “non clinical studies” means and no numbers of test subjects among mice or Rhesus money’s were given. Pfizer was reassured by this report. I was not. (page 46)

Efficacy of the vaccine was being reported at extremely high values (Table 8, page 25) but I could not find any data indicating confirmed infections rates for the population where the study took place. Thus, it would be impossible to know actual infection rates in the total population. This could mean Pfizer was quoting relative risk reduction not absolute risk reduction. If there was very low exposure in the study group, efficiency based on relative risk reduction could seem very high when in fact the results were not significant due to very low infection rates in the total population. Since the study was conducted during a period of lockdowns, limited interactions and ongoing infection control measures, I felt an actual infection rate for the entire population in which the study was being conducted from an independent source was warranted. I did not find it.

Most alarming to me was reports of a 36 year old male with no medical comorbidities who developed what appeared to be full blown COVID. The symptoms began on Day 2 after the second shot. Pfizer attributed this case to one of three causes, an adverse reaction to the vaccine, a false negative PCR test in someone infected with the virus, or another infectious process. A two day bout of another infectious process and a false negative PCR test seemed highly unlikely to me. Further, symptoms of suspected cases of COVID occurring in the vaccine group in days 1-7 happened twice as often as in the placebo group yet there appeared to be no PCR testing to confirm COVID. This report precisely matched my concerns about the possibility of the spike protein traveling outside the muscle area in larger than expected quantities causing the very disease it was supposed to prevent. An alternative explanation was the transient reduction in lymphocytes days 1-3 noted in Phase 1 which might mean a period of enhanced vulnerability to infection immediately after receiving the vaccine. It was based on this result I decided I was not satisfied with Pfizer’s safety data and I would not take the vaccine.

Imagine my shock to find only a few months later my informed decision to not consent based on my experience and qualifications as a scientist would result in my being turned into a minority status denying me all kinds of freedoms and rights. I went from being an informed expert to suddenly being an “antivaxxer” pariah refusing to do my part for society and being personally responsible for the continuation of the pandemic and endangering the vulnerable populations (of which I happen to be a part.) Everything I know about ethics like informed consent, and bodily integrity is being violated.

Something is very wrong here.

Source: The Naked Emperor's Newsletteer