I am writing to you in regards to the COVID-19 vaccination clinics, which you have requested I participate in.
I am unwilling to administer COVID-19 vaccinations to individuals, for a number of reasons I will cover in this letter, and I very much hope we can come to a mutual agreement on this matter.
In the first instance, I am ethically opposed to administering the AstraZeneca vaccine, as it contains a cell line derived from aborted foetuses (1). I am opposed to this morally, philosophically, and on principle, and therefore cannot in good conscience apply this treatment to patients.
Although the Pfizer vaccine does not contain cell lines from aborted foetuses, both the Pfizer and the AstraZeneca vaccine constitute experimental therapies, which are not approved for general use and have a licence for emergency purposes only.
Leading on from this, the vaccines are still being trialled for safety, and trials will not be complete until January 2023 (2).
As a result of this, the data is not available to evidence that these injections are, in the long-term, safe. The accelerated nature of development by definition means we have no data on how these products might affect patients in the long-term.
When attempts in the past have been made to develop coronavirus vaccines, these have always failed, due to vaccinated individuals developing a syndrome known as “vaccine enhancement”, whereby, when vaccinated individuals are exposed to the wild virus, they develop far worse symptoms than those who were not vaccinated (3). These effects are not instant, and may yet materialise in COVID-19 vaccinated individuals.
The UK Government has confirmed there is a possibility of COVID-19 vaccinations causing severe disability and impairment in some individuals, and has structured a compensation programme accordingly (4).
Patients are not reliably informed of the above, and the guidelines of informed consent that govern the NHS' work, as per the Montgomery ruling (5), state that they must be – that patients must be warned of all ‘material risks’ of any medical treatment, including risks considered less common, before their consent can be considered truly informed, and therefore, legally valid.
I am concerned that administering these experimental injections to patients, without expressly informing them they are experimental and of all the possible risks, is in violation of the Nuremberg Code (6), which states that, where it comes to medical experimentation, the voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
Given my grave concerns as documented above, I would very much appreciate your prompt and written acknowledgement that I will not be expected to participate in administering COVID-19 vaccinations, which I am ethically opposed to, and which I have robust reason to believe could cause more harm than good to patients, since, as yet, the evidence to prove otherwise does not exist.
Therefore, I cannot gamble with individuals’ health by administering these injections without the available data to assure me these products are ultimately more beneficial than harmful.
I have taken advice pertaining to my rights in this area, and I am instructed that it is reasonable for me to decline my employer’s request to administer experimental therapies, without my suffering any disadvantage or penalty for so declining.
I look forward to hearing from you.