A Pfizer director of mRNA research and development, Jordon Trishton Walker, has been caught on tape saying what many women of childbearing age have most feared. He, too, worries about the longterm effect of the COVID-19 vaccine on the female hormonal balance, a key to fertility.

In an undercover video released by Project Veritas, he discusses the possibility that hitherto unknown aspects of mRNA technology in the COVID-19 vaccine could affect women’s hormonal and menstrual cycles.

Dr. Walker said, “There is something irregular about the menstrual cycles. So, people will have to investigate that down the line.”

“The [COVID-19] vaccine shouldn’t be interfering with that [menstrual cycles]. So, we don’t really know,” he said.

He also said in the video, “I hope we don’t find out that somehow this mRNA lingers in the body and like — because it has to be affecting something hormonal to impact menstrual cycles.”

“I hope we don’t discover something really bad down the line…If something were to happen downstream and it was, like, really bad? I mean, the scale of that scandal would be enormous.”

Why did the vaccine have an effect it was not supposed to have? He looks to two areas of the body–first, the brain. Since the blood-brain barrier should prevent vaccine interference, he thinks this shouldn’t be the root cause of changes in the menstrual cycle.

The problem might also be in the Hypothalamus-Pituitary-Gonadal axis. “Well, that’s why I understand that it’s weird,” he said. “So, somehow, that vaccine must be interacting with that axis, the HPG axis, to be causing problems with the menstrual cycles.” He agreed this could impact the fertility cycle. “Yeah, because they control the cycle. So if it’s impacting that, it must impact these hormones somehow,” he said.

Again, this shouldn’t be happening. But in Walker’s opinion, it is happening. The trillion-dollar question is why? Schools, colleges, corporations, and (under President Biden) the military and the federal government removed personal choice from women who worried about the vaccine’s effect on their fertility. No jab, no job, and no school was the rule in many areas.

Even if fertility issues affected only a portion of these women, the demographic impact would be tragic and irreparable. Fertility is already at an all-time low.

Some women fought taking the vaccine because they feared it would make it harder to get pregnant. Bonnie Jacobson, a New York waitress, had this fear and was fired, and she was not alone in losing her job under the public and private sector mandate regime.

The first rule in ethics is never to act on a doubtful conscience. Thus, if you are doing an experiment that may or may not blow up the lab, your first duty is to determine that it will not blow up the lab before you begin. Only then can you ethically act. Acting if you are unsure of what the effect would be is both immoral and reckless.

The medical shorthand for all this is that a doctor, as well as a drug manufacturer, is obliged to “First do no harm.” Did the lure of money and the granting of blanket immunity cause Pfizer to be reckless, or to adopt a less rigorous “do some harm” approach? What ethical standard of care did it employ? How fully did Pfizer vet the COVID-19 vaccine before releasing it to the public? If not thoroughly, would this be the largest medical experiment in human history?

Project Veritas’s video prompts many such questions. Congress needs to find some answers so legislation can be crafted to ensure public safety. It needs to find out how tax dollars were spent in this process.  mRNA technology may be the wave of the future. It is up to Congress to ensure it does not become a tidal wave.

This content was originally published here.