A new study by researchers Tomljenovic and Shaw question whether the HPV vaccine even prevents cervical cancer.
“On January 12, 2011 the Annals of Medicine published a ground-breaking peer-reviewed paper titled,Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?,1written byrenowned researchers Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D.,and Christopher Shaw, Ph.D.”*
“Merck’s clinical trials were flawed because they used an aluminum adjuvant as a ‘placebo’ and only used saline as a comparative for minor, non-serious adverse reactions. With serious adverse reactions, they pooled the results from the saline group and the aluminum ‘placebo’ group. By doing this, they concealed the true rate of serious reactions.”*
Tomljenovic and Shaw cite these key messages:
- To date, the efficacy of HPV vaccines in preventing cervical cancer has not been demonstrated, while vaccine risks remain to be fully evaluated.
- Current worldwide HPV immunization practices with either of the two HPV vaccines appear to be neither justified by long-term health benefits nor economically viable, nor is there any evidence that HPV vaccination (even if proven effective against cervical cancer) would reduce the rate of cervical cancer beyond what Pap screening has already achieved.
- Cumulatively, the list of serious adverse reactions related to HPV vaccination worldwide includes deaths, convulsions, paraesthesia, paralysis, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), transverse myelitis, facial palsy, chronic fatigue syndrome, anaphylaxis, autoimmune disorders, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolisms, and cervical cancers.
- Because the HPV vaccination programme has global coverage, the long-term health of many women may be at risk against still unknown vaccine benefits.
- Physicians should adopt a more rigorous evidence-based medicine approach, in order to provide a balanced and objective evaluation of vaccine risks and benefits to their patients.
- The almost exclusive reliance on manufacturers’ sponsored studies, often of questionable quality, as a basis for vaccine policy-making should be discontinued.
- Greater efforts should be made to minimize the undue commercial influences on academic institutions and medical research, as this influence may impede unbiased scientific inquiry into important questions about vaccine science and policies.
- Passive adverse event surveillance should be replaced by active surveillance to better understand the true risks associated with vaccines, particularly new vaccines.*
*Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034636_vaccinations_quack_science_medical_journals.html#ixzz1jMeEhOHn
I know if I raise objections to a vaccine there are certain people who will try to discredit me with various tactics, such as name calling, branding me a nut or such. I expect bigoted comments from these comments.
There are several assumptions about HPV vaccines and their ability to protect against cervical cancer: that the HPV vaccine is effective; that the HPV vaccine is safe; that the HPV vaccine is necessary; that there are no alternatives to the HPV vaccine.
EFFECTIVE AGAINST CERVICAL CANCER ? UNPROVEN !!
Merck, the manufacture of Gardasil has been forbidden by the FDA to market this vaccine as a anti cervical cancer vaccine. It is marketed as a vaccine for HPV. There are no clinical trials which would establish efficacy as a treatment for cervical cancer. Why ? Because a clinical trial would take about 50 years, as Girls inoculated with the vaccine would have to be tracked though about age 60, as cervical cancer does not show up early. Any claim that the HPV vaccine is a cervical cancer vaccine is based on ignorance, or gross speculation.
SAFETY
In 2009, Dr. Diane Harper, lead researcher in HPV at University of Minnesota Gynecological Cancer Prevention Group went on record stating that the rate of serious adverse reactions to the HPV vaccines was greater than the rate of cervical cancer. These reactions include death ( so far over 60 reported ) and permanent sever disabilities ( over 300 reported ) ( numbers are for the U.S. ) In other words, there are more problems caused by the vaccine than cervical cancer. Treatment of cervical cancer, according to the CDC, has a success rate of about 75 percent. There is no known treatment for death caused by this vaccine.
ADDITIONAL UNCERTAINTIES
The affect of this vaccine on fertility is unknown, and likewise, it is unknown if this vaccine itself could cause cancer in humans.
INFLATED CLAIMS OF CANCER RATE
Proponents of HPV vaccinations like to cite the world wide rate of cervical cancer to scare people into accepting HPV vaccines. They fail to mention the rate for the U.S. where regular screening occurs is much lower. According to the CDC for the U.S. cervical cancer represents one percent of all cancers, about ten thousand per year, with a twenty five percent mortality rate.
ALTERNATIVES
Testing a potential partner for STD is an alternative not generally suggested. There is an assumption that HPV infections are inevitable.
TRUSTING FDA, MERCK ?
Since the approval process was accelerated for pharmaceuticals products ( drugs, appliances, vaccines ) as instituted in the Clinton administration, one quarter of all approved products have been recalled and banned. Why ? Because they either kill people or are ineffective. Take Merck’s Vioxx for example. Vioxx was allowed to be on the market for five years, killing somewhere between thirty five thousand and one hundred thousand people via heart attack. To put this in perspective that is approximately three to five times the rate of death than the current rate of death for cervical cancer. Merck has great incentive to make a killing off Gardasil vaccine, as it has to pay for the wrongful deaths caused by its Vioxx drug. Now we are supposed to trust Merck and the government that the deaths associated with HPV vaccines are purely coincidental ? That’s the same nonsense that they clung to for years with Vioxx, while people died. Does the Leopard change its Spots ? I don’t think so. Death and disability are apparently part of the cost of doing business in the trillion dollar pharmaceutical industry.
CONCLUSION
Just say no the the unproven, unsafe, and unnecessary HPV vaccines that are promoted to be cervical cancer cures. Taking an unproven cure from a disease that may be occur thirty five years later is unprecedented. Why risk death and disability of the youth ? This promotion of the HPV vaccine as a ‘cure ‘ for cervical cancer assumes there will be no advancements in medicine in the next thirty five years, so go with this risky, unproven treatment we have today. This is pure nonsense.
I think its ironic, that the mainstream medical industry holds the double blind, controlled clinical trial as the gold standard for proving efficacy, and would condemn any alternative that doesn’t provide this scientific testing ( and a list of ingredients ) as snake oil or quack medicine, but does not hold the HPV vaccines to the same standard.
Seems like a serious world public health issue- OH I forgot, the pharmaceutical company’s and W.H.O. headquarters are beside each other in the same city.