Scientific Evidence Says Vaccinating With HPV Vaccine Is Ineffective, Dangerous For You And Your Daughters & Wrongly Promoted As “Anti-Cancer”

Thank God for researchers with courage who are prepared to tell the truth against the financial might of the drug industry, its manipulation and its political lobbying to market harmful ineffective drugs.

A peer reviewed well researched well referenced letter has been published in The Journal of Infectious Agents And Cancer telling the truth – yes – really – yes it has – honest to God:

Letter to the Editor HPV vaccines and cancer prevention, science versus activism Lucija Tomljenovic1*, Judy Wilyman2, Eva Vanamee3, Toni Bark4 and Christopher A Shaw1 1st February 2012 [.pdf version here].  

The analysis and text is insightful and important.  The letter would be valuable alone just for the papers and evidence it cites.

Using evidence from published peer reviewed literature and official sources, the letter rips into an editorial published 20 December 2012 in the Journal. 

The letter reveals scientific and factual evidence that the data behind claims that HPV vaccines prevent cancers and save lives with no risk of serious side effects areoptimistic” and contrary to the evidence and largely are from “significant misinterpretation of available data” which is “presented to the public as factual evidence

That translates to:

drug industry and government health officials making up BS

The authors use scientific and factual evidence to indicate how they say the editorial wrongly presented the complex scientific and factual issues as a simple battle between ‘unjustified “anti-HPV vaccine activism” vs alleged absolute science and indisputable evidence of HPV vaccine safety and efficacy.  That translates into:

the use of BS evidence passed off by one too many medical journals these days as science to accuse those who use good scientific and factual evidence to question validly the drug marketing hype and BS published in journals as if it were science

We apologise to our regular readers for the colloquial nature of the translations of the published peer reviewed text.  This has been included so that “scientists” who publish the kind of BS concerned can more easily understand and distinguish the valid science and facts from their normal diet of drug industry sponsored BS junk science.  Normal service will be resumed as soon as we can.

The vaccine safety profiles are based on highly flawed safety trial designs and are contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports linking the vaccines to serious side effects including death and permanent disabilities. That translates into:

the drug industry and government health officials hiding death and serious injury with BS so they can sell ever more vaccines and turn you and your daughters into pin-cushion profit centers

The letter shows that the efforts to get as many pre-adolescent girls vaccinated can be viewed validly as a cynical way for the drug industry to make money out of you and your daughters with hype and misrepresentation of the science and the facts.  Reduction of cervical cancers might be best achieved by optimizing cervical screening (which carries no serious health risks) and targeting other factors of the disease rather than by the reliance on vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.

The authors show:

  • HPV vaccines have not thus far prevented a single case of cervical cancer let alone death;
  • the evidence is that HPV vaccines prevent some pre-cancerous symptoms which mostly spontaneously resolve without vaccination and it is ineffective against other kinds of HPV infections;
  • the successes claimed are against a backdrop of high misclassification and poor diagnosis where diagnoses may just be error.

They say it is not science but an optimistic assumption that HPV vaccination will reduce 70% of cervical cancers – seemingly based on exaggerated and invalid extrapolations which fail to take into account important basic scientific issues like:

  • whether they can measure what they claim to;
  • that the vaccine cannot address all HPV infections and may cause an increase in those kinds of infections;
  • whether the vaccine has any effect for women who have multiple types of HPV infections and/or pre-existing HPV infections;

Merck’s Gardasil vaccine:

  • was priority Fast Tracked by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 6-months when it failed and continues to fail to meet any of the required criteria for Fast Track approval;
  • is demonstrably neither safer nor more effective than Pap screening combined with conventional prevention;
  • it cannot improve the diagnosis of serious cervical cancer outcomes

This has meant “unwarranted confidence in the new HPV vaccines” has “led to the impression that there was no need to actually evaluate their effectiveness“.

In the USA Gardasil alone is associated with 61% of all serious adverse reactions including 63.8% of all deaths and 81.2% cases of permanent disability in females younger than 30 years of age.

The unusually high frequency and consistency of adverse reactions worldwide with nervous system-related disorders ranking the highest, strongly suggests the vaccine is the cause along with repeated reports of very similar cases of the same serious adverse reactions.  Nervous system and autoimmune disorders are most frequently reported.

[ED: and what is the justification for the rush to approve a vaccine given to young girls when the majority of cervical cancers affect women over the age of 40-50? So why not make sure it is safe?  And by the time these girls are 40-50 years old there are likely to be effective treatments anyway.]  

5 Responses

  1. Years ago we did have vaccines and we did have catastrophes but then the vaccine company took the blame, accepted responsibility and moved on to safer vaccines such that I was thankful for my protection against DIPHTHERIA, TETANUS and SMALLPOX given at the tender age of 6 years or more.

    Today the vaccine companies take no blame, the government deny their PROMISES to pick up the bill unless you have a PhD, professorship and lifelong knowledge of immunology to back up your observation and EVIDENCE OF HARM.

    And while the old vaccines cause problems they NEVER did before possibly due to younger and younger and then younger age of delivery (in the womb today almost?) or repeat vaccines (RICHET and ANAPHYLAXIS not withstanding) or up to 11 or more vaccines at once (they can take it) or when having allergies or being ill means (keep shooting it into them); we have absolutely NO IDEA why we have health issues from vaccines or anything else government mandated.

    And we all know CORRELATION does not mean CAUSATION.

    So these EXPERTS, regulators, vaccine companies, government agencies make it themselves.

    For cows it was BS but for those that shoot us to death or injury its just S you know what!

  2. Here are some, (not all) important questions which the manufacturer and other Gardasil proponents are not able to answer:

    Whether it prevents cancer, necessity for boosters, if it increases risk of cancer, if it increases risk of cancer due to aluminium bound recombinant HPV DNA, if Gardasil vaccinated may donate blood without the aluminium bound recombinant HPV DNA causing serious health consequences for the recipient, if there is increased risk of autoimmune disorders due to the recombinant HPV DNA, if HPV is necessarily an infection transmitted by sexual intercourse, whether it causes genotoxicity, targets the relevant virus strains in different demographics,if the strains change in the course of time, adverse events due to concomitant administration with other vaccines, true extent of serious adverse events, long term serious side effects, what the results would be if a true placebo had been used in the clinical trials, what the results of clinical trials would be if Merck had not used their own exclusion criteria, if there is increased risk of blood clots when it is combined with oral contraceptives, if there is an increased risk of brain damage, consequences of “bridging” – extrapolation of study results from one group to another, potentially serious consequences if it is not thoroughly shaken, if it will increase risk of infertility, whether polysorbate is carcinogenic, health consequences due to combination of polysorbate and l-histidine, if aluminium adjuvant is safe, consequences of presence sodium borate, if it will increase risk of miscarriages, stillbirths or babies born with anomalies, if it is excreted in human milk, complete list of ingredients, whether possible benefits outweigh the risks.

  3. Who dares might win, who dont stay either happily not knowing what goes on or got harmed without knowing from what.
    I’m happy to know and I dare choose.

    What scares me most is the day where we have so many vaccines that doctors getting problems to recognize which type of dicease they face. Or getting problem recognize the sideeffects from vaccines.

    Overall it’s a society problem, that the general communication about vaccines is for or against.

    Let it be an open choice where you as a person/parent have to investigate information and be responsible for you and your kids life.

    Remember that in both cases you are responsible.

    When I was a kid most housewifes and house doctors knew the symtoms from kids dicease and knew how to treat them.
    The doctor made the visit in your home and you a had a reliable relation.
    Today we go to the doctor and we are in generally told its a flu or a cold and we leave the doctor with antibiotics, painkillers or nosespray in the pockets.
    Luckily it seems like we get a new generation of doctors that starts to ask questions like: What do you eat and how do you treat your self.
    Sometimes a good cup of camomille tea and a simple nosewash with plain saltwater, your bed and a good book can do it .

    By the way I have had serious injuries on my body and thoose doctors being involved fixing that have done a great job.

  4. i’ve asked myself if the risk of not vaccinating my children is worse than the risk of vaccination… my decision was easy… i can either ENSURE that my child is put at risk by injecting him with something that might be life threatening/debilitating OR my child might NEVER be exposed to any one of the 13+ diseases (most are curable) now on the childhood vaccination recommendation list… it’s a coin toss, but with vaccines it’s worse, it’s a roulette game… a game i’d rather not play

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: