People must remember, there is no magic bullet out there. To prevent cancer, you need to do the healthy things, like detoxification, eat fruits and vegetables, exercise, you can also take supplement like probiotics and enzyme. For me, I will not touch medication, but I do take herbs.
Nope. Studies show that the vaccine is safe and prevents precancerous lesions; see e.g. "Quadrivalent Vaccine against Human Papillomavirus to Prevent High-Grade Cervical Lesions", N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1915-1927 and "Overall efficacy of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against grade 3 or greater cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: 4-year end-of-study analysis of the randomised, double-blind PATRICIA trial", Lancet. It really looks like the vaccines are going to prevent a lot of cancer to me.
@dankegel yes the studie funded by the drug companies is going to be unbiased, the same drug companies that say that mercury preservatives are safe to be injected into people.
@tv321123 I can understand wanting somebody other than the drug company to confirm a vaccine's safety. Happily, the CDC and a large HMO did just that; they studied whether Gardasil caused a dozen autoimmune diseases in about 300,000 women; they found no increased risk from all but one disease, and that one only had a slightly increased risk. See kegel.com/hpv/safety for links.
@tv321123 I haven't found any evidence of that. Where did you read that?
I did find a report by UPI from 2003, "UPI Investigates: The vaccine conflict", which mentions that scientists with vaccine patents were allowed to serve on the ACIP, which sets vaccination policy. Evidently that has changed since then; "The structure, role, and procedures of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)" (2001, Vaccine) says this is no longer allowed.
Google: " h t tp://wwwDOTomsjDOTorg/corruption/scandal-exposed-in-mercury-autism-study~ Google: 'Media pushes 'sucess' of experimental GSK malaria vaccine while ignoring deadly side effects" Sunday, October 23, 2011 Ethan Huff. There are now over 15,000 signatures on The National Vaccine Information Center [NVIC] Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition at wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx.'SwineFluVaccinesHaveNowBeenConclusivelyToChronicNeurologicaldisorders"
*There Are Now Over 15,000 signatures on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition. wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx ~ ~ ~ ~
GOOGLE: " Swine flu vaccines have now been "conclusively linked" to chronic neurological disorders." Here's the report on this, including an explanation of why and how drug companies use vaccines to ensure future profits from degenerative disease: Mike Adams, The Health Ranger At Natural News Dt Cm~
GOOGLE: " CVS pharmacy promotes flu shot propaganda using life-sized grim reapers" [IT'S HILARIOUS!] Mike Adams, the Health Ranger At Natural News Dt Cm~
google: " Swine flu vaccines have now been "conclusively linked" to chronic neurological disorders." Here's the report on this, including an explanation of why and how drug companies use vaccines to ensure future profits from degenerative disease: Mike Adams of Natural News Dt Cm~
Not a fan of Alex Jones, he hypes stuff up, just to freak ppl out. I like the above video, from think twice, it does a wonderful job of explaining things.
'mercury deposits in breast milk and in much larger amounts than in the vaccine'
Yeah, right (sarcasm)! Where did you get that one from? Natural selection isn't survival of the fittest, that social darwinism which is a retarded idea! And, are you some kind of a cave 'tard who has been defrosted?
But why now day's, the very corps' who produce the VAX's and depend on gross profit for share holders hence the perpetual expansion Thus forth i put it to you, the VAX's the contraceptive pill and anti depressant cause more effects than they cure !
Not bad, but that means our kids get sick, just look around at all the low self esteem kids, adht, depression, all in the last 10 years, VAX them young Keep them dumb ?
@TisGiraf Hmm, there are over 100 HVP's, only 4 in the VAX, if your not a virgin when they give you the VAX Then you have dueled up on 2 of them Hence your 80% more likely to get cancer regardless !
Please just think before putting aluminum or Mercury through the bodies of undeveloped children especially YOUR OWN !
Ask your Dr when there children got the VAX, they might look a little tattered as the VAX is un-nessasery
There are now over 15,000 signatures on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition. wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx.
@elliotseabrook Vaccines are not required to travel to most places overseas. There are risks whether you take vaccines or reject them, the reason most people find it difficult to make a decision. Each vaccine under consideration needs to be assessed regarding its safety and efficacy profile, plus the odds of contracting the disease.
I went to Cuba myself a few years back and recieved 9 shots from the nurse, i was in the uk and all the jabs were free, on reflection i personally would have gone without the jabs as Cuba has an outstanding health service and if u get sick ur in the right place to get medical care. The only thing I caught was the salsa bug and a love for Cuban woman..lol
No HPV vaccine for my daughter! Pharma's marketing ads for that vaccine shows fine and dandy, now look at the video's and stories of how this vaccine changed young women's lives for the worse! Yes THINK TWICE!!!!
Viral diseases (including my own case of severe CFS) have no chance with blood electrification, search Bob Beck right here on Youtube! Visit my channel for a link to more info.
If you are interested in learning about a microcurrent therapy that will help you avoid the gross side effects of vaccinations please visit my channel or visit the Unleash Health site for information on blood electrification and the Beck Protocol.
N121 has Mercury in it , and since 2003 when they started to give it to kids over 6 months AND pregnant mums ? The death rate in children has soared , the autism rate has soared , and even more families feel Alone
we should pass this info to all and let us make informed decisions , our girls will be off school when the vax comes NO QUESTION
'Transatlantic'...you're obviously a shill for Pharma w/your transparent attempts to promote vaccines, in particular the Gardasil vaccine. This vaccine has caused significant neurological damage among girls w/over 11,000 adverse events reported and 40 deaths. These numbers are under-reported in that less than 10% of vaccine reactions are registered w/VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). Over $91 mlllion was paid out in 2007 for vaccine damage/death and close to $2 billion since '86
Some even more interesting things: if you read about side effects of the vaccine during tests: some of the adverse reactions reported were higher in the placebo..... which proves harmless.
To finish; that 2006 report was the matter of discussion in a health comitte. resulting in the acceptance of gardasil as a possible high efficient and safe vaccine. And much better when compared with other competitive pharma companies.
During clinical trials, more HPV-vaccinated women developed arthritis and birth defects than women in the placebo group. That does not "prove harmless." In addition, post-marketing data shows 30 deaths in young women and thousands of emergency doctor visits or hospitalizations after HPV vaccination. This is a very dangerous vaccine. It was pulled from the market in Spain, yet a coverup of risks by FDA, CDC and vaccine manufacturer continues to result in more damage to our girls & young women.
The vaccine was not pulled from the market in Spain; only one lot was tossed.
"Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Espanola de Pediatría: recomendaciones 2011" continues to recommend Gardasil or Cervarix for girls aged 9 and up.
A recent followup study (pubmed 21973261) found no increased incidence of arthritis in 117,000 women followed for a year after their first Gardasil shot compared to 412,000 nonvaccinated women.
I'd also like to add this video does not mention that oral contraceptive users are very susceptible to contracting HPV... not only because it encourages women to have sex without a condom, but because it also depletes their bodies of folic acid which is crucial for cervical health.
I almost got tricked by my gynecologist to get Gardasil... even AFTER I explained to him that the Merck website itself states that the vaccine is not meant for treating already existing lesions (and that it can make it worse), he STILL insisted. (Geesh)... I've been taking folic acid for about 2 weeks now and have felt much different down there. Seriously ladies, we have our own weapon against viruses, it's our own immune system.
Mind sharing your sources? Its sloppy not to include sources of stats and info.
The FDA's "Addressing Questions About Gardasil" article (search those words to find it) as of Sept 29, 08 has a completely different outlook. The FDA and CDC "continue to find that Gardasil is a safe and effective vaccine."
The 2 strains were presumably chosen because they cause most HPV-related cases of cervical cancer. However, scientists are concerned about "strain replacement," a common phenomenon. If you attack 1 or 2 strains, the others gain virulence. This occurred with the Hib and pneumococcal shots. Your "coincidence" argument is overused by the industry. Also, girls have seizures immediately after the shot, in the doctor's office. The best source: read the reports yourself at VAERS or medalerts. org
Source for statement about underreporting of adverse reactions: Kessler, DA. JAMA (June 2, 1993):2765. Two sources for statement about "strain replacement": 1. Sawaya, GF., et al. HPV vaccination - more answers, more questions. NEJM (May 10, 2007);356:1991-93.
2. FDA. Gardasil HPV Vaccine, May 18, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting. Vaccines... Advisory Committee Background Document. (This document also confirms that women pre-exposed to HPV when vaccinated are MORE likely to be at risk.)
Regarding Sept 29 CDC/FDA statement of faith in Gardasil, the CDC refuses to release the study design, data, and principal investigators involved in making the statement. There is no science to support their claim. CDC and FDA are, sad to say, sycophants of the drug industry. CDC licensed Gardasil despite warning signs in the clinical trials. This vaccine is harming our young females. Reported reactions include vaginal warts (in pre-teens) and menstrual irregularities. Read the VAERS reports!
The new FDA/HPV numbers are in: 9,800 adverse reactions in less than 2 1/2 years, with 30 deaths, plus GBS (paralysis), etc. Fully one-half (4,800+) required ER visit and/or hospitalization. Although millions received the vaccine, previous FDA commissioner estimated that reported adverse drug reactions represent just 1% of true numbers (multiply 9,800 by 100 for a more accurate account of true rate of adverse reactions).
Severe reactions are over represented in VAERS, and the 1% is a complete guess. VAERS data also does not mean that these reactions were related tot he vaccine. When serious adverse reactions of the same type occur, they are investigated. For instance they pulled the first rotavirus vaccine after 3 intussusception cases. The data simply does not support the claims against Gardasil.
There are nearly 5,000 severe reactions after Gardasil. Over-represented or not, that's 5,000 teenage girls whose lives have been drastically altered by this vaccine. This shot is extremely dangerous and should not have been licensed. About rotavirus, there were more than 3 cases of intussusception from the recalled shot. You are a complete shill for the industry! The current rotavirus shot actually caused more deaths in babies than in the placebo group -- yet it was still licensed!
Out of 16 million doses, that means .0003%. 4000 women DIE every year in the US from cervical cancer, 70% cases of which are caused by HPV. That is 2,800 deaths per year v. 30 at most in 2.5 years from Gardasil.
You state Im a shill without commenting on the fact that my statement concerning the recall is accurate. What is your study on the "new" rota virus vaccine? There is more than one vaccine.
You bring a lot of talk but not a lot of fact. Sure you aren't a lawyer drumming up business?
30 teens died after Gardasil; thousands more were paralyzed or hospitalized for other conditions after Gardasil. These girls were not at risk for cervical cancer, which strikes older women. They were sacrificed for profit and you are one of their pitch men. Therefore, you are culpable for their deaths and debilitations. In addition, the vaccine is NOT effective after girls become sexually active, and is only somewhat effective against LOW-grade lesions which usually go away on their own.
Continuing... The HPV shot is NOT effective against mid-grade or high-grade lesions, the ones more likely to cause problems. This vaccine has never proven it can prevent a single case of HPV. It's a huge scam. Furthermore, many girls report menstrual irregularities and spontaneous abortions after the shot, suggesting the vaccine may be causing unknown reproductive problems. This a large-scale experiment on our population. This vaccine should be removed from the market immediately!
Regarding the recall of RotaShield, there were numerous cases of intussusception and deaths [CDC]. You yourself just said that 30 deaths after HPV isn't enough to cause concern in the CDC or FDA, but we're supposed to believe that only 3 cases of intussusception triggered a recall?! Regarding the new rotavirus vaccine, Rotarix, GSK published the clinical studies used to license this shot. Even though more babies who received the shot died (vs. unvaccinated babies) they licensed it.
Re: Rotavirus vaccine. In fact, 400 babies per every million would be saved by NOT vaccinating them against rotavirus! Furthermore, this vaccine causes statistically significant increases in seizures, diarrhea (it's a diarrhea vaccine!), vomiting, ear infections, and bronchitis. This vaccine is another scam foisted on the public for profit.
As for the "deaths" from rotarix, the study says pneumonia related deaths was slightly higher, but the OVERALL deaths in both groups was THE SAME. This also occurred in only one of three studies. Also, the number of serious adverse events reported was LOWER than placebo. Again, you provide disingenuous information. Rotavirus causes 500k deaths in 25 million cases v. (again using your questionable numbers) 10k/25million w/vaccine. That is saving 490,000 children per year using the vaccine.
You have your facts wrong. The overall death rate was greater in the vaccinated group, and it was not "slightly" higher. It translates into 400 extra baby deaths per million vaccinated. Several million are vaccinated every year. In addition, there is a biologically plausible explanation for the extra deaths in the vaccinated group. Your figures on death rates refer to worldwide and are exaggerated. Few babies die of rotavirus in the U.S. Regarding your comment that I am being disingenuous...
...where I come from we call that honesty. You should try it sometime. Among the vaccinated babies, there is a statisticaly significant increase in death, convulsions, bronchitis, Kawasaki's disease (often leading to congestive heart failure and sudden death), seizures, diarrhea, vomiting, and ear infections. These are the facts.
No one with knowledge of science has denied that there are potential hazards for vaccination, EVER. You, however, are disingenuous in presenting exceedingly rare (and often scientifically unproven) complications as the standard. You are again relying on VAERS as a dataset which you know is scientifically unacceptable, and knowing that makes you disingenuous.
No, you are wrong. The vaccine manufacturer actually published the results, not VAERS. These are not rare incidents. These are statistically significant increases in vaccinated versus placebo groups. These are studies. You should be careful of your statements because they are sloppy and false. You are revealing yourself all too well. I've read the studies.
Those figures are not exaggerated, they are official from WHO. Even if they are. the 400 is not extra, as the 400 is in lieu of those who would have died of Rotavirus and more than 10000 certainly die every year of it.
No, you're gaming the figures. I read the studies. The 400 is EXTRA deaths: vaccinated babies died at a much higher rate than non-vaccinated babies—mainly due to a statistically significant increase in pneumonia-related fatalities: 68 deaths in the vaccinated group versus 50 deaths in the non-vaccinated group (a death rate of 18.5 versus 14.5 per 10,000). I know, it's hard to believe they actually licensed this vaccine!
Good job trying to reword what I said. I stated that even if the 30 deaths were legitimate, which they aren't, it would be worthwhile. Rotashield was withdrawn due to 3 deaths and 12 other associated cases of intussusception, it is a matter of public document for anyone caring to look it up.
Here are your exact words: "they pulled the first rotavirus vaccine after 3 intussusception cases." That is what you claimed. I called you on it, now you say I reworded it. Finally, after I mentioned your lie, you admit it was recalled after baby deaths and more than 3 cases of intussusception. Also, now you claim the 30 deaths from HPV aren't legitimate. Show me your documentation. Show me your proof that these healthy teenage girls who died after receiving Gardasil weren't caused by Gardasil.
We were talking about cases of death at the time, and I was glad to present the additional information later. Do you disagree with that documentation? Did they not recall it on that basis? Again, you are disingenuous in your argumentation.
I gave you two specific cases which further analysis showed were not vaccine based (1 death, 1 GB syndrome). You are still relying on VAERS without any analysis.
I agree that their official statement was that they pulled the rotavirus vaccine because of a handful of intussusception cases, but there were many more cases and deaths than officially acknowledged.
So you're basing it by guess work on what wasn't reported? That is irrelevant at any rate, because that is all it took for them to pull it, and the VAERS reports are on file for you to look at. Your answwer baasically is "don't trust the CDC unless their numbers agree with my position" You are perfectly willing to take them at face value in regards to your list of adverse reactions to Gardasil, and their numbers on Rotarix.
The VAERS figures prior to the recall showed more cases than the CDC acknowledged. Also, I don't take HPV, Rotarix (and Rotashield) numbers (VAERS) at face value because it is a passive reporting system, meaning the cases are UNDER-represented. For every adverse event reported there are many that fall between the cracks. This is acknowledged by the FDA. I know this is true, because Thinktwice receives numerous adverse reaction reports that are not filed with VAERS.
Yes, it did show more than the CDC acknowledged, because other causes were found in some cases. Irrelevant though, because they still pulled the vaccine on a small number of cases when there is a causal connection established. No investigation of VAERS reports has done so with Gardasil, hence they have not pulled it. Certainly cases fall through the cracks, but again, serious adverse reactions are going to be overrepresented in VAERS, and not all of the VAERS reports are legitimate.
You aren't supposed to get the shot if you are pregnant, and menstrual irregularities are exceedingly common amongst teenage girls. As most of these girls are in the age where they are just beginning their cycles and their bodies changing, one would expect the cycle to vary. Again, entirely spurious argumentation with no factual scientific basis. Several international (not Merck) studies have shown the efficacy of Gardasil.
Many girls/women don't realize they're pregnant when they get the shot, but experience spontaneous abortions after HPV. This is a warning to any rational person that we may be looking at more than an individual problem. This could have far-reaching consequences. Also, many young women in their late teens and early 20s, with years of regular cycles, received Gardasil and had horrible, smelly, hemorrahagic blood flows lasting days. Another warning!
Regarding efficacy of HPV, I've read the studies. The vaccine is only effective against the strains in the vaccine, and only effective against LOW-grade lesions. Also, scientists are concerned about "strain replacement." Vaccines that only target some strains of a disease cause other strains to gain prominence and virility. They believe this may be occurring with the HPV vaccine.
Those strains are responsible for 70% of the cervical cancer in the US. Scientists may be concerned about strain replacement, but that has nothing to do with the efficacy of this vaccine against the virus it is designed to combat. Modern medicine are always fighting an arms race against microbes which reproduce and mutate quickly; that does not mean you shouldn't fight the ones that we are certain are doing it now.
Again the point is to get the vaccine before getting lesions of any kind.
That is disingenuous. If the shot causes weak strains to become strong, the overall efficacy against cervical cancer is reduced. You seem like a Merck pitchman, paid to defend its products. Who cares if the vaccine is effective against some strains if the overall risk of cancer to women is not reduced. That is a truer measure of efficacy. You and Merck may be able to fool most of the people, but some of us can see through the nonsense.
It should also be pointed out that numerous studies show that folic acid and lycopene can reverse and eliminate many low and mid-grade lesions. This is a better solution.
The overall rate will drop for the an indefinite future. You can worry about strain replacement with any vaccine, but the fact is that they have proven effective for many years to this point. hPV is not the same as flu where a different strain arrives yearly. No, 70% of cancer cases are related to only 2 strains, out of the many that are always present, and countering those two will lower that rate.
Strain replacement is a real concern. After Hib (strain b) vaccine was introduced, cases of Hif (strain f) quadrupled. Another example: Prevnar (for pneumococcus) only targets 7 of 90+ strains. When introduced, 35% of disease was caused by non-vaccine serotypes. In just 4 years, 73% of disease was caused by non-vaccine strains, and they are more virulent! (continue next post...)
With HPV, the FDA and a study in NEJM (May 10, 2007), explore a disproportionate number of cases of grade 2 and 3 lesions related to non-vaccine HPV types in vaccinated women. Thus, I am not making false claims. These are significant concerns.
An FDA HPV advisory committee member said: "I do believe Gardasil protects against HPV 16 and 18, but the effect it will have on cervical cancer rates in this country is another question entirely. There is a leap of faith involved."
Your reading skills are poor. It says that there was no statistically significant difference in the number of cases of grade 2 & 3 lesions from non vax viruses. The seeming disproportionate, they suggest requires follow up, but does not prove anything due to the small number and the direction of the study.
Again, that article states clearly that the vaccine does exactly what it was supposed to do.
My reading skills are fine. I never claimed there was a statistically significant difference. I said strain replacement is a real concern. Thus, your reading skills are the poor ones. In addition, your posts are nasty. I will respond to this post of yours, but will not permit additional posts of yours. I am fine with an honest discourse, but you continue to misquote me and are not civil. This is not a blog and readers get the gist of your belief system. (continued next post...)
Yes, the vaccine is effective against the 2 oncogenic strains in the vaccine. However, there are 15 cancer-causing HPV strains. Table 3 in the NEJM study shows that vaccinated females had a 15% increase in high-grade lesions caused by dangerous non-vaccine strains. Unvaccinated females did not show this increase. This indicates that normally less virulent strains are replacing the vaccine strains and becoming more dangerous. (continued next post...)
In addition, the study shows the vaccine is only 17% effective against mid-grade lesions and has NO efficacy against high-grade lesions, the ones most likely to progress to cancer. (Plus, it INCREASES a girl's chance of cancer if she has HPV 16 or 18 when vaccinated.) So, you and Merck can claim the vaccine does what it is supposed to do -- reduce non-dangerous, low-grade lesions caused by two HPV strains, 16 and 18 -- but its overall protective benefit against cervical cancer is highly suspect.
THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO TAKE IT IF THEY ARE PREGNANT, specifically listed as a contraindication for the vaccine. If they do not know, they should have a pregnancy test first. Again the entire point of the vaccine is to get it before any sex.
Where is the scientific study showing information about that age group's menstrual cycles?
We agree on this, that pregnant women should not take this vaccine. However, your claim that the entire point of the vaccine is to get it before sex doesn't explain why the maker pushes it for older women -- and boys! The entire point of the vaccine is money. There are no scientific studies on alterations to menstrual cycles after Gardasil. Who would do that study? But if you read the VAERS reports, you will see a pattern of menstrual irregularities. Our society should be very concerned.
Deflecting again from the matter at hand, which is the efficacy and safety of the vaccine. It works well doing what is supposed to do. It has not been approved for older women for the fact that science has not shown it to be effective. As for boys, preventing them from spreading the disease would be a great leap forward by protecting women indirectly, even without them having the danger of cervical cancer. HPV still infects regardless of sex.
And who would do the study? Well you say it is all about money, so why wouldn't one of the other pharmaceutical companies do it so that they could further a competitor?
Girls become women last I checked. IT is ineffective after they have become sexually active because those women have generally already been exposed, not because the vaccine does not work. Your claim that thousands have been paralyzed is purely fantasy. 31 instances of Guillain-Barre (again, unconfirmed causation) is not thousands and VAERS is not scientific ,and several of those reports have already been proven false (Tetlock, Baird).
Again, nice try with your disingenuous argument. If a women takes the vaccine and it does not protect her, the vaccine is a dud; it does not work. Actually, if women have already been exposed to HPV and then get the vaccine, the shot exacerbates the disease and they are MORE likely to contract cervical cancer. Yet, these girls are not screened beforehand. This is a crime! Also, do not misquote me. I never claimed thousands were paralyzed. You are sloppy with your facts and reading patterns.
I said "30 teens died after Gardasil; thousands more were paralyzed or hospitalized for other conditions after Gardasil." This is a true statement. Also, 31 cases of GBS is low because many more were diagnosed with nerve or muscle disorders very similar to GBS, causing some degree of motor disability. Regarding VAERS not being scientific, why aren't they analyzed? It's disingenuous -- and criminal -- to have so many cases reported, not investigate them, and claim there's no proof of causation.
I don't mind. You have not spoken a single word to this point that has not been an insincere representation of the cost benefit, and should you leave my comments here, which would be atypical, I am confident that my case is far stronger than yours and is presented thusly.
The cost/benefit analysis is simple: we simple check to see how much money Merck has made from this dangerous, ineffective vaccine. I have no intention of removing your posts.
They are analyzed on a case by case basis and further studies are being done, specifically on the GBS. The CDC has published accounts of their reviews of the VAERS data. As of June'07 only 2 /13 fit GBS/single vaccine/6 weeks criteria. 6 had Menactra (which is being studied for GBS) in that period. 13 is also within parameters for GBS by chance for that period.
June 2008 CDC report says that there is no pattern among 20 VAERS reported deaths; all with available autopsy ruled out Gardasil.
No one really expects the CDC to battle Merck or protect our pre-teen and teenage girls from monetary interests. They already whitewashed the data on GBS like much of their published material.
If they do not get those 4 strains of HPV, it was completely effective.
Give a citation for the claim that it increases rates amongst those who already have the disease (again pointing out the entire point is to have the shot before exposure).
Girls are screened beforehand as to whether they have had it or are sexually active or have had an abnormal smear. You not agreeing with the type of screening doesn't mean no screening occurs.
The HPV vaccine has an efficacy of negative 45 percent (-45%) in women already exposed to HPV strains in the vaccine . These women are significantly more likely to develop high-grade markers for cervical cancer. FDA study is located in VRBPAC Background Document, May 18, 2006. Girls are NOT screened. This has nothing to do with whether I like screening protocols. In the U.S., 40% of girls are sexually active by age 16; 10% have HPV by age 12. Yet, vaccine is licensed for up to age 26.
uhm....the vaccine is preventive...therefore the efficacy after infection sure is negative.
And further clarificacion about those values are made in the report. you should go re-read it instead of picking a small bit out of context from some "fear website" (that part is from table 17 btw, just to place you in the document).
10% have lots of types of HPV at age 12, the worst ones come from sexual relationships later. therefore vaccine at 12-14.
I am not the only one concerned about the negative efficacy; the FDA voiced concern. Your interpretation of the data is incorrect. The vaccine exacerbates the existing infection. This means that the vaccine causes the infection to progress to a WORSE condition than in women with existing infections who do NOT receive the vaccine. This is not a "small bit out of context." -45% is a significant result and a very important consideration in terms of overall efficacy and potential to HARM women.
I was given the HPV vaccine after it was determined that I had HPV and that I was sexually active. My doctor never talked to me about adverse side effects or any of the effects on me since I already had HPV. I don't think my doctor even knew any of this. She just said "You need this because you have an HPV strain." What do you do if neither doctor or patient is aware of these things?
I just got my last gardasil shot on monday the 13th and am having adverse effects. These results are real, people!! Please please PLEASE think twice before you get this.
I knew that Guardasil CRAP was bad news.... I hate my parents for being ignorant vaccine advocates.... being a minor's no fun either. Why SHOULDN'T minors have the right to refuse vaccination?
People must remember, there is no magic bullet out there. To prevent cancer, you need to do the healthy things, like detoxification, eat fruits and vegetables, exercise, you can also take supplement like probiotics and enzyme. For me, I will not touch medication, but I do take herbs.
thinkcat01 2 weeks ago
Nope. Studies show that the vaccine is safe and prevents precancerous lesions; see e.g. "Quadrivalent Vaccine against Human Papillomavirus to Prevent High-Grade Cervical Lesions", N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1915-1927 and "Overall efficacy of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine against grade 3 or greater cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: 4-year end-of-study analysis of the randomised, double-blind PATRICIA trial", Lancet. It really looks like the vaccines are going to prevent a lot of cancer to me.
dankegel 3 months ago
@dankegel yes the studie funded by the drug companies is going to be unbiased, the same drug companies that say that mercury preservatives are safe to be injected into people.
tv321123 2 months ago
@tv321123 I can understand wanting somebody other than the drug company to confirm a vaccine's safety. Happily, the CDC and a large HMO did just that; they studied whether Gardasil caused a dozen autoimmune diseases in about 300,000 women; they found no increased risk from all but one disease, and that one only had a slightly increased risk. See kegel.com/hpv/safety for links.
dankegel 2 months ago
@dankegel the cdc is paid by the big drug companies
tv321123 2 months ago
@tv321123 I haven't found any evidence of that. Where did you read that?
I did find a report by UPI from 2003, "UPI Investigates: The vaccine conflict", which mentions that scientists with vaccine patents were allowed to serve on the ACIP, which sets vaccination policy. Evidently that has changed since then; "The structure, role, and procedures of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)" (2001, Vaccine) says this is no longer allowed.
dankegel 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Google: " h t tp://wwwDOTomsjDOTorg/corruption/scandal-exposed-in-mercury-autism-study~ Google: 'Media pushes 'sucess' of experimental GSK malaria vaccine while ignoring deadly side effects" Sunday, October 23, 2011 Ethan Huff. There are now over 15,000 signatures on The National Vaccine Information Center [NVIC] Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition at wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx.'SwineFluVaccinesHaveNowBeenConclusivelyToChronicNeurologicaldisorders"
promiseIsaih60 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOOGLE:" h t tp://wwwDOTomsjDOTorg/corruption/scandal-exposed-in-mercury-autism-study
promiseIsaih60 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
* GOOGLE: " Media pushes 'success' of experimental GSK malaria vaccine while ignoring deadly side effects
Sunday, October 23, 2011 Ethan Huff~
Learn more: h t t p ://wwwdotnaturalnewsdotcom/033951_malaria_vaccine.html#ixzz1bm41MDru
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
*There Are Now Over 15,000 signatures on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition. wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx ~ ~ ~ ~
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
Comment removed
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
Comment removed
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOOGLE: " Swine flu vaccines have now been "conclusively linked" to chronic neurological disorders." Here's the report on this, including an explanation of why and how drug companies use vaccines to ensure future profits from degenerative disease: Mike Adams, The Health Ranger At Natural News Dt Cm~
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GOOGLE: " CVS pharmacy promotes flu shot propaganda using life-sized grim reapers" [IT'S HILARIOUS!] Mike Adams, the Health Ranger At Natural News Dt Cm~
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
Please update the numbers for 2011...great video from Think Twice... as usual
amaragrace713 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
google: " Swine flu vaccines have now been "conclusively linked" to chronic neurological disorders." Here's the report on this, including an explanation of why and how drug companies use vaccines to ensure future profits from degenerative disease: Mike Adams of Natural News Dt Cm~
promiseIsaih60 4 months ago
Google: " Gardasil: Injection of Death"
promiseIsaih60 5 months ago
@promiseIsaih60
Not a fan of Alex Jones, he hypes stuff up, just to freak ppl out. I like the above video, from think twice, it does a wonderful job of explaining things.
Abbywantscoupons 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Abbywantscoupons To each his own. :) Peace~
promiseIsaih60 3 months ago
when it comes to herpes,I hate how many people are using the word "end".It's not the end,start your new life DatingHerpesSingles,com
MyAlice109 7 months ago
@TisGiraf, LOL @ the mature argument you a putting forward, well done !
In the interim period you may wish to educate us all on exactly why there is any ALUMINUM in any VAX ?
They wouldn't do any thing to hurt us right !
They don't need to show perpetual expansion and gross profit for share holder's !
Ask your Dr when they injected there own kid's, then see how you feel about his awenser, if you wish to take a leap forward read a chiropractors book.
Fannybaws
krs306 8 months ago
@TisGiraf
'mercury deposits in breast milk and in much larger amounts than in the vaccine'
Yeah, right (sarcasm)! Where did you get that one from? Natural selection isn't survival of the fittest, that social darwinism which is a retarded idea! And, are you some kind of a cave 'tard who has been defrosted?
rebelq1 8 months ago
@TisGiraf
Newborns don't eat fish!
rebelq1 8 months ago
This video was very helpful. Thank you!!
sohi0928 9 months ago
@TisGiraf Why is there any metals in any VAX ?
A preserve in the 50s maby !
But why now day's, the very corps' who produce the VAX's and depend on gross profit for share holders hence the perpetual expansion Thus forth i put it to you, the VAX's the contraceptive pill and anti depressant cause more effects than they cure !
Not bad, but that means our kids get sick, just look around at all the low self esteem kids, adht, depression, all in the last 10 years, VAX them young Keep them dumb ?
krs306 9 months ago
@TisGiraf Hmm, there are over 100 HVP's, only 4 in the VAX, if your not a virgin when they give you the VAX Then you have dueled up on 2 of them Hence your 80% more likely to get cancer regardless !
Please just think before putting aluminum or Mercury through the bodies of undeveloped children especially YOUR OWN !
Ask your Dr when there children got the VAX, they might look a little tattered as the VAX is un-nessasery
krs306 9 months ago
@TisGiraf fair point, but the HPV has Aluminum in it and is an unnecessary risk for every family !
Eat tomatoes and get a regular smear test to stay safe, should you worry,
Take care Krs
krs306 9 months ago
Thanks for the video, it answered all my questions. I will give a miss to the vacine and concentrate on my healthy diet.
AJSwisgirl 10 months ago
wwwdotknowshotsdotcom. healingourchildrendotnet
promiseIsaih60 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There are now over 15,000 signatures on the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Investigate Gardasil Vaccine Risks NOW! You can view the petition. wwwdotnvicdotorg/Petitiondotaspx.
promiseIsaih60 1 year ago
can someone help me... im going on holiday to cuba and apparently i need some vaccines? do i really need them? am i at risk if i dont take it?
elliotseabrook 1 year ago
@elliotseabrook Vaccines are not required to travel to most places overseas. There are risks whether you take vaccines or reject them, the reason most people find it difficult to make a decision. Each vaccine under consideration needs to be assessed regarding its safety and efficacy profile, plus the odds of contracting the disease.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 1 year ago
@elliotseabrook
I went to Cuba myself a few years back and recieved 9 shots from the nurse, i was in the uk and all the jabs were free, on reflection i personally would have gone without the jabs as Cuba has an outstanding health service and if u get sick ur in the right place to get medical care. The only thing I caught was the salsa bug and a love for Cuban woman..lol
jigbouy 1 year ago
If one partner was infected with HPV, the other partners chance of also being infected with the same HPV type? increased over 50 times.
The doctor recommend me a HPV dating site named =====" HPVmatch, net" =====
pozlove 1 year ago
No HPV vaccine for my daughter! Pharma's marketing ads for that vaccine shows fine and dandy, now look at the video's and stories of how this vaccine changed young women's lives for the worse! Yes THINK TWICE!!!!
1jtbt1 1 year ago
Viral diseases (including my own case of severe CFS) have no chance with blood electrification, search Bob Beck right here on Youtube! Visit my channel for a link to more info.
If you are interested in learning about a microcurrent therapy that will help you avoid the gross side effects of vaccinations please visit my channel or visit the Unleash Health site for information on blood electrification and the Beck Protocol.
unleashhealth 1 year ago
OMG they will hurt anyone to make a $ ?
N121 has Mercury in it , and since 2003 when they started to give it to kids over 6 months AND pregnant mums ? The death rate in children has soared , the autism rate has soared , and even more families feel Alone
we should pass this info to all and let us make informed decisions , our girls will be off school when the vax comes NO QUESTION
krs306 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If one partner was infected with HPV, the other partners chance of also being infected with the same HPV type increased over 50 times.
The doctor recommend me a HPV dating site named =====" HPVmatch, net" ===== .
stdsupports 2 years ago
omg i had my hpv vaccine 2day!! oh crap i didnt no dat!! ow my arm hurts from it !!!:(:(:(
mel6237 2 years ago
i am not gettin this done now! like seriously, what is the point!
laydeeNeon 2 years ago 2
Presently:
32 deaths related to Gardasil
drmdk 2 years ago
Unfortunately... only going to increase based on peoples ignorance and blind loyalty to their doctors recommendations.
kphett 2 years ago
Comment removed
jasimex 2 years ago
'Transatlantic'...you're obviously a shill for Pharma w/your transparent attempts to promote vaccines, in particular the Gardasil vaccine. This vaccine has caused significant neurological damage among girls w/over 11,000 adverse events reported and 40 deaths. These numbers are under-reported in that less than 10% of vaccine reactions are registered w/VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System). Over $91 mlllion was paid out in 2007 for vaccine damage/death and close to $2 billion since '86
mrbelley 2 years ago
Some even more interesting things: if you read about side effects of the vaccine during tests: some of the adverse reactions reported were higher in the placebo..... which proves harmless.
To finish; that 2006 report was the matter of discussion in a health comitte. resulting in the acceptance of gardasil as a possible high efficient and safe vaccine. And much better when compared with other competitive pharma companies.
transtlantic 3 years ago
During clinical trials, more HPV-vaccinated women developed arthritis and birth defects than women in the placebo group. That does not "prove harmless." In addition, post-marketing data shows 30 deaths in young women and thousands of emergency doctor visits or hospitalizations after HPV vaccination. This is a very dangerous vaccine. It was pulled from the market in Spain, yet a coverup of risks by FDA, CDC and vaccine manufacturer continues to result in more damage to our girls & young women.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
@ThinkTwiceGlobal
The vaccine was not pulled from the market in Spain; only one lot was tossed.
"Calendario de vacunaciones de la Asociación Espanola de Pediatría: recomendaciones 2011" continues to recommend Gardasil or Cervarix for girls aged 9 and up.
A recent followup study (pubmed 21973261) found no increased incidence of arthritis in 117,000 women followed for a year after their first Gardasil shot compared to 412,000 nonvaccinated women.
dankegel 2 months ago
Holy shit that scares me because I just had my second jab a few days ago.
headbangerrock 3 years ago
I'd also like to add this video does not mention that oral contraceptive users are very susceptible to contracting HPV... not only because it encourages women to have sex without a condom, but because it also depletes their bodies of folic acid which is crucial for cervical health.
BabyMelly 3 years ago
I almost got tricked by my gynecologist to get Gardasil... even AFTER I explained to him that the Merck website itself states that the vaccine is not meant for treating already existing lesions (and that it can make it worse), he STILL insisted. (Geesh)... I've been taking folic acid for about 2 weeks now and have felt much different down there. Seriously ladies, we have our own weapon against viruses, it's our own immune system.
BabyMelly 3 years ago
Mind sharing your sources? Its sloppy not to include sources of stats and info.
The FDA's "Addressing Questions About Gardasil" article (search those words to find it) as of Sept 29, 08 has a completely different outlook. The FDA and CDC "continue to find that Gardasil is a safe and effective vaccine."
What about the other questions I asked?
solitairedream 3 years ago
The 2 strains were presumably chosen because they cause most HPV-related cases of cervical cancer. However, scientists are concerned about "strain replacement," a common phenomenon. If you attack 1 or 2 strains, the others gain virulence. This occurred with the Hib and pneumococcal shots. Your "coincidence" argument is overused by the industry. Also, girls have seizures immediately after the shot, in the doctor's office. The best source: read the reports yourself at VAERS or medalerts. org
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Source for statement about underreporting of adverse reactions: Kessler, DA. JAMA (June 2, 1993):2765. Two sources for statement about "strain replacement": 1. Sawaya, GF., et al. HPV vaccination - more answers, more questions. NEJM (May 10, 2007);356:1991-93.
2. FDA. Gardasil HPV Vaccine, May 18, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting. Vaccines... Advisory Committee Background Document. (This document also confirms that women pre-exposed to HPV when vaccinated are MORE likely to be at risk.)
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Regarding Sept 29 CDC/FDA statement of faith in Gardasil, the CDC refuses to release the study design, data, and principal investigators involved in making the statement. There is no science to support their claim. CDC and FDA are, sad to say, sycophants of the drug industry. CDC licensed Gardasil despite warning signs in the clinical trials. This vaccine is harming our young females. Reported reactions include vaginal warts (in pre-teens) and menstrual irregularities. Read the VAERS reports!
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Just few questions,
How many people received the vaccines within 26 months of the FDA report? And what proportion who had reactions were severe?
Why were those two pre-mal strains picked out of the 15?
How can you tell if something was not prevented (how you can be sure these people would've gotten cancer anyways)?
Were are the sources, besides the FDA?
solitairedream 3 years ago
The new FDA/HPV numbers are in: 9,800 adverse reactions in less than 2 1/2 years, with 30 deaths, plus GBS (paralysis), etc. Fully one-half (4,800+) required ER visit and/or hospitalization. Although millions received the vaccine, previous FDA commissioner estimated that reported adverse drug reactions represent just 1% of true numbers (multiply 9,800 by 100 for a more accurate account of true rate of adverse reactions).
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Severe reactions are over represented in VAERS, and the 1% is a complete guess. VAERS data also does not mean that these reactions were related tot he vaccine. When serious adverse reactions of the same type occur, they are investigated. For instance they pulled the first rotavirus vaccine after 3 intussusception cases. The data simply does not support the claims against Gardasil.
batigol47 3 years ago
There are nearly 5,000 severe reactions after Gardasil. Over-represented or not, that's 5,000 teenage girls whose lives have been drastically altered by this vaccine. This shot is extremely dangerous and should not have been licensed. About rotavirus, there were more than 3 cases of intussusception from the recalled shot. You are a complete shill for the industry! The current rotavirus shot actually caused more deaths in babies than in the placebo group -- yet it was still licensed!
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Out of 16 million doses, that means .0003%. 4000 women DIE every year in the US from cervical cancer, 70% cases of which are caused by HPV. That is 2,800 deaths per year v. 30 at most in 2.5 years from Gardasil.
You state Im a shill without commenting on the fact that my statement concerning the recall is accurate. What is your study on the "new" rota virus vaccine? There is more than one vaccine.
You bring a lot of talk but not a lot of fact. Sure you aren't a lawyer drumming up business?
batigol47 3 years ago
30 teens died after Gardasil; thousands more were paralyzed or hospitalized for other conditions after Gardasil. These girls were not at risk for cervical cancer, which strikes older women. They were sacrificed for profit and you are one of their pitch men. Therefore, you are culpable for their deaths and debilitations. In addition, the vaccine is NOT effective after girls become sexually active, and is only somewhat effective against LOW-grade lesions which usually go away on their own.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Continuing... The HPV shot is NOT effective against mid-grade or high-grade lesions, the ones more likely to cause problems. This vaccine has never proven it can prevent a single case of HPV. It's a huge scam. Furthermore, many girls report menstrual irregularities and spontaneous abortions after the shot, suggesting the vaccine may be causing unknown reproductive problems. This a large-scale experiment on our population. This vaccine should be removed from the market immediately!
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Regarding the recall of RotaShield, there were numerous cases of intussusception and deaths [CDC]. You yourself just said that 30 deaths after HPV isn't enough to cause concern in the CDC or FDA, but we're supposed to believe that only 3 cases of intussusception triggered a recall?! Regarding the new rotavirus vaccine, Rotarix, GSK published the clinical studies used to license this shot. Even though more babies who received the shot died (vs. unvaccinated babies) they licensed it.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Re: Rotavirus vaccine. In fact, 400 babies per every million would be saved by NOT vaccinating them against rotavirus! Furthermore, this vaccine causes statistically significant increases in seizures, diarrhea (it's a diarrhea vaccine!), vomiting, ear infections, and bronchitis. This vaccine is another scam foisted on the public for profit.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
As for the "deaths" from rotarix, the study says pneumonia related deaths was slightly higher, but the OVERALL deaths in both groups was THE SAME. This also occurred in only one of three studies. Also, the number of serious adverse events reported was LOWER than placebo. Again, you provide disingenuous information. Rotavirus causes 500k deaths in 25 million cases v. (again using your questionable numbers) 10k/25million w/vaccine. That is saving 490,000 children per year using the vaccine.
batigol47 3 years ago
You have your facts wrong. The overall death rate was greater in the vaccinated group, and it was not "slightly" higher. It translates into 400 extra baby deaths per million vaccinated. Several million are vaccinated every year. In addition, there is a biologically plausible explanation for the extra deaths in the vaccinated group. Your figures on death rates refer to worldwide and are exaggerated. Few babies die of rotavirus in the U.S. Regarding your comment that I am being disingenuous...
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
...where I come from we call that honesty. You should try it sometime. Among the vaccinated babies, there is a statisticaly significant increase in death, convulsions, bronchitis, Kawasaki's disease (often leading to congestive heart failure and sudden death), seizures, diarrhea, vomiting, and ear infections. These are the facts.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
No one with knowledge of science has denied that there are potential hazards for vaccination, EVER. You, however, are disingenuous in presenting exceedingly rare (and often scientifically unproven) complications as the standard. You are again relying on VAERS as a dataset which you know is scientifically unacceptable, and knowing that makes you disingenuous.
batigol47 3 years ago
No, you are wrong. The vaccine manufacturer actually published the results, not VAERS. These are not rare incidents. These are statistically significant increases in vaccinated versus placebo groups. These are studies. You should be careful of your statements because they are sloppy and false. You are revealing yourself all too well. I've read the studies.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Cite the studies that show these are not rare incidents.
batigol47 3 years ago
.19% is slightly.
Those figures are not exaggerated, they are official from WHO. Even if they are. the 400 is not extra, as the 400 is in lieu of those who would have died of Rotavirus and more than 10000 certainly die every year of it.
batigol47 3 years ago
No, you're gaming the figures. I read the studies. The 400 is EXTRA deaths: vaccinated babies died at a much higher rate than non-vaccinated babies—mainly due to a statistically significant increase in pneumonia-related fatalities: 68 deaths in the vaccinated group versus 50 deaths in the non-vaccinated group (a death rate of 18.5 versus 14.5 per 10,000). I know, it's hard to believe they actually licensed this vaccine!
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Good job trying to reword what I said. I stated that even if the 30 deaths were legitimate, which they aren't, it would be worthwhile. Rotashield was withdrawn due to 3 deaths and 12 other associated cases of intussusception, it is a matter of public document for anyone caring to look it up.
batigol47 3 years ago
Here are your exact words: "they pulled the first rotavirus vaccine after 3 intussusception cases." That is what you claimed. I called you on it, now you say I reworded it. Finally, after I mentioned your lie, you admit it was recalled after baby deaths and more than 3 cases of intussusception. Also, now you claim the 30 deaths from HPV aren't legitimate. Show me your documentation. Show me your proof that these healthy teenage girls who died after receiving Gardasil weren't caused by Gardasil.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
We were talking about cases of death at the time, and I was glad to present the additional information later. Do you disagree with that documentation? Did they not recall it on that basis? Again, you are disingenuous in your argumentation.
I gave you two specific cases which further analysis showed were not vaccine based (1 death, 1 GB syndrome). You are still relying on VAERS without any analysis.
batigol47 3 years ago
I agree that their official statement was that they pulled the rotavirus vaccine because of a handful of intussusception cases, but there were many more cases and deaths than officially acknowledged.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
So you're basing it by guess work on what wasn't reported? That is irrelevant at any rate, because that is all it took for them to pull it, and the VAERS reports are on file for you to look at. Your answwer baasically is "don't trust the CDC unless their numbers agree with my position" You are perfectly willing to take them at face value in regards to your list of adverse reactions to Gardasil, and their numbers on Rotarix.
batigol47 3 years ago
The VAERS figures prior to the recall showed more cases than the CDC acknowledged. Also, I don't take HPV, Rotarix (and Rotashield) numbers (VAERS) at face value because it is a passive reporting system, meaning the cases are UNDER-represented. For every adverse event reported there are many that fall between the cracks. This is acknowledged by the FDA. I know this is true, because Thinktwice receives numerous adverse reaction reports that are not filed with VAERS.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Yes, it did show more than the CDC acknowledged, because other causes were found in some cases. Irrelevant though, because they still pulled the vaccine on a small number of cases when there is a causal connection established. No investigation of VAERS reports has done so with Gardasil, hence they have not pulled it. Certainly cases fall through the cracks, but again, serious adverse reactions are going to be overrepresented in VAERS, and not all of the VAERS reports are legitimate.
batigol47 3 years ago
We would presume so, but that doesn't change the fact that the decision was made on the basis of that handful. not the many more.
batigol47 3 years ago
You aren't supposed to get the shot if you are pregnant, and menstrual irregularities are exceedingly common amongst teenage girls. As most of these girls are in the age where they are just beginning their cycles and their bodies changing, one would expect the cycle to vary. Again, entirely spurious argumentation with no factual scientific basis. Several international (not Merck) studies have shown the efficacy of Gardasil.
batigol47 3 years ago
Many girls/women don't realize they're pregnant when they get the shot, but experience spontaneous abortions after HPV. This is a warning to any rational person that we may be looking at more than an individual problem. This could have far-reaching consequences. Also, many young women in their late teens and early 20s, with years of regular cycles, received Gardasil and had horrible, smelly, hemorrahagic blood flows lasting days. Another warning!
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Regarding efficacy of HPV, I've read the studies. The vaccine is only effective against the strains in the vaccine, and only effective against LOW-grade lesions. Also, scientists are concerned about "strain replacement." Vaccines that only target some strains of a disease cause other strains to gain prominence and virility. They believe this may be occurring with the HPV vaccine.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Those strains are responsible for 70% of the cervical cancer in the US. Scientists may be concerned about strain replacement, but that has nothing to do with the efficacy of this vaccine against the virus it is designed to combat. Modern medicine are always fighting an arms race against microbes which reproduce and mutate quickly; that does not mean you shouldn't fight the ones that we are certain are doing it now.
Again the point is to get the vaccine before getting lesions of any kind.
batigol47 3 years ago
That is disingenuous. If the shot causes weak strains to become strong, the overall efficacy against cervical cancer is reduced. You seem like a Merck pitchman, paid to defend its products. Who cares if the vaccine is effective against some strains if the overall risk of cancer to women is not reduced. That is a truer measure of efficacy. You and Merck may be able to fool most of the people, but some of us can see through the nonsense.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
It should also be pointed out that numerous studies show that folic acid and lycopene can reverse and eliminate many low and mid-grade lesions. This is a better solution.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Remarkably, another of my posts disappears.
The overall rate will drop for the an indefinite future. You can worry about strain replacement with any vaccine, but the fact is that they have proven effective for many years to this point. hPV is not the same as flu where a different strain arrives yearly. No, 70% of cancer cases are related to only 2 strains, out of the many that are always present, and countering those two will lower that rate.
Again you make false claims based on bad science.
batigol47 3 years ago
Strain replacement is a real concern. After Hib (strain b) vaccine was introduced, cases of Hif (strain f) quadrupled. Another example: Prevnar (for pneumococcus) only targets 7 of 90+ strains. When introduced, 35% of disease was caused by non-vaccine serotypes. In just 4 years, 73% of disease was caused by non-vaccine strains, and they are more virulent! (continue next post...)
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
With HPV, the FDA and a study in NEJM (May 10, 2007), explore a disproportionate number of cases of grade 2 and 3 lesions related to non-vaccine HPV types in vaccinated women. Thus, I am not making false claims. These are significant concerns.
An FDA HPV advisory committee member said: "I do believe Gardasil protects against HPV 16 and 18, but the effect it will have on cervical cancer rates in this country is another question entirely. There is a leap of faith involved."
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Your reading skills are poor. It says that there was no statistically significant difference in the number of cases of grade 2 & 3 lesions from non vax viruses. The seeming disproportionate, they suggest requires follow up, but does not prove anything due to the small number and the direction of the study.
Again, that article states clearly that the vaccine does exactly what it was supposed to do.
batigol47 3 years ago
My reading skills are fine. I never claimed there was a statistically significant difference. I said strain replacement is a real concern. Thus, your reading skills are the poor ones. In addition, your posts are nasty. I will respond to this post of yours, but will not permit additional posts of yours. I am fine with an honest discourse, but you continue to misquote me and are not civil. This is not a blog and readers get the gist of your belief system. (continued next post...)
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Yes, the vaccine is effective against the 2 oncogenic strains in the vaccine. However, there are 15 cancer-causing HPV strains. Table 3 in the NEJM study shows that vaccinated females had a 15% increase in high-grade lesions caused by dangerous non-vaccine strains. Unvaccinated females did not show this increase. This indicates that normally less virulent strains are replacing the vaccine strains and becoming more dangerous. (continued next post...)
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
In addition, the study shows the vaccine is only 17% effective against mid-grade lesions and has NO efficacy against high-grade lesions, the ones most likely to progress to cancer. (Plus, it INCREASES a girl's chance of cancer if she has HPV 16 or 18 when vaccinated.) So, you and Merck can claim the vaccine does what it is supposed to do -- reduce non-dangerous, low-grade lesions caused by two HPV strains, 16 and 18 -- but its overall protective benefit against cervical cancer is highly suspect.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Comment removed
batigol47 3 years ago
THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO TAKE IT IF THEY ARE PREGNANT, specifically listed as a contraindication for the vaccine. If they do not know, they should have a pregnancy test first. Again the entire point of the vaccine is to get it before any sex.
Where is the scientific study showing information about that age group's menstrual cycles?
batigol47 3 years ago
We agree on this, that pregnant women should not take this vaccine. However, your claim that the entire point of the vaccine is to get it before sex doesn't explain why the maker pushes it for older women -- and boys! The entire point of the vaccine is money. There are no scientific studies on alterations to menstrual cycles after Gardasil. Who would do that study? But if you read the VAERS reports, you will see a pattern of menstrual irregularities. Our society should be very concerned.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Deflecting again from the matter at hand, which is the efficacy and safety of the vaccine. It works well doing what is supposed to do. It has not been approved for older women for the fact that science has not shown it to be effective. As for boys, preventing them from spreading the disease would be a great leap forward by protecting women indirectly, even without them having the danger of cervical cancer. HPV still infects regardless of sex.
batigol47 3 years ago
And who would do the study? Well you say it is all about money, so why wouldn't one of the other pharmaceutical companies do it so that they could further a competitor?
batigol47 3 years ago
Girls become women last I checked. IT is ineffective after they have become sexually active because those women have generally already been exposed, not because the vaccine does not work. Your claim that thousands have been paralyzed is purely fantasy. 31 instances of Guillain-Barre (again, unconfirmed causation) is not thousands and VAERS is not scientific ,and several of those reports have already been proven false (Tetlock, Baird).
Keep deflecting with ad hominem.
batigol47 3 years ago
Again, nice try with your disingenuous argument. If a women takes the vaccine and it does not protect her, the vaccine is a dud; it does not work. Actually, if women have already been exposed to HPV and then get the vaccine, the shot exacerbates the disease and they are MORE likely to contract cervical cancer. Yet, these girls are not screened beforehand. This is a crime! Also, do not misquote me. I never claimed thousands were paralyzed. You are sloppy with your facts and reading patterns.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
I said "30 teens died after Gardasil; thousands more were paralyzed or hospitalized for other conditions after Gardasil." This is a true statement. Also, 31 cases of GBS is low because many more were diagnosed with nerve or muscle disorders very similar to GBS, causing some degree of motor disability. Regarding VAERS not being scientific, why aren't they analyzed? It's disingenuous -- and criminal -- to have so many cases reported, not investigate them, and claim there's no proof of causation.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Thank you for posting your standard-faire propaganda on this forum. It gives me a chance to dispel your myths and educate the public.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
I don't mind. You have not spoken a single word to this point that has not been an insincere representation of the cost benefit, and should you leave my comments here, which would be atypical, I am confident that my case is far stronger than yours and is presented thusly.
batigol47 3 years ago
The cost/benefit analysis is simple: we simple check to see how much money Merck has made from this dangerous, ineffective vaccine. I have no intention of removing your posts.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
There we come back to the point. The science doesn't count for you. It is all a company conspiracy.
batigol47 3 years ago
They are analyzed on a case by case basis and further studies are being done, specifically on the GBS. The CDC has published accounts of their reviews of the VAERS data. As of June'07 only 2 /13 fit GBS/single vaccine/6 weeks criteria. 6 had Menactra (which is being studied for GBS) in that period. 13 is also within parameters for GBS by chance for that period.
June 2008 CDC report says that there is no pattern among 20 VAERS reported deaths; all with available autopsy ruled out Gardasil.
batigol47 3 years ago
No one really expects the CDC to battle Merck or protect our pre-teen and teenage girls from monetary interests. They already whitewashed the data on GBS like much of their published material.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Again, you conveniently disparage the CDC when it doesn't suit your preconceived notions.
batigol47 3 years ago
If they do not get those 4 strains of HPV, it was completely effective.
Give a citation for the claim that it increases rates amongst those who already have the disease (again pointing out the entire point is to have the shot before exposure).
Girls are screened beforehand as to whether they have had it or are sexually active or have had an abnormal smear. You not agreeing with the type of screening doesn't mean no screening occurs.
batigol47 3 years ago
The HPV vaccine has an efficacy of negative 45 percent (-45%) in women already exposed to HPV strains in the vaccine . These women are significantly more likely to develop high-grade markers for cervical cancer. FDA study is located in VRBPAC Background Document, May 18, 2006. Girls are NOT screened. This has nothing to do with whether I like screening protocols. In the U.S., 40% of girls are sexually active by age 16; 10% have HPV by age 12. Yet, vaccine is licensed for up to age 26.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
uhm....the vaccine is preventive...therefore the efficacy after infection sure is negative.
And further clarificacion about those values are made in the report. you should go re-read it instead of picking a small bit out of context from some "fear website" (that part is from table 17 btw, just to place you in the document).
10% have lots of types of HPV at age 12, the worst ones come from sexual relationships later. therefore vaccine at 12-14.
transtlantic 3 years ago
I am not the only one concerned about the negative efficacy; the FDA voiced concern. Your interpretation of the data is incorrect. The vaccine exacerbates the existing infection. This means that the vaccine causes the infection to progress to a WORSE condition than in women with existing infections who do NOT receive the vaccine. This is not a "small bit out of context." -45% is a significant result and a very important consideration in terms of overall efficacy and potential to HARM women.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
I was given the HPV vaccine after it was determined that I had HPV and that I was sexually active. My doctor never talked to me about adverse side effects or any of the effects on me since I already had HPV. I don't think my doctor even knew any of this. She just said "You need this because you have an HPV strain." What do you do if neither doctor or patient is aware of these things?
LYNNLEIGHLOPEZ 2 years ago
the doctors are just told what to do. Hand out this as advised by the GOVERNMENT or Health Authorities.
Resist Man Made Chemicals from Money Making Pharma Corporations Playing God.
Study Legalise Law Language, and illuminati New World Order
WAKE UP please Dont Be Sheeple
truexposure 2 years ago
I just got my last gardasil shot on monday the 13th and am having adverse effects. These results are real, people!! Please please PLEASE think twice before you get this.
QueenNeen09 3 years ago
I knew that Guardasil CRAP was bad news.... I hate my parents for being ignorant vaccine advocates.... being a minor's no fun either. Why SHOULDN'T minors have the right to refuse vaccination?
ByakuganWhite 3 years ago
you have my deepest sympathies. :( i'm lucky, my mom's a total conspiracy theorist. i also have the excuse that i have a needle/pain phobia.
loserella55 3 years ago
zomg, i got that shot... now im wishing i hadnt
PurpleNinja420 3 years ago
Yes, we would prefer to reach people with this important information BEFORE they receive their shots so that truly informed decisions could be made.
ThinkTwiceGlobal 3 years ago
Why are you wishing you didn't have the vaccine?
Stazica11 3 years ago