Gardisil pointless and dangerous? Merck researcher shares shocking info (CMB Post)

The Population Research Institute* is reporting on some shocking statements made by Dr. Diane Harper,  the leading international developer of the HPV vaccine, at the 4th Annual Public Conference on Vaccination on Gardisil the vaccine touted to prevent cervical cancer from HPV infections.

Here are some statistics that this Merck representative reportedly shared at this conference, taken directly from the Population Research Institute's article:

• 70% of HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment in one year.
• After two years, this rate climbs to 90%.
• Of the remaining 10% of HPV infections, only half coincide with the development of cervical cancer.
• 4 out of 5 women with cervical cancer are in developing countries (i.e. not the United States or Canada)
• 8 in 100,000 women will get cervical cancer.
• 1.3-3.7 will die from it.
• The cancer rate has been declining by 4% every year, since between 1955 to 1992 when the rate declined 74%, without any influence from a vaccine. [Link to American Cancer Society]
• There will be no decrease in cervical cancer until 70% of the population is vaccinated.
• The highest amount of decrease in cervical cancer will not be seen for 60 years.
• After 60 years, the highest predicted decrease will be 70%.
• No efficacy trials have been done on girls under 15.
• Merck did study a group of girls under 16 who had been vaccinated, but did not follow them long enough to conclude sufficient presence of effective HPV antibodies.
• If a child is vaccinated, she will not keep immunity until puberty and will need boosters.
• 15,037 girls have officially reported adverse side effects from Gardasil to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
• Adverse effects include Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation and many others.
• The CDC acknowledges that there have been 44 reported deaths.
• Dr. Harper  told ABC News that "The rate of serious adverse events is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer."

To read more on this (and I really, really, really urge you to and how often do I "really, really, really" urge anything? Never. That's the first time.), please click here.  This is an original post I've written for Canada Moms Blog and I'm not authorised to print the entire text.  You can comment here or there, your choice.

Comments

[Megan]

Just tried leaving a comment but the screen refreshed or something.
Thanks for the post. The last time I went for a checkup at the OBGYN, I was barraged with signs for Gardasil and every nurse, aide, and doctor was pushing me to get it. I felt like a kid in one of those teen drug commercials.
Of course, despite the fact that I was practically yelling for all the world to hear that I was a devout Christian who (1) was a virgin when I got married last year and (2) don't plan on ever divorcing my husband, they wouldn't stop. I eventually gave in when the doctor started making up obscene "what if" stories about my husband cheating on me or getting a divorce.
Plus, the side effects are crazy and they make you sign and initial that you know all the risks.

[Anna]

My 10 year old daughter came home with a permission slip to get the vaccine. It was to be given at the same time as her regular booster. I read what it said, and it stated that the vacine is only effective for five years. So they're expecting my daughter to be promiscuous while she's a young teen.

I signed the booster, but not the vacine. When she becomes an adult she can decide for herself, but I'm not going to expose her to an unnessesary vacine when we don't know what the long term effects are.

Turns out, she's not the only girl in her class who's parents turned it down.

I hate the commercials showing all these wholesome looking girls, like every girl is sleazy and it's the norm.

[Jennie]

Something is fishy with this vaccine. A teen died a few weeks ago in Great Britain just hours after receiving the vaccine, though the autopsy said it was caused by a heart problem. It must've triggered something.

The main thing is to stay on the ball with pap smears etc. I've had hpv that went away by itself, never to return (knock on wood). I'm starting to get iffy on all vaccines nowadays. Are they all as necessary as we're taught?

[Natasha]

Anna,

It's not about promiscuity. They only need one sexual contact. If you're okay with the booster she might as well get the vaccine. It's not going to make her more psychologically ready for sex. It's not going to make her think she loves someone. A vaccine doesn't have that power. She will probably forget she ever had it.

[Jennie]

Hm, I need clarification. After reading this post, and the one you linked to, you're saying Anna's daughter "might as well get the vaccine"? That's kind of 180 (degrees) of you, or did I miss something?

[Natasha]

Jennie, She as much as said that the only reason she didn't agree to the vaccine was because she resented the assertion that her little girl might be promiscuous at a young age. And she said that she consented to the booster. I'm not agreeing that she should get the vaccine. I'm trying to show that the reasons she doesn't want to give her the vaccine are faulty, emotional, and illogical. Her daughter will probably forget she had it. The vaccine is not going to turn her into someone with psychological issues that lead to promiscuity. By Anna's logic, she might as well get the vaccine. I mean, if this blog post didn't sway her at all, and her only comment was that she didn't like the commercials and the assumption that her daughter might have sex as a young teen, then there's really nothing more that I can say, is there?

[Anna]

No, that's not what I meant.

The booster is for other diseases, diseases that we know are helped by vacines, and it's a booster for vacines she recieved as a pre-schooler. The normal stuff for mumps and measles.

This is a new vacine for something that else all together that has nothing to do with diseases you get from just existing. If you notice I said that I won't expose her to a vacine that we don't know the long term effects. And seeing that it's not preventing anything really, (why does a 10 year old need a vacine that only lasts 5 years for a sexually transmitted situation, I don't know). Yes, I know that there are 13 year olds misbehaving, but the vacine is not going to solve that.

My point is that their selling it to every little girl with the assumption that she's going to have sex at an early age.

And my daughter does know what it's about. I talked to her so that she could understand why I said no, and she agrees with me.

We're actually arguing on the same side.