It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Serious Questions About HPV Vaccine (Gardasil)

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   

Serious Questions About HPV Vaccine (Gardasil)


www.cbsnews.com

Merck's HPV vaccine is dealing with a growing number of reports of serious side effects,

The conservative-funded public interest group Judicial Watch recently obtain more than eight 8,000 reports of adverse events reports under Freedom of Information law.

They reveal everything from massive wart outbreaks to seizures and paralysis. Of 18 deaths, nearly a quarter cited "blood clots."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
Looks like the big pharma companies are going to push for this to stay on the market despite the drastic side-effects that some are having. (If you call possilbe death a side-effect) Sure the odds are low, but this is a new drug and we still don't know what long term effects this will have on women. Personally I'm not letting my daughter get this vaccine. I'm not convinced that the cure is better than the disease yet.

www.cbsnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
My girls are not going to get this. I've read too many stories like this one. I took her to the dr. once for allergies, and this dr. tried to convince me to get her to have this.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 


The HPV vaccine should be removed from the market immediately. Some irresponsible , greedy and vile people are using it to poison other peoples daughters. There will come a day when they will pay for the suffering they are causing innocent girls.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:10 AM
link   
This is definitely a double edged sword. On one hand there is evidence of bad side effects. On the other hand, this is a possible cure of a very painful and common type of cancer. One has to weigh the risks and make their own decisions. Something bad happens and everyone wants the government to jump up and do something to make them "safe". At what costs? What about the women this vaccine will help? I strongly feel that all risks involved in taking a vaccine whould be made public information but it should be the individual or parent's decision to whether or not it is used.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by slicobacon
 
This is not mom and dad making these choices. Sometimes it's a doctor conning mom and dad by not telling mom and dad all the gorey details surrounding this vaccine. It is forced on young girls who have been wrongly taken into foster care. The reasearchers and scientists who are trying to destroy HPV have pure motives ,and if they were allowed to properly work out the flaws the vaccine could one day become useful. For now it's used by dirty, seedy, old men, against innocent young girls. The bastards do not even really need the money they are making off the misery they causing.



[edit on 9-7-2008 by eradown]



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I think the HPV vaccine is the new anti-depressant, or should I say the new trend, of the medical world. Prior to reading this thread I was ignorant of the side effects myself. (I'm also male and have no children so this isn't a topic at the forefront of my mind) This is appalling though. Anything with DEATH as a side-effect should not be stocked at all, there are other alternatives I'm sure; then again we subject our water to fluoridation (for those in the dark fluorine is a poison)... Gardasil should be administered on a patient by patient basis, with the doctor or pharmacist giving them fore-warning, a list of side-effects, a follow-up exam, a contract stipulating that they are aware of the consequences and allowing the girls to make that choice for themselves. I guess it's asking too much of our doctors to care more about the patients they took an oath to protect than the cashflow.

I do have a question after that little rant, however. Does anyone know what Gardasil is (as in its chemical make up) and what the active ingredient(s) is/are?
I would like to know if it is the actual compound for treating the disease that is causing nasty side effects or if its a "filler" of some sort.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
I would just like to add this excerpt from a link at the bottom of the page of dbates link to the article.

HPV Vaccine Information For Young Women




This vaccine has been licensed by the FDA and approved by CDC as safe and effective. It was studied in thousands of females (ages 9 through 26 years) around the world and its safety continues to be monitored by CDC and the FDA. Studies have found no serious side effects. The most common side effect is soreness in the arm (where the shot is given). There have recently been some reports of fainting in teens after they got the vaccine. For this reason, it is recommended that patients wait in their doctor’s office for 15 minutes after getting the vaccine.


That's the only safety information posted.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by virraszto
My girls are not going to get this. I've read too many stories like this one. I took her to the dr. once for allergies, and this dr. tried to convince me to get her to have this.


I'm not surprised. I don't know about you, but here in Ontario there was a full scale media blitz to get girls to take the shot when the government was administering it at schools. Tv ads, radio ads, posters all scaring 13 year olds into thinking they were most definitely going to get cervical cancer if they didn't take this precious vaccine. The school by my house even had it listed on the outdoor "events" bulletin board.

Here's a thought, if you don't have sex with people until you know them well enough to get tested for HPV...you won't get it!! Nope, nope too much work and too much self control involved. Better to just take a vaccine that might kill you.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
By now, the HPV vaccine campaigns are well underway in many countries.

The Healthcare and Education systems are footing the entire bill in several countries and it's an expensive vaccine. Many of the large pharmaceutical companies are some of the oldest established companies around the world (Multi-national companies without boarders). Most are not in competition with one another but rather a controlling monopoly over the entire medical industry.

The in-bed relationship of Big Pharma/Big Chema and how it relates to vaccines is BIG. Many ingredients exist within that can create and exaggerate other conditions. Adverse side-effects to vaccines may not appear for years hence the burden of proof requirement for the vaccinated person. It seems a lot of people expect side-effects to present themselves in a timely and convenient manner. If treatment 1 eventually causes side effect a, b, and c, then that's a wonderful bonus. Now comes new treatment a, b, c, etc.

For instance, how profitable nowadays are fertility treatments? Everyone knows someone having a hard time conceiving.

Read the following excerpt and see if it sounds familiar...



"In 1995, a Catholic human rights organization called Human Life International accused the WHO of promoting a Canadian-made tetanus vaccine laced with a pregnancy hormone called human choriogonadotropic hormone (HCG). Suspicions were aroused when the tetanus vaccine was prescribed in the unusual dose of five multiple injections over a three month period, and recommended only to women of reproductive age. When an unusual number of women experienced vaginal bleeding and miscarriages after the shots, a hormone additive was uncovered as the cause.

Apparently the WHO has been developing and testing anti-fertility vaccines for over two decades. Women receiving the laced tetanus shot not only developed antibodies to tetanus, but they also developed dangerous antibodies to the pregnancy hormone as well. Without this HCG hormone the growth of the fetus is impaired. Consequently, the laced vaccine served as a covert contraceptive device."



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by dbates


Looks like the big pharma companies are going to push for this to stay on the market despite the drastic side-effects that some are having. (If you call possilbe death a side-effect) Sure the odds are low, but this is a new drug and we still don't know what long term effects this will have on women.


That does apply to ANY new drug, and even then it would take time to get sufficient data. What do you do then?

The only meaningful question we can ask now is: are the new data statistically compatible with the results of pre-approval testing? If yes, all is fair, if the rate of side effects is significantly higher, under same conditions, then it should be investigated.

The tragic cases of "side effects" need to be investigated to establish whether they were indeed such, and not a random coincidence. People to have seizures or die unexpectedly.

I am a father of two girls, by the way, so not inclined to take it lightly.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
I think the whole Gardasil thing is a scam. There are more than 40 strains of HPV that can infect the genitals. Gardasil allegedly protects against four and the maker (and government) claim that it is designed to help prevent cervical cancer. Granted, not all forms of HPV lead to cervical cancer, so maybe the four they target are the only ones. I don't know. But, here's what bothers me, there are something like 11,000 cases of cervical cancer diagnosed each year. In women it breaks down to:

About 10% of the number of digestive tract diagnoses each year.
About 10% of the number of respiratory cancers diagnosed each year.
Less than half of the skin cancers diagnosed each year.
About 10% of the number of breast cancers diagnosed each year.
One-quarter of the number of uterine cancers diagnosed each year.
About one-third of the number of urinary tract cancers diagnosed each year.
About the same as brain cancers diagnosed each year.
One-third of endocrine cancers diagnosed each year.
A little more than half of the leukemia cases diagnosed each year.
And about two-thirds of other unclassified cancers.

Maybe the HPV virus is just an easy target, but it sure seems like there are more effective ways to reduce the number of cancer cases (i.e., targeting other cancer causing agents). The fact remains, though, that HPV is a sexually transmitted disease (STD). And Gardasil has been approved for girls starting as young as nine years old. Do you know a lot of nine year old girls who are at risk for contracting an STD? I don't. When they (the manufacturer and the government) first started pushing for mass public vaccination of school-age girls in Texas (I believe it was), I thought, "WTF is wrong with these people? What parent thinks their nine year old is at risk for an STD?"

Then I found out that one of the side-effects is sterilization, and I started to wonder. Is this a mass-sterilization attempt? Get all of these girls vaccinated young, then ten to twenty years later they all find out they can't produce offspring. By then it'll be too late to do anything about it, and the manufacturer (and the government) will claim, "We had no idea!" and everyone will be SOL.

Of course, that's just idle speculation.



posted on Feb, 25 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
I'm not surprised at the results or the tactics. It is the same spin coming from people who told everyone that it is safe and effective. They are covering their posteriors. If people actually knew what they were injecting into them, you would see torches and pitchforks make a HUGE comeback.

It is pretty easy to spot when you are being lied to.

1. Paying the FDA and CDC to approve it by offering a multimillion dollar job for the current head of these agencies when they resign their post.
2. Multimillion dollar advertising campaign to get everyone on board the "gee, we need this" wagon.
3. Paying legislators to require the vaccine so that parents do not have a choice about what is injected into their children.
4. Paying for medical conferences across the country to "educate" doctors about the huge new problem with whatever disease the new vaccine is for. this conference will also show how "wonderous" the new vaccine is in treatment of the new disease using cherry picked data to convice the fence sitters.
5. Pay huge sums for advertising through the American Medical Association literature so that even those who didn't go to the conference will be able to say how wonderful the product is because they are sure the AMA screens these products.

Now you have a nifty four pronged attack on the public at large.

FDA/CDC says it's cool and even if you have evidence to the contrary, most people will believe the FDA/CDC even though they have a horrible track record.

Legislators will require these vaccine for your kids and if you do not agree, you go to jail and get fined and even possibly lose your children due to neglect of not giving them life saving vaccines.

Doctors line up in droves saying how wonderful the vaccine is because of the free airfare, great dinner and golf resort in Hawaii they visited during this conference. If they can afford this kind of hotel, it must be good stuff to give to the kids.

They will also point to the nifty ads, articles, and purchased peer reviewed studies in the medical journals promoting the product.


What is the reality?

TOTAL HOGWASH and a screwed public.



posted on Feb, 26 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Absolutely no link has been made between the adverse effects cited in the article and Gardasil.



posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leto
Absolutely no link has been made between the adverse effects cited in the article and Gardasil.


According to whom? What data are you referencing and who paid for the study?



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I find it odd that the numbers given regarding the studies are "thousands of girls around the world" and such as that. So, there were no definite control group studies? I coded in a hospital for 20 years and the results of those codes were eventually related to the CDC and the WHO, along with the rest of the worlds. Depending on the capability of the coder many diagnoses are missed, coded wrong or not coded at all. I was extremely disappointed when the CDC did away with isolation precautions and the wearing of gowns and gloves for infection control. Poor patient care in my opinion.

It would be prudent to say that it takes about ten years of monitoring a new medicine, vaccine or medical procedure to realize the total picture of late effects and adverse effects. (two different things)

On the other hand, everytime a person has a tonsillectomy, hernia repair or open heart surgery they sign a permit that says death is a possibility, of course from the anesthesia. So the adverse effect of death is a common factor, many times just to protect physicians arses.

I can not imagine subjecting a nine or ten year old child to a STD preventing vaccine. I would hope that would not be in the moral fabric of the family or community. It is time for parents to take charge of their families and quit letting the declining morality of society decide what their children need.

The CDC is also the reason that TB has broke out again, they shut all the sanitariums down. The Bible states that if a person has a contagious disease, they must stay sheltered out of the community.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
I've been hearing a huge amount this vaccine for a bit and have been reading everything I can since my daughter is 8 and just about to the age where it is being pushed so hard to start getting the series. Not much about it inspires confidence that I would be doing the healthiest thing to allow my child to be given these shots.

First I found this: New England Journal of Medicine There isn't really one specific part that stood out as much as the entirety of the article taken as a whole made me not comfortable with this vaccine.

Next I came across this article: Researcher blasts HPV marketing It is an interview with Diane M. Harper, who is a scientist, physician, professor and the director of the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group at the Norris Cotton Cancer Center at Dartmouth Medical School in New Hampshire and a lead researcher who spent 20 years developing the vaccine for humanpapilloma virus. This was just one bit she had to say, but a really interesting read from a lead researcher who developed this.

• That is why it is important to note that the vaccine has not been tested for efficacy (effectiveness) in younger girls, she said. Instead, the effectiveness was "bridged" from the older girls to the younger ones - meaning that Merck assumed that because it proved effective in the older girls, it also would be effective in the younger ones. The actual tests on the younger girls, ages 9 to 15, were only for safety and immune response, Harper said, and then only as a shot by itself, or in combination with only one other vaccine, Hepatitis B. It has not been tested in conjunction with any other shots a girl receives at about age 11, Harper said.


This bit, commented on in the New York Times came straight from Merck:

Merck has tested the cervical cancer vaccine in clinical trials of more than 20,000 women (about half of them got the shot). The health of the subjects was followed for about three and a half years on average. But fewer than 1,200 girls under 16 got the shots, among them only about 100 9-year-olds, Merck officials said, and the younger girls have been followed for only 18 months.

100 9 year olds? What? Someone is cracked in the noggin if they think I'm going to get my soon-to-be 9 year old these shots and they've only been tested on about 100 kids of the same age. Not enough money on this planet.

This is another New York Times article that I found and thought was very interesting. It is called "The Evidence Gap: Drug Makers’ Push Leads to Cancer Vaccines’ Rise". From the New York Times Blog I found an article called Blaming the Media for Gardasil Hype that was also a good read and had lots of great links to other articles.

After all of that reading, I decided that I can't risk allowing my daughter to be given these shots. There has not been nearly enough research done on them and the testing was dismally lacking. 100 kids just doesn't cut it for me. If you couldn't be bothered with testing it on more children than that, you sure won't be seeing me paying you to test it on my kid.

I had no idea how disturbed I would be once I finished all of the reading that I found about this Gardasil vaccine. It wasn't a hard decision to make after that. Thanks for posting about this dbates!

Take care,
Cindi



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   
The bad part of the deal Glencairn is that this is transmitted by the males but the ones targeted are females with dangerous vaccines.

The irony.



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
There is NO WAY my child will be getting this.

And I agree that there is more to this gardasil then meets the eye. It's being pushed on the entire female reproductive population. Young females. All getting this shot that was only tested for about 4 years. Made by MERCK, the makers of Vioxx that killed hundreds of thousands of people.


Originally posted by Leto
Absolutely no link has been made between the adverse effects cited in the article and Gardasil.

You are kidding, right?



posted on Feb, 28 2009 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
The bad part of the deal Glencairn is that this is transmitted by the males but the ones targeted are females with dangerous vaccines.

The irony.

I noticed that about it, too. Apparently they are either now testing or soon starting testing for males, though. I didn't focus a huge amount on that aspect because I only have the one girl child, but it looked like more and more males are asking for it to be tested for their use.

I don't see why it wasn't made for males to begin with. Even still, with the short time that it was tested and on such a small number of children who are almost the same age as mine, I wouldn't let my kid get it, boy or girl.

Take care,
Cindi




top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join