Natural Solutions Foundation
Science For Sale: HPV Vaccines “Safe” (For Vaccine Makers, Anyway) Once Liability Has Been Removed
Action Item: Tell Legislators you want the right to refuse Pandemic vaccines, self- shield instead:
[4:00:20 AM] Rima Laibow: The standard dogma says that Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) is a deadly killer which warrants the use of deadly force, at least deadly to the virus. Or maybe not. First of all, despite the associated 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine awarded to Harald zur Hausen, DSc, MD, from the German Cancer Research Center (Heidelberg, Germany) for his discovery that human papilloma viruses cause cervical cancer, that may not true, according to what the FDA has known for quite some time. But it sure sells vaccines.
The problem is that, like many such awards, they may be more politics than science to the selection. Studies show that 94% of sexually active women have some form of HPV and in almost all those cases, it goes away by itself without causing any problems at all. But studies also show that Gardasil appears to increase cervical cancer by 44.6 percent in women who are already carriers of the same strains of HPV used in the vaccine itself. Those same studies, well known to the FDA before the approval and release of this vaccine, actually show that Gardasil vaccination activates otherwise harmless forms of HPV and changes those infections from harmless to potentially lethal cancer-stimulating infections. Which is, after all, really good for business considering the profits gleaned from vaccination (enormous) plus cancer (almost unimaginably huge). What part of “Do no harm!” do the physicians who work for that company fail to understand?
“vaccination with Gardasil of the women who are already sero-positive and PCR-positive for vaccine-relevant genotypes of HPV has been found to increase the risk of developing high-grade precancerous lesions by 44.6%, according to an FDA VRBPAC Background Document : Gardasil HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine. May 18, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting. www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/briefing/2006-4222B3.pdf
Not only that, but FDA documents themselves make it quite clear that the FDA was aware for years that, Nobel Prize or no, Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) has no direct link to cervical cancer. Persistent infection with HPV, which the body’s immune system cannot clear, on the other hand, is, in fact, associated with cervical cancer. The infection and suppressed immune state, not merely the virus, are the culprits. Unless, of course, the woman or girl has been vaccinated with substances which weaken her immune system. Then the cancer rate, if she is already sexually active, increases by nearly 45%!
Consider this quote from FDA documents concerning whether there is any clinical reason to give sexually active girls and women, other than profit, of course, the HPV vaccine: “Finally, there is compelling evidence that the vaccine lacks therapeutic efficacy among women who have had prior exposure to HPV and have not cleared previous infection (PCR positive and seropositive).” [because virtually every woman who is sexually active carries the HPV viruses- REL]
We know that in 2003, the FDA concluded that the presence of HPV was NOT linked to the presence of cervical cancer. Therefore, authorizing a vaccine touted as a “prevention” for cervical cancer, let alone one that actually INCREASES the incidence of the disease is … well, typical for the drug-dependent Fraud and Death Administration.
An FDA news release of March 31, 2003 acknowledges that “most infections (by HPV) are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer”, in recognition of the advances in medical science and technology since 1988. In other words, since 2003 the scientific staff of the FDA no longer considers HPV infection to be a high-risk disease when writing educational materials for the general public whereas the regulatory arm of the agency is still bound by the old classification scheme that had placed HPV test as a test to stratify risk for cervical cancer in regulating the industry”, and, ” “The HPV DNA test [which detects the presence of HPV] is not intended to substitute for regular Pap screening. Nor is it intended to screen women under 30 who have normal Pap tests. Although the rate of HPV infection in this group is high, most infections are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer. [Emphasis added- REL]” http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2003/NEW00890.html
So the idea that Gardasil could possibly be effective OR safe is totally absurd both logically and clinically.
And, Oh, By the Way, HPV Vaccines Are Experimental in EVERYONE. Cerverix’s Manufacturer Documents Say So, Gardasil Final Evaluation Due 9/09.
As you will see when you read the second article following my notes to you, both the FDA and SKG, the manufacturers of Cervarix, understand this clearly. They understand as well that their product is not only dangerous, but that the dangers of its use have not yet begun to emerge, despite the tragedies already associated with it. That does not stop them from selling it, of course. That is what drug companies do, after all. Nor does it stop the FDA from approving it. That is what corrupt and self-interested regulators do, too.
Vaccination is an uninsurable risk because all vaccines are dangerous. Nether the FDA nor the drug companies seem deterred by this undeniable, and well documented fact. Nonetheless, Congress has removed all liability from this uninsurable risk and placed a special tax that all purchasers of vaccines pay to compensate some of those harmed, thereby guaranteeing the profits of the drug companies.
Recall that thimerisol, 50% mercury by weight, was tested for safety by Eli Lilly on 11 patients, all of whom died. Since they all had meningitis, Eli Lilly concluded, and the FDA colluded, that they would all have died anyway so, voila!, thimerisol is safe.
And that is why it can be included in your vaccines and your child’s too, shot after shot after cumulative shot. This is not science, it is voodoo.
Recall, too, the announcement recently of a brand new disease entity, never before seen: childhood ALS. It follows vaccination with Gardasil and with Cervarix, the “safe and effective” subject of the Lancet’s glowing July 7th article. That article, whose most interesting line is at the very bottom, “The study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. Several of the study authors have reported financial relationships with GlaxoSmithKline and/or Merck; the disclosures are listed in the paper. The editorialists declare no conflicts of interest.”, says that not only is this vaccine (which contains a dangerous squalene derivative in addition to amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate 80, sodium borate, (commonly used as a roach killer), and water for injection., “safe and effective”, it SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER HALF OF THE SEXUAL EQUATION: BOYS AND MEN! Question: how much money does Smith Klein Glaxo, the maker of Cervarix, pay annually to the Lancet, a once proud medical journal, for advertising and other forms of support?
The second article documents that every girl who receives Cervarix, soon to be approved for sale in the US, and the subject of a massive campaign to mandate it and Gardasil, its sister poison, for all girls and women, boys and men, is part of a grand experiment whose long term, and adverse, results will not be known for a generation. What if Cervarix and Gardasil cause infertility? Will we have lost a whole generation of child-bearing people? That would be consistent with the World Health Organization’s goals for its Task Forces created in 1974 to find male and female fertility control vaccines. The task forces have been quite successful in eliminating “excess population” in sub Saharan Africa, South and Central America, the Phillipines (where WHO was convicted on involuntarily sterilizing more than 3 Million women).
There is good reason to believe that in addition to cataclysmic reactions in the short term (including heart stoppage, analphalactic reactions, paralysis, blindness and death), long term results may be much worse. To quote the memorable words of Health and Human Services Secretary Karen Sibelius concerning what happens when all of America’s children are vaccinated with the untested, unsafe and unnecessary Swine Flu vaccine this fall, “We’ll just have to sit back and watch to see what happens and hope that there are not too many adverse events.” Secretary Sibelius has yet to define just exactly how many adverse events will be too many and what will take place in the event that the FDA and CDC decide that there have been “too many” adverse events, as there were in the last “Haste Makes Death” Swine Flu vaccination disaster in 1976 and in every other vaccine campaign carried out.
JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association, not an anti vaccine venue, put it this way “Results from our community-based study [of the benefits of Gardasil vaccination] provide strong evidence that there is little, if any, therapeutic benefit from the vaccine in the population we studied. Furthermore, we see no reason to believe that there is therapeutic benefit of the vaccine elsewhere because the biological effect of vaccination among already infected women is not expected to vary by population.” Effect of Human Papillomavirus 16/18 L1 Viruslike Particle Vaccine Among Young Women With Preexisting Infection – Journal of the American Medical Association, August, 2007.
Even the antibodies produced by the vaccine, which may have little or nothing to do with immune protection against the virus, are not long lasting and “While Gardasil is the most expensive vaccine ever to be recommended by the FDA, its long-term effectiveness is unknown and could be as brief as only two to three years. [emphasis added- REL]
• During testing, an aluminium-containing placebo was used. Aluminium can cause permanent cell damage and is a reactive placebo, unlike most standard saline placebos. This means that tests of Gardasil may not have given an accurate picture of safety levels.” http://uncensored.co.nz/2009/03/27/a-judicial-watch-special-report-examining-the-fda%E2%80%99s-hpv-vaccine-records/
It is clear that Gardasil is not effective. Is Gardasil safe? The reports of young women and girls experiencing horrific adverse events number in the thousands. One citation from October, 2007 makes the point effectively, although not exhaustively, indicating, among other things, that of the 77 pregnant women receiving the vaccine, 33 of them experienced adverse events including fetal abnormalities and spontaneous abortions: FDAnews Drug Daily Bulletin – Oct. 11, 2007 | Vol. 4 No. 200
Gardasil Adverse Events Include Deaths, Seizures, Judicial Watch Says
There have been 3,461 reports of adverse events, including a maximum of 11 deaths, in patients receiving Merck’s cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, public interest group Judicial Watch said.
Since May, the group has found documents detailing 1,824 reports of adverse reactions to Gardasil (quadrivalent human papillomavirus [Types 6, 11, 16, 18] recombinant vaccine), including eight deaths. Before May, Judicial Watch had obtained 1,637 adverse event reports. The group received the data from the FDA through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.
Of the 1,824 adverse events reported between May 10 and Sept. 7, 347 were serious reactions including paralysis, Bell’s palsy, Guillain-Barre syndrome and seizures, according to the group.
Thirty-three out of 77 pregnant women who received the vaccine experienced side effects, including spontaneous abortion and fetal abnormalities, Judicial Watch added.
“In light of this information, it is disturbing that state and local governments might mandate in any way this vaccine for young girls,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said. http://www.fdanews.com/newsletter/article?articleId=99624&issueId=10844
By June 30, 2008, the same source, Judicial Watch, said, noting that the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports are grossly under-reported and that the real numbers are likely to be substantially higher, “Merck’s patent and drug information submitted to the FDA, transcripts and briefing material from approval meetings, and reports documenting health, safety, and efficacy test results, as well as VAERS documents detailing 8,864 cases of adverse effects experienced by people after receiving the Gardasil vaccine. VAERS reports show that at least eighteen people have died after receiving Gardasil [in the US alone- REL].” http://uncensored.co.nz/2009/03/27/a-judicial-watch-special-report-examining-the-fda%E2%80%99s-hpv-vaccine-records/
Cervarix is on track for approval in the United States in the near future.
Supported by science for hire, the US application for approval of Cervarix is on target for approval despite the fact that the “science” in this study is so shoddy that the “placebo” was not a saline shot, it was another dangerous vaccine, GlaxoSmithKline’s Hepatitis A vaccine which contains Hepatitis A virus, the chemicals formalin, (AKA Formaldehyde), aluminum hydroxide, 2-phenoxyethanol, and polysorbate 20, and human diploid cells from aborted human fetuses. Cerverix contains aluminum and a dangerous lipid-base adjuvant calles ASO4. By definition, a pacebo has no biological activty. Testing two toxic brews against one another tells you nothing about the relative safety of either since the difference between them is reduced to the difference between the two toxins. If one is as toxic as the other, the statistical difference will be zero and a hired lab gun could conclude, especially if his job were at stake, that neither one was toxic when, in fact, both might be wildly dangerous. Like Cervirix, Gardasil was tested against a placebo containing aluminum and other toxins. The hired white coats are, in truth, hired killers.
The science here is appalling. The public health betrayal is breathtaking. Senator Chuck Grassley is disturbed by the disconnect between the big name at the front of the Author line and the fact that the hired lab coat may never have even seen the data. We should be disturbed, too. That big name author carries a great deal of weight in the ‘herd beast’ which is scientific opinion. Data-for-hire is part of the corrupt Fraud and Death System. Vaccines and dangerous drugs are its spawn. And we are its victims. We and our children, that is. Fraud that can kill.
And the US Government wants us to “trust” them because they will make sure that the Swine Flu vaccine they have rushed into production, approved without even as much “testing” as they carried out or reviewed on Gardasil. They want to inject this unproven, uninsurable brew into our children first to “wait and see if here aren’t too many adverse events”? Over our collective cold, dead bodies I say! The “public servant” who made that statement should resign in shame. And her boss, our new President who promised change, should pledge to adhere to the strictures of the Helsinki Declaration on Medical Experimentation from now on. This callous betrayal of the “trust” they demand must not be forgotten.
Click here, http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/568/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=27275, to demand the right to self-shield instead of being injected with another deadly brew or forced into isolation, quarantine or incarceration, which is what both State and Federal laws permit.
Our seminal white paper, Stay Home, Stay Alive: Your Right to Self-Shield is here:
And click here, http://drrimatruthreports.com/?page_id=189, to continue to support the Natural Solutions Foundation so we can bring you the truth you need when you need it. Supporters provide 100% of our support. Gifts, large or small, are tax deductible in the United States since we are a 501 (c) (3) tax exempt organization. Size does not count here, but numbers do. Please give generously. In the time of Declared Pandemic Madness which is upon us, you need the Natural Solutions Foundation more than ever! And we need you!
Yours in health and freedom,
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Natural Solutions Foundation
Valley of the Moon Eco Demonstration Project
Article 1: Cervarix is Safe and Effective – NOT! And Must be Extended to Boys and Men! Why Not!
July 8, 2009
The final results of a large phase 3 trial have confirmed that a bivalent vaccine is highly effective at protecting against human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18. Licensed under the name Cervarix and manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, the vaccine was effective at providing protection against cervical intrpithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) lesions asociated with HPV-16 and HPV-18, as well as lesions that were associated with nonvaccine types HPV-31, and GPV-45
These 5 HPV types are responsible for about 82% of all cervical cancers, researchers say, in a report published online July 7 in the Lancet.
This is 1 of 2 vaccines against HPV that are now commercially available, the other being Gardasil (Merck). At present, only Gardasil is marketed in the United States, while Cervarix is awaiting approval there. But both vaccines are marketed in many other countries worldwide, including most of Europe.
The 2 vaccines also differ in the range of HPV subtypes they target — Cervarix is active against HPV 16 and 18, while Gardasil is active against HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18.
But even though both HPV vaccines appear to be effective at reducing precancerous lesions and have the potential to substantially reduce the incidence of cervical cancer, current approaches are too limited, argue the authors of an accompanying editorial.
Cannot Be Limited to Women
The only efficient way to control the spread of HPV is to “vaccinate the other half of the sexually active population: boys and men,” write the editorialists, Karin Michels, PhD, from Harvard Medical School, in Boston, Massachusetts, and Harald zur Hausen, DSc, MD, from the German Cancer Research Center, in Heidelberg, Germany. Dr. zur Hausen was awarded the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of human papilloma viruses causing cervical cancer.
The primary public-health goal of immunization programs is to halt the spread of infection and ultimately disease, and the current targets for the HPV vaccines are girls and young women who have not yet become sexually active. But while this program will reduce cervical-cancer incidence in a couple of decades, they note, “this subgroup of the population at risk is too small to limit the spread of the virus.”
The editorialists point out that infection with oncogenic HPV types goes beyond cervical cancer, as they are also a primary cause of anal cancer and contribute to a substantial proportion of penile, oropharyngeal, and tonsillar cancers, all of which are predominant in men.
“Women have shouldered responsibility for contraception since its inception,” they write. “The goal to eradicate sexually transmitted carcinogenic viruses can be jointly carried by women and men and could be accomplished within a few decades.”
Lead author of the latest study, Jorma Paavonen, MD, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Helsinki, in Finland, agrees. “Vaccinating both girls and boys is important to produce so-called herd immunity, which protects the population as a whole and may ultimately lead to eradication of the high-risk oncogenic HPV types.”
He added that there is an ongoing randomized phase 4 community trial in Finland that is evaluating the HPV vaccine in both sexes, and more than 30,000 participants have already been enrolled.
The latest results, from a 3-year follow-up of women participating in the Papilloma Trial Against Cancer in Young Adults (PATRICIA), show the vaccine to be highly immunogenic, generally well tolerated, and effective against HPV-16 or HPV-18 infections and associated precancerous lesions, the researchers note.
Efficacy against CIN2+ associated with HPV types 16 and 18 was 92.9% (96.1% CI, 79.9% – 98.3%) in the primary analysis and 98.1% (95% CI, 88.4% – 100%) in an additional analysis, in which probable causality to HPV type was assigned in lesions infected with multiple oncogenic types.
The final analysis was event-driven, meaning that there were enough end points to show efficacy during this follow-up. “Also, the efficacy was even stronger when we used a CIN3+ end point, which is the immediate precursor of invasive cervical cancer,” he told Medscape Oncology. “This and the Kaplan-Maier curves show that the efficacy gets stronger over time and does not wear off.”
A total of 18,644 women between the ages of 15 and 25 years, residing in 14 countries, were included in PATRICIA. Participants were randomized to receive either the HPV vaccine or a control hepatitis-A vaccine. The analyses were conducted in several cohorts:
* According-to-protocol cohort for efficacy (ATP-E), which consisted of women who met eligibility criteria, complied with the trial protocol, and received all 3 doses of study vaccine (vaccine=8093; control=8069).
* Total vaccinated cohort (TVC), which included all women receiving at least 1 vaccine dose, regardless of their baseline HPV status; this represents the general population, including those who are sexually active (vaccine=9319, control=9325).
* Total vaccinated cohort-naive (TVC-naive), consisting of women with no evidence of oncogenic HPV infection at baseline; this represents women before sexual debut (vaccine=5822; control=5819).
All of the participants received vaccinations at months 0, 1, and 6, and the mean follow-up was 34.9 months after the third dose. The primary-end-point analysis was conducted in the ATP-E cohort, in participants who were seronegative at month 0 and HPV DNA negative at months 0 and 6 for the HPV type considered in the analysis.
Efficacy Observed for Vaccine and Nonvaccine Oncogenic Types
At the final analysis, there were a total of 60 confirmed cases of CIN2+, of which 33 (55%) contained DNA from nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types in addition to HPV-16 or HPV-18. Within this group, 12 CIN3+ lesions containing HPV-16/18 DNA, including 3 cases of adenocarcinoma in situ, were detected. Only 2 of these cases were found in the vaccine group, while the other 10 were detected among the controls.
Neither this trial nor any of the other trials have shown any safety signals.
Vaccine efficacy against CIN2+, irrespective of HPV DNA in lesions, was 30.4% in the TVC and 70.2% in the TVC-naive groups. The researchers also noted that efficacy against CIN3+ was 33.4% in the TVC cohort and 87.0% in the TVC-naive cohort.
The efficacy against CIN2+ associated with 12 nonvaccine oncogenic types was 54.0% in the ATP-E group. Since several lesions were coinfected with HPV-16/18, a post hoc analysis was conducted excluding these lesions, showing an efficacy of 37.4% against CIN2+ lesions associated exclusively with nonvaccine types. These 2 analyses suggest that the true vaccine efficacy against CIN 2+ associated with 12 nonvaccine oncogenic HPV types is between 37% and 54%, the authors note.
The authors also observed that the vaccine substantially reduced the number of colposcopy referrals and cervical-excision procedures in both the TVC and TVC-naive cohorts.
In general, the safety profile was generally similar to that of the control vaccine. “Neither this trial nor any of the other trials have shown any safety signals,” said Dr. Paavonen. “All existing evidence shows that the prophylactic HPV vaccine is safe.”
The study was funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals. Several of the study authors have reported financial relationships with GlaxoSmithKline and/or Merck; the disclosures are listed in the paper. The editorialists declare no conflicts of interest.
Lancet. Published online July 7, 2009.
Article 2: Girls used as Guinea Pigs in HPV Trials Admits GSK
Christina England – July 05, 2009
We have always suspected it and now they admit it, GSK are using young girls (as young as 9 in some areas) as human Guinea Pigs in HPV vaccine Cervarix trials. This was only discovered after reading a document that was meant for ‘Scientific Background and Informational Purposes only’?
Cervarix GlaxoSmithKline?s Cervical Cancer Candicate Vaccine Mandate. Media Backgrounder makes very disturbing reading as it states exactly what trials are to be carried out, with one particular very interesting line?
“Phase III Trials Phase III studies are underway in 37 countries with more than 39,000 subjects planned.”
So this appears to prove that all our children are part of one big experiment to enable the drug companies to line their pockets whilst they sit back and watch what happens to our children.
Whilst trawling the Internet a fellow member of ICAP also came up with this gem of a document which also appears to prove that our children are part of trials.
The document is the Presentation of advisory report Vaccination against cervical cancer from the health Council of the Netherlands to the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport
This is an official political document. It is called ‘Vaccination against Cervical Cancer’ and it was accompanied with a letter addressed to the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport in the Netherlands, from the Health Council. Interestingly the report outlines some very alarming points. The report discusses the differences between the two HPV vaccinations Cervarix and Gardasil.
“Both vaccines are designed to provide immunity against HPV-16 and 18: the two types of the virus responsible for about 70 per cent of cervical cancer cases. Gardasil also provides protection against HPV-6 and 11, which together cause nearly all genital warts. Broader-spectrum vaccines capable of protecting against hrHPVs other than HPV-16 and 18 may become available in due course. The vaccines differ from one another in terms of the adjuvants (vaccine-aiding agents) they utilise. Gardasil uses the well-established adjuvant aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulphate, while Cervarix uses the equally widely employed aluminium hydroxide, but in combination with monophosphoryl lipid A, a chemically modified lipopolysaccharide, that influences the innate immune system. The latter complex is known as ASO4. Cervarix stimulates higher levels of antibody production, but the significance of this phenomenon for its protective effect is not known.”
The report states that there is no real knowledge to how long the vaccine lasts or if a booster will be needed or if in fact it does protect against cervical cancer.
Vaccination protects against persistent infection and the precursors of cervical cancer
The initial effect of vaccination is favourable: vaccination leads to the formation of antibodies against the target hrHPVs and thus to protection against infection by those hrHPVs. This in turn brings about a major short-term reduction in the incidence of the precursors of cervical cancer. It is known that the development of such precursors is a prerequisite for the subsequent development of the cancer. Vaccination against cervical cancer itself. However, whether vaccination does in fact protect against cervical cancer will not be known for many years to come.”
Lovely isn’t it? Then it states:-?
“It is not yet clear whether booster vaccinations will be needed. The duration of the protection afforded by vaccination has yet to be determined. It is known, however, that high antibody levels persist for at least five years and that immunological memory is created. Protection is required, however, for several decades. The possibility that re-vaccination will be needed in order to provide such prolonged protection cannot be excluded at the present time.”
It carries on
“Although the available data provide an incomplete picture of the effectiveness of HPV vaccination, they are sufficient to support the expectation of significant health benefit: vaccination leads to fewer infections and thus to a reduced incidence of the precursors of cervical cancer. We may therefore move on to the next criterion. Thus, this chapter of the report considers whether vaccination might have any adverse effects that offset the attainable health benefit.
Although the trials so far conducted have involved the administration of HPV vaccine to thousands of women (nearly 12,000 have been given Gardasil and more than 16,000 Cervarix), the numbers are small compared with those that would be involved in general vaccination. If vaccination were made available to all twelve-year-old girls in the Netherlands, that would mean treating roughly 100,000 young people a year. Certainty regarding the vaccine?s safety and insight into any rare side-effects that it might have are therefore very important.”
For me however, the highlight of whole report and letter is in the Executive Summary at the beginning where it states quite clearly:-
“With regard to safety, the third assessment criterion, there is currently no reason to suppose that the vaccine has any adverse events that might preclude its inclusion in the NIP. Nevertheless, the possibility cannot be excluded that, if it were administered to large numbers of people, relatively uncommon adverse events might come to light in due course. This underlines the importance of careful monitoring following the introduction of this form of vaccination.”
I would particularly like to draw your attention to this phrase “relatively uncommon adverse events might come to light in due course” In other words the more they vaccinate the more likely it is that a serious adverse reaction will show up. That is really great news to all parents out there with children about to be vaccinated with Cervarix or Gardasil. Your children are part of a nationwide test but it is OK because if your child gets very bad reaction it will help determine the safety of the vaccine. I am sure that will be a great comfort to mothers of children like Ashleigh Cave who is still in hospital after a Cervarix vaccination. She has now been in hospital for 9 months, is just beginning to be able to put a very small amount of weight on her legs, cannot stand unaided and has recently lost bladder control at 13.
The news gets better for all you parents out there because Suzanne Garland who is the director of Microbiology and Infectious Diseases at the Royal Woman’s Hospital in Melbourne has decided she wants to include babies in the HPV vaccine trials. She is on the advisory boards for both rival companies Merck and Glaxo Smith Kline and has proposed to test cervical cancer vaccines in babies, with a view to adding the vaccine to the infant immunisation program. This is according to The India Times in 2007
Suzanne Garland has a special interest in the management of herpes in the pregnant woman and the neonate. She is an advisor to World Health Organisation in the area of sexually transmitted infection diagnosis and the prophylactic HPV vaccine Obs-Gyne Exhibition & Congress Speakers Tackle Cervical Cancer Vaccine Issues And Encourage Advocacy
So she has no real conflicts of interest there then, does she? Not only is she on both boards of advisers for Merck and GSK but she is an advisor to WHO! It appears that no matter who advises Governments on vaccinations whether it is WHO or the JCVI,the members have strong links and alliances to the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture the vaccines, therefore, how can the general public trust the people who tell us the vaccines are safe? As we have seen we are all just human Guinea Pigs to them, of course they are safe!