{"id":3185,"date":"2012-07-30T10:50:49","date_gmt":"2012-07-30T15:50:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/realfoodhouston.com\/?p=3185"},"modified":"2019-05-27T20:07:20","modified_gmt":"2019-05-28T01:07:20","slug":"gardasil-and-cervarix-whats-the-controversy-about-the-hpv-vaccine","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.realfoodhouston.com\/wp-files\/2012\/07\/30\/gardasil-and-cervarix-whats-the-controversy-about-the-hpv-vaccine\/","title":{"rendered":"Gardasil and Cervarix – what’s the controversy about the HPV vaccine?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Gardasil<\/a><\/p>\n

[This post has been updated several times as additional information about the potential harms of the HPV vaccine, including the newer one, Gardasiil 9, becomes available.\u00a0 Scroll down to the end of the post to see the updates.]<\/em><\/p>\n

The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines have been in the news frequently for the last several years.\u00a0 Young girls are encouraged and sometimes required to have the series of three vaccinations, and now, the HPV vaccines are even recommended for young boys.\u00a0 The governmental pressure to vaccinate, through mandates, school requirements, and criticizing parents who question the vaccines is growing, especially in the US, but also around the world.<\/p>\n

I decided to do some research into the controversy when I read about<\/a> a 2012 report in the British Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine<\/em> of a study that evaluated the HPV vaccine marketing push in India by The Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH), an organization with close ties to the Gates Foundation<\/a>.\u00a0 The problems the study uncovered intrigued me to look into this further.\u00a0 I found a wealth of information and it turned out to be more complicated, more interesting, and<\/em> more frightening than I expected.\u00a0 Here’s what I found.<\/p>\n

What is the human papillomavirus (HPV)?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The human papillomavirus is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the world.\u00a0 The virus affects<\/a> the “skin and mucous membranes, where they cause benign lesions, some of which have the potential to progress to invasive cancer.”\u00a0 More than 80% of American women will have been infected by at least one strain of HPV by age fifty<\/a>.\u00a0 HPV infection causes almost all cases of cervical cancer.\u00a0 There are at least 16 types of HPV that cause cancer, and two of those (HPV-16 and HPV-18) “cause 70% of cervical cancers, 80% of anal cancers, 60% of vaginal cancers, and 40% of vulvar cancers.”\u00a0 An additional two types of HPV (HPV-6 and HPV-11) cause 90% of genital warts.\u00a0 There are over 100 types of HPV<\/a> and more than 40 types are sexually transmitted.<\/p>\n

What are the vaccines and what do they do?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Gardasil (Merck) and Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) are the brand names of the two currently available HPV vaccines. Both protect against HPV-16 and HPV-18 and have been shown to prevent potentially precancerous lesions of the cervix.\u00a0 Although no long-term study has been conducted to determine if the vaccines actually prevent cancer, it is assumed<\/em> that they will protect against HPV induced cancers because they prevent HPV lesions.\u00a0 The Merck vaccine, Gardasil, also protects against the types HPV-6 and HPV-11, which cause\u00a0most genital warts.\u00a0 The vaccinations can be quite expensive–the series of three vaccines can cost between $400 and $1,000<\/a>.\u00a0 The cost to a pediatrician is more than $300<\/a>, and pediatricians often charge hundreds over cost.<\/p>\n

How prevalent is HPV<\/strong>?<\/p>\n

Although HPV is common, it is not widely prevalent<\/a> due to its normally short duration–about 90% of infections clear within 2 years without any remaining effects.\u00a0 According to one study, “At a given time, the overall prevalence of high-risk (cancer causing) HPV types was 15% of female participants; the prevalence of the types covered by the vaccine were 1.5% (HPV-16) and 0.8% (HPV-18).\u00a0 The overall prevalence of low-risk (wart causing) types was 18%.\u00a0 The two types covered by the vaccine were found in 1.3% (HPV-6) and 0.1% (HPV-11) of the population<\/em>.\u00a0 Overall, the types prevented by the vaccine were found in 3.4% of female participants.” The study’s conclusion: “the prevalence of HPV vaccine types was relatively low<\/strong><\/em>.” [emphasis added]\u00a0 About 85% of cervical cancers and 80% of deaths from cervical cancers occur in developing countries, and most of those are in women who haven’t had a Pap smear in five years.<\/p>\n

Are there potential benefits of the vaccine for women?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The vaccines are almost 100% effective against the two HPV types<\/a> included in the vaccines; they prevent HPV infection, the cervical cancer precursors, and the genital lesions associated with those types.\u00a0 The high effectiveness rate was only valid when<\/em> analysis was restricted to those women who had never been infected with those types of HPV.\u00a0 The vaccines cannot cure existing cases of HPV.\u00a0 Since the vaccine is effective against only two types of cancer-causing HPV, and 30% of cervical cancer is caused by other types, it is recommended that vaccinated women continue to have regular Pap smear tests.<\/p>\n

Both vaccines also protect against cervical dysplasia<\/a> caused by HPV types 16 and 18, a condition that can lead to cancer, but rarely does<\/a>, and can also be painful and costly to treat.\u00a0 Up to 70% of cases of dysplasia return to normal without treatment<\/a>, but the “greater the abnormality, the higher the risk for developing cervical cancer.”\u00a0 Most cases of dysplasia can be detected with a Pap smear test and can be cured with treatment; survival rate is over 90%.<\/p>\n

Are there any benefits for males?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The vaccine is now also recommended for boys, so are there benefits?\u00a0 It seems that the primary reason for males to be vaccinated against HPV is to protect the women who will be their sexual partners, especially where vaccination rates for females are low.\u00a0 The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the CDC recommends<\/a> the vaccine for boys of 11 and 12 to protect against anal and throat cancers.\u00a0 In fact, based on the Committee’s recommendation, it would appear to be more cost effective to vaccinate only homosexual boys because the risk for cancer is higher for them.<\/p>\n

Who is being targeted for the vaccination?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Since the vast majority of cases of cancer and cancer deaths from HPV are in developing countries, it would seem that administering the vaccine in those areas would yield the greatest health benefits; however, “Unfortunately for Merck, that is not where the money is<\/a>.”\u00a0 In the US and other developed countries, the primary beneficiaries of vaccinations, especially mandatory ones, appear to be Merck and GlaxoSmithKline.\u00a0 On the other hand, providing unlimited vaccinations to developing countries who don’t even have clean water, sanitation, and enough nutritious food is also problematic. Here’s the response<\/a> of one visitor to a remote village in Africa that had been given Gates Foundation vaccines: “I don\u2019t care who you are or what side of the vaccine philosophy you fall under, there is no logic in the world that can explain going into a remote village with children who only eat one meal a day and have never had clean drinking water \u2026 and giving them a vaccine. Seriously?”<\/p>\n

Since both Gardasil and Cervarix are preventive vaccines, they do not treat or cure active HPV infections.\u00a0 To be effective, they must be administered before infection occurs.\u00a0 The highest prevalence of HPV was among women aged 20 to 24.\u00a0 The current recommendation is to vaccinate females from 9 to 25 years and to vaccinate males from 11 to 12 years.<\/p>\n

What are the risks from the vaccines?<\/strong><\/p>\n

One possible risk would be the creation of a false sense of security.\u00a0 The vaccines don’t protect<\/em> against at least 14 types of HPV that cause 30% of cervical cancers<\/em>, and women may not realize that they should continue regular Pap tests after vaccination.\u00a0 Drug trials lasted about three years, so we don’t know how long the benefit will last or if there are long-term risks associated with the vaccinations<\/em>.\u00a0 I myself have seen a comment by a young woman who said she would prefer getting vaccinated to having to submit to a regular Pap smear.\u00a0 She apparently didn’t know that the vaccinations don’t cover all types of cancer causing HPV and that she would continue to need the Pap test.\u00a0 How many others believe like she did?<\/p>\n

Some conservative groups in the US have opposed making the HPV vaccine mandatory<\/a> for young girls due to concern for parental rights and from fear that it would lead to early sexual experimentation because of a false sense of immunity to sexually transmitted disease.<\/p>\n

However, the most significant risks from the HPV vaccines are the serious adverse effects.\u00a0 First, we’ll look at the official CDC lists of side effects.<\/p>\n

Officially reported side effects of Gardasil:<\/em><\/p>\n

The official CDC list<\/a> of commonly reported side effects of Gardasil is similar to those from other vaccinations and include pain at the injection site (80%),\u00a0 headache (33%), redness or swelling (25%), and fever (14%).\u00a0 Other sources<\/a> include Gardasil side effects of nausea (7%), dizziness (4%), and diarrhea (3%).\u00a0 Slightly less common (more than 1%) side effects include vomiting, cough, toothache, joint pain, insomnia, sore throat, muscle pain, and dizziness.\u00a0 More serious side effects that have been reported are very high fever; weakness, tingling, or paralysis (possibly signs of\u00a0Guillain-Barr\u00e9 syndrome); and allergic reactions.\u00a0 Rare side effects that have been reported include appendicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), airway spasms, blood clots in the legs or lungs, seizures, and\u00a0Guillain-Barr\u00e9 syndrome.<\/p>\n

Death and serious health problems such as stroke and blood clots are reported more frequently<\/a> for Gardasil vaccination than for those receiving meningococcal vaccination.\u00a0 Another source reports that although the rate of adverse side effects from Gardasil is similar to those seen in other vaccines, there has been a higher incidence of fainting and blood clots<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Officially reported\u00a0side effects of Cervarix:<\/em><\/p>\n

The official CDC list<\/a> of commonly reported side effects of Cervarix is also similar to those from other vaccinations and include pain at the injection site (90%); redness or swelling (50%); headache and fatigue (50%); muscle or joint pain (50%); nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, or abdominal pain (25%); and fever (12%),\u00a0\u00a0 Although infrequent, some serious side effects have been reported, including high fever, behavior changes, seizures, fainting, and allergic reactions. Other sources<\/a> report rare side effects including gastroenteritis, appendicitis, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), airway spasms, blood clots, seizures, and\u00a0Guillain-Barr\u00e9 syndrome.<\/p>\n

Other reports of serious adverse effects from HPV vaccines:<\/em><\/p>\n

Official reports of vaccine side effects are maintained in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).\u00a0 Unfortunately there is an insufficient investigation of the reported side effects (and many are not even reported by doctors) to determine the cause; therefore, much of our evidence is anecdotal–stories of young women who appear to have been harmed by the HPV vaccines.\u00a0 One such case<\/a>, a young woman named Amanda, may bear more weight than some others.\u00a0 Her doctors were so concerned by her illnesses that they questioned giving the vaccine to their own daughters.\u00a0 Amanda had a reaction after her first dose.\u00a0 It began with soreness at the injection site and “eventually travelled [sic] down her arm, her legs, and led to a horrible autoimmune myofasciitis that is so painful Amanda had to go on morphine for the pain.”\u00a0 She had been a high school varsity athlete before being vaccinated but now must take “a handful of pills a day just to keep her illness tolerable.\u00a0 When she goes off the medicine, the excruciating pain and other debilitating symptoms return.”<\/p>\n

A class action lawsuit<\/a> is being brought against Gardasil manufacturer Merck in Australia led by Naomi Snell, a 28-year old woman who suffers from autoimmune and neurological complications after receiving the Gardasil vaccine. \u00a0 After the first dose of Gardasil, she had convulsions, severe back and neck pain, and lost her ability to walk.\u00a0 Unfortunately, at first her symptoms were diagnosed as multiple sclerosis (MS), so she continued with the second and third doses of the vaccine.\u00a0 Her doctors eventually retracted the initial diagnosis and labeled her condition as a neurological reaction to the vaccine.\u00a0 Others with similar complaints may join the lawsuit. [It’s important to mention here that although a lawsuit is possible in Australia, in the US, manufacturers of vaccines are shielded from liability by the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act<\/a> enacted by the US government in 1986.\u00a0 The US Supreme Court upheld that shield with a decision on February 22, 2011<\/a>, ruling that plaintiffs must go through the US compensation plan to seek damages, which are capped at $250,000.]<\/p>\n

MS-like symptoms have been reported multiple times after HPV vaccinations. A 2009 study<\/a> found that five cases of patients who had such symptoms within 21 days of receiving Gardasil “may be explained by the potent immuno-stimulatory properties of HPV virus-like particles which comprise the vaccine.”<\/p>\n

Documents obtained from the FDA by Judicial Watch provide information about reports of deaths and serious injury filed in the VAERS database as Gardasil reaction events.\u00a0 There were 16 deaths reported between May 2009 and September 2010<\/a> and 26 deaths reported between September 2010 and September 2011<\/a>.\u00a0 During the May 2009 to September 2010 time period there were 789 reports of serious effects, including 213 cases of permanent disability and 25 diagnoses of Guillain-Barr\u00e9 syndrome.<\/p>\n

Is the HPV vaccination worth the risk and cost?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Here’s a summary of what we know about HPV and the vaccines.\u00a0 Although Gardasil is very effective against the two HPV types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, the prevalence in the US of those types is very<\/em><\/strong> low, 1.5% and 0.8%, respectively.\u00a0 Up to 90% of HPV infections resolve without any treatment<\/em> within two years, and about 70% resolve within one year. Over 80% of HPV-caused cancers and cancer deaths are in developing countries, and most cancers occur in women who have not had a Pap smear within the previous five years.\u00a0 Having the vaccination does not eliminate the cost and inconvenience of regular Pap smear tests and has not been proven to prevent cancer.\u00a0 Even the\u00a0Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the CDC is becoming “concerned<\/a> about the cost effectiveness of vaccines, since the newest vaccines tend to be very expensive while protecting against diseases that affect fewer people.”<\/p>\n

I found many studies and reports that evaluated the risks versus the benefits of the HPV vaccine.<\/em>\u00a0 Here are a few highlights from those that had concerns:<\/em><\/p>\n

The British study <\/a>that first caught my attention concluded that “the rate of cervical cancer [in India] is not high enough to justify the cost and risks associated with Gardasil and Cervarix vaccines.\u00a0 Further, the authors noted that the rate of cervical cancer in India has dropped dramatically in a little more than 20 years, from 43 cases per 100,000 in 1982-83 down to 22 per 100,000 in 2004-05. . . . In the US and UK, the cervical cancer rate is less than half that found in India<\/strong><\/em>. This analysis found that giving the HPV vaccine makes no sense in light of both its cost and harmful effects<\/strong><\/em>. This doesn\u2019t even consider the fact that no cause-and-effect connection between HPV and cancer has ever been shown, so there is nothing to demonstrate that the very expensive HPV vaccines even accomplish what they claim.” [emphasis mine]\u00a0 The series of three vaccines can be very expensive, and the cost of medical treatment does matter because, if we spend limited resources on one disease or condition, we may not have enough resources for something much more serious.\u00a0 If cervical cancer is rare and the cure rate is already very high, does it make sense to promote the HPV vaccine at such high cost and with such devastating adverse effects?<\/p>\n

A study<\/a> from the University of British Columbia found that “while the world’s leading medical authorities state that HPV vaccines are an important cervical cancer prevention tool, clinical trials show no evidence that HPV vaccination can protect against cervical cancer<\/strong><\/em>. Similarly, contrary to claims that cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, existing data show that this only applies to developing countries. In the Western world cervical cancer is a rare disease with mortality rates that are several times lower than the rate of reported serious adverse reactions (including deaths) from HPV vaccination<\/strong><\/em>.” [emphasis added]\u00a0 This study found that participants were not fully informed of the potential risks<\/em><\/strong> of the HPV vaccination.<\/p>\n

Dr. Diane Harper, a researcher in the development of the vaccines and a consultant to the World Health Organization, once stated<\/a> that “even if we get the vaccine and continue Pap screening, we will not lower the rate of cervical cancer in the US<\/strong><\/em>” because the rate of cervical cancer is already so low. [emphasis added]<\/p>\n

An article<\/a> published in the Journal of the American Medical Associatio<\/em>n<\/em> (JAMA) on the Risks and Benefits of the HPV Vaccinations, says “if the potential benefits are substantial, most individuals would be willing to accept the risks.\u00a0 But the net benefit of the HPV vaccine to a woman is uncertain.\u00a0 Even if persistently infected with HPV, a woman most likely will not develop cancer if she is regularly screened.\u00a0 So rationally she should be willing to accept only a small risk of harmful effects from the vaccine<\/strong><\/em>.”\u00a0 [emphasis added]\u00a0 The author questions the extreme push to vaccinate huge populations: “These educational programs strongly promoting HPV vaccination began in 2006, more than a year before the trials with clinically important end points were published<\/strong><\/em>. How could anyone be so certain about the effect of the vaccine?” [emphasis added]\u00a0 Physicians and professional medical associations were provided with “ready-made presentations, slide sets, e-mails, and letters” to help market the vaccines before the study results were even published.\u00a0 Why would anyone promote any medical procedure before clinical study results had been published?\u00a0 Follow the money?<\/p>\n

A 2010 report<\/a> evaluated the adverse events that were reported following vaccination with Gardasil, including 49 deaths.\u00a0 The evaluation concluded that the data “suggest a dose-response and temporal relationship to Gardasil.”\u00a0 The study found that the adverse symptoms reported increased with each successive dose of the vaccination.\u00a0 For those who died, onset of first symptoms was within three days of the injection.\u00a0 One of the deaths was immediately following the second dose of vaccine.\u00a0 One of the conclusions by the authors is that those experiencing adverse effects from early doses should seriously consider stopping the HPV inoculation process<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n

An analysis<\/a> was performed after HPV DNA was found in the blood of a young Canadian girl.\u00a0 HPV is a virus that does not survive in the blood stream for long.\u00a0 HPV lives only on skin and mucous membranes.\u00a0 Although the subject is complicated, finding HPV DNA in the blood apparently indicated that the Gardasil vaccine given to the girl had been contaminated with “recombinant viral HPV-11 and viral HPV-18 residues, both of which firmly attached to the aluminum adjuvant<\/a>.”\u00a0 Recombinant DNA is artificially genetically engineered<\/strong><\/em>, i.e., is man-made, and is considered a biohazard.\u00a0 The study found HPV DNA contaminants in <\/strong><\/em>all<\/strong> samples from 13 lots of the Gardasil vaccine<\/strong><\/em>.\u00a0 A major concern of this finding is that recombinant DNA might trigger autoimmune disorders in those receiving the vaccinations.\u00a0 At the time of approval of the vaccine, both Merck (Gardasil) and the FDA said there was no viral DNA in the vaccine<\/em>.\u00a0 Determining whether the vaccine contained viral DNA was important because the DNA is a known to pose a health risk.<\/p>\n

One analysis<\/a> of studies that claim to support HPV vaccination found that the researchers “cherry-picked” the data, misapplied the data, or were sponsored by patent holders or financial beneficiaries of the HPV vaccines.<\/p>\n

When an HPV vaccine mandate was proposed in Canada, the Canadian Medical Association said<\/a> that “There is no epidemic of cervical cancer in Canada to warrant the sense of urgency for a vaccination program. . .”\u00a0 Deaths from cervical cancer had already declined dramatically before the vaccine was introduced, and even high-risk strains of HPV rarely cause cancer.<\/p>\n

What should you do and what questions should you ask yourself?<\/strong><\/p>\n

When the vaccine was first introduced in 2006, I thought it was great that scientists had come up with a treatment that could prevent cancer.\u00a0 Fortunately for my daughters, they were already beyond the early recommended ages, and I was not required to make a decision about whether to give them the vaccine.\u00a0 I am so glad now that they weren’t given the HPV vaccine because, when I began to research information about the HPV vaccines for this post, I was really surprised by the amount of information about the adverse effects and also disturbed by the insignificance of the possible benefits.\u00a0 I feel like I had been fooled by the heavy promotion of the vaccines and the implied seriousness of the government mandates.\u00a0 After what I have learned, if my children were that age today, I would not allow them to be vaccinated with Gardasil or Cervarix<\/em><\/strong>.\u00a0 To make your<\/em> decision, you must do as I have done and weigh the potential benefits against the potential risks as carefully as you can, including looking for more information through the sources below and other avenues of research.\u00a0 You should ask yourself is it necessary<\/em><\/strong> and, especially, is it worth the risk<\/em><\/strong>. As the JAMA article<\/a> said, the potential benefit of this vaccine is small; therefore, we should only be willing to accept a small risk of harmful effects.<\/p>\n

Update, October 31, 2012:<\/strong> Cervarix, Like Gardasil, Doesn’t Do What Was Claimed: Research<\/a>.<\/em> This is important new information demonstrating that the vaccine trials did not show that they prevented cancer.<\/p>\n

Update, November 13, 2012<\/strong>: UBC Researchers Advocate HPV Vaccine Scrutiny<\/a>.<\/em> “New research from the University of British Columbia (UBC) has provided evidence that Gardasil, a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, may cause a type of inflammation in the brain involving blood vessels (cerebral vasculitis) that can lead to death.”<\/p>\n

Update, May 1, 2013:<\/strong> HPV Vaccine Linked to Rare Disease with No Known Cure<\/a><\/em>. “Gardasil and Cervarix are two of the 76 FDA approved vaccines included in the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) database. Since Gardasil was approved for use in the United States, there have been 682 reports of ITP after vaccine administration. 126 of these reports occurred after HPV vaccines. If all vaccines carried equal risk, there should only be 18 reports of Idiopathic Thrombocytopenic Purpura after HPV vaccine use.”<\/p>\n

Update, June 19, 2013:<\/strong> Health ministry withdraws recommendation for cervical cancer vaccine<\/a><\/em>. The health ministry [Japan] decided June 14 to withdraw its recommendation for a vaccination to protect girls against cervical cancer after hundreds complained about possible side effects, including long-term pain and numbness.\u00a0 According to The Healthy Home Economist<\/a>: “It is important to note that it is rare for the Japanese health ministry to withdraw a recommendation for a vaccine that is used regularly by local governments and is spelled out as part of revisions to the Preventative Vaccination Law approved in April 2013.”<\/p>\n

Update, August 5, 2013:<\/strong> Have the HPV vaccines Gardasil and Cervarix been proven effective?<\/a><\/em> A recent study claimed there had been a significant reduction in cases of human papillomavirus (HPV) among young girls following the introduction of the HPV vaccine Gardasil in 2006. There are many flaws in the study.<\/p>\n

Update, August 9, 2013<\/strong><\/em>:\u00a0 The Hidden Connection Behind Viruses, Vaccines and Cancer<\/a><\/em> The “the CDC admits that HPV has never been isolated in culture<\/em>. . . . Merck, the maker of the HPV vaccine Gardasil, presented information to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prior to approval that their vaccine increased the risk of pre-cancerous changes by 44.6% in women exposed to HPV types 16 or 18 pre-vaccination.\u00a0 How many doctors do you know who test for the presence of these strains prior to administering the HPV vaccine?\u00a0 I have yet to hear of such a doctor.”\u00a0 [emphasis added]<\/p>\n

Update, August 9, 2013<\/strong><\/em>: Scientists Explain Why HPV Vaccines Are Unsafe<\/a><\/em> “There is no evidence that Gardasil or Cervarix can prevent cancer better than a decent screening program. There is strong evidence that they can produce severe and life-threatening harm. This report by 4 scientists documents how science has been corrupted & misused to promote these life-devastating vaccines. . . .\u00a0 Indeed, Gardasil appears to have failed to meet a single one of the four criteria required by the FDA for Fast Track approval.”<\/p>\n

Update, February 1, 2015<\/strong><\/em>: “In December 2014, Gardasil 9 vaccine, manufactured by Merck Sharp and Dohme, was approved by the FDA. This vaccine appears to be somewhat of a \u201csuper\u201d vaccine in comparison to the previous versions, as the FDA has claimed it can protect men and women against no less than NINE strains of the HPV virus.”\u00a0 (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

Multiple Updates, October 7, 2018<\/strong><\/em>:<\/p>\n

As of 2016, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is no longer marketing its human papillomavirus (HPV) bivalent vaccine, Cervarix, in the United States. (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

Study finds that the HPV vaccine can cause primary ovarian failure (POF) and premature menopause in young girls. (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

“HPV infection, resulting in naturally acquired human papilloma virus (HPV) antibodies, reduces the risk for new infection and cervical abnormalities linked to cancer in non-HPV vaccinated subjects. In addition to this startling finding \u2013 additional GSK-funded research from this year revealed that the HPV vaccine may not protect women against high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions, dysplasias. If, in fact, the HPV vaccines do not work as widely advertised, and natural HPV infectious exposures actually protect against the progression of HPV linked cervical changes to cancer, then taken together, both these findings challenge the most fundamental assumptions within vaccine science (aka vaccinology), and render highly dubious the oft repeated rhetoric that natural HPV infection is juggernaut \u2013like deadly force the best defense against which are\u00a0 universal immunization campaigns.” (source<\/a>)\u00a0 (study<\/a>)<\/p>\n

“Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine also contains approximately 500 mcg of aluminum.” (source<\/a>) “The aluminum in both Gardasil and Gardasil 9 is aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate (AAHS).” (source<\/a>)\u00a0 “Gardasil (as well as the Cervarix HPV vaccine) uses newer-generation aluminum adjuvants that induce a far more forceful immune response than conventional aluminum adjuvants (which are far from benign to begin with).” (source<\/a>)\u00a0 Additional information about aluminum in vaccines. (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

“The human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine and Hepatitis B vaccine (HBV) are recombinant [GMO] vaccines produced by genetically modifying yeast<\/strong><\/em> ( Saccharomyces cerevisiae). The vaccines therefore contain yeast proteins ranging from 7 mcg up to 5% of total protein content. The target proteins are weakly
\nimmunogenic. Vaccinologists defeat the immune system’s checks and balances and force an immune
\nresponse directed against these weakly immunogenic target proteins, by using immunological
\nadjuvants. The result is a robust immune response directed against target proteins which makes the
\nvaccines effective. However, this boosted immune response is not limited to the target proteins alone.
\nThe robust immune response is also directed at non-target proteins (yeast proteins in this case) thus
\nresulting in numerous off-target immune responses. Numerous epidemiological studies and a meta
\nanalysis have linked yeast containing vaccines to autoimmune disorders<\/strong><\/em>.” [emphasis added]\u00a0 (source<\/a>)<\/p>\n

Update, January 2019:<\/strong><\/em>: Researchers found contamination and missing antigens in the Gardasil 9 vaccine.\u00a0 Exposing Vaccine Contamination \u2013 More Results from Corvelva<\/a><\/p>\n