The Truth about Gardasil - Latest Comments

Re: Is borax responsible for Gardasil’s adverse side effects?

Dr. T — Sun, 01 Apr 2012 22:19:04 -0000

unless they added borax to the aluminum adjuvant placebo, I doubt it is the culprit as the placebo group had the same rates of deaths and adverse events.

Re: Less frequent pap testing won’t increase cervical cancer death rate, authorities say

John Wagoner — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:10:52 -0000

Some alternative thoughts on the promotion of Gardasil for supposed protection from cervical cancer:
     Its unethical to seek to stampeded people to get the HPV vaccine with such statements as   " cervical cancer is the second leading cause   of cancer death in the world ". In the U.S., cervical cancer represents   one percent of all cancer,   and its cure   rate   is   75 %.     Cervical cancer represents     a death rate of 2.4 per million, or 2,500 deaths per   year.    The rate of   unexplained   death   and serious life altering ( disabling ) illness among the   vaccinated   is greater    than the death rate of cervical cancer.    This is quite interesting,   as society seems willing to risk the lives and health of   children, to   someday extend of lives of middle age    women ( the median age of cervical cancer patients is 49 ) .    Isn't this     a lot like child sacrifice ? This would not be so bad if the vaccine was proven to have any effect on cervical cancer, but it   has not.   There are no results from clinical trials   that show hpv vaccines protect women   against cervical cancer. That answer won't be know for decades.   Why   submit children to risk for   unproven protection    from a cancer   that   most likely occurs at age fifty?    Does anyone really believe there will be no medical advances in cancer treatment   in the next thirty five years ?
    Does Merck, the CDC, and the FDA deserve   our trust ? Remember, at least thirty five thousand people    died from the approved   Merck drug Vioxx during the five years it was on the market. .   The rate of death   from   Vioxx   was twice the rate of death   from cervical cancer.       Now we are to trust   Merck when they are protected from liability   as a vaccine maker ?
    Just   say No to the HPV vaccines,   which are unproven,   unsafe,   unethically promoted, and unnecessary.

Re: Young woman posts YouTube video about her Gardasil experience

Gailbogart — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:24:50 -0000

Please don't let your daughters (or sons) have this gardasil.

Re: Aggressive marketing of Gardasil plays on public fear of cancer

Fucked — Wed, 11 Jan 2012 19:10:37 -0000

Gardasil all HPV Vaccines

How does a vaccine work when acquired immunity has not been established
As
in that is how vaccines work, Acquired immunity was seen and documented
in man or animal and a vaccine was made that had this immunity in it ,

The Vaccine has an immunity in it, to work small pox cow pox chicken pox
ect
the vaccine for small pox and chicken pox has this immunity cell structure so the body can learn the immunity

HPV a Wart No NO no, a man or animal in history has not developed the immunity, never get anouther Wart {external, internal}

warts plantar what ever
their all a wart
where they grow changes the name

complicated they made it
so they are lieing

No MSDS
nothing in government has the legal authority to make legal a product
with no msds
The product jumped through all the testing

Merck are lieing and pretending to be somehow that authority

Pharmacutical companys have not done this before
and then try to force mandate an untested vaccine
a vaccine that, science in making vaccines does not support Gardasil or any HPV Vaccines

Their is some pilot project i noticed

Terrorists
computer program
Animated computer program to look like people and
get them to say what they would like to say
News government
ect
To make Gardasil look legal
you have noticed
its a lot bigger
Criminal intelligences

Re: Canadian coroner expresses worry about Gardasil side effects

Sandrodangelo — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 09:03:15 -0000

wow - you wonder if this is all about money and the drug manufactures just pushing the drug and not enough research with respect to the potential side effects??

The more you read the more you wonder if anone realy knows all the serious side affects? Any link to Type 1 diabetes?

Re: Parents advised to cautiously weigh pros and cons of Gardasil vaccine

Nonna — Tue, 29 Nov 2011 00:20:19 -0000

These observations are especially insightful considering that there are only 4,000 deaths from cervical cancer a year (compared to 40,000 deaths from breast cancer). The risk/reward just doesn't make sense, especially for pre-teen girls. In addition, the long-term effects of this vaccine are unknown as no studies have been conducted on girls reproductive systems 15 years AFTER getting the vaccine.There is NO WAY I would have my daughter/granddaughter vaccinated. This program benefits Merck, and very few others.

Re: Cervical cancer vaccine may cause women to skip vital screening

stomach cancer — Wed, 19 Oct 2011 03:14:14 -0000

Hi,

Its really big news guys about that cervical cancer vaccine may cause women to skip vital screening.

Thanks guys.

Re: Filmmakers plan documentary about Gardasil harmful side effects

Donna — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 16:37:44 -0000

My Daughter is 18 yrs. old. She took the Gardasil vacine three yrs. ago and now she has been diagnosed with cervical cancer. This was meant to prevent it, not cause it. I am telling all parents not to let their Daughters take these shots. I am furious. And I believe the medical association is to blame. I'm sure it's not just the medical association alone. But I do know they made millions off of this. DO NOT LET YOUR DAUGHTERS TAKE THESE SHOTS!!!!!!!

Re: Canadian coroner expresses worry about Gardasil side effects

ap2013 — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 21:46:14 -0000

IF CANADA IS CALLING FOR MORE RESEARCH ON GARDASIL WHY ISN"T THE UNITED STATES?

Re: First post

Barbara Williams — Mon, 03 Oct 2011 16:27:10 -0000

Don't call them ignorant, call them money hungry.

Re: First post

ianmacleod — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 18:03:29 -0000

" That even more women and girls will be sacrificed for Merck’s bottom line as Gardasil shots are unnecessarily doled out is nothing less than criminal."

Agreed; so is the fact that the corporate criminals who have perpetrated an insider takeover of the government and are now operating it solely for the profit of the "elites" and the corporations they own have used the law to protect the vaccine makers against ANY kind accountability. That removes any reason to make or sell anything that is actually effective, much less safe. Why should they bother? All they need to do is put something into a syringe, raw sewage if they feel like it - and sell it as whatever - an inoculation against age and death if they want - and when it fails to work or turns out to be deadly, they can say, "Oh well; too bad, but there's nothing you can can do about it."

And they'll be right.

Ian

Re: Gardasil injures and kills many, but no recall

Susana Wright — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:48:02 -0000

Thanks for the truth you have posted here, vaccines are not safe, I had horses die and foals be aborted from the disease they had been vaccinated for 3 times in 11 months. The vet identified the disease in the mares as the cornmeal looking specks on the umbilical cord. Then the mares died later with the same disease. Guess what the drug companies and labs said when we tried to report it? Oh we can't prove it was that disease and they probably had it before you gave the vaccinations. My friends had healthy horses die of a disease after the 3rd to 5th booster on West Nile. Guess what the vets and labs said? Oh, they probably had it before the vaccinations. So those deaths are not even reported on the danger or side effect results. Hmmmmmmm.........You decide for yourself, I did, no more vacs for any person, animal around me. My vet asked me if I was prepared for my horses to die. I said I wouldn't do that if I though they would die. I have vets that taught me this. It took me 12 yrs to get the strength of my convicttions to follow through with it. That has been 15 yrs ago and no horse has died or even been sick since. I used to have my show horse sick often with Rhino, so they vac him more often to try and stop the sickness. When I stopped his vacs, he hasn't had a cold since. Hmmmmmmm you decide on that, I know I have. The natural vets with Dynamite products (Natural supplements etc) do not give any of their kids, or pets any vaccinations, not even Rabies. The titer counts on horses non vaccinated compared with vaccintaed horses are higher., That means their immunity is better than the vaccinated ones. Hmmmmm .....Research it, you will find out the truth. I know I did. DId you know some of the ingredients in some of the vacs? Live virus, dead killed virus, mercury, formaldehyde, etc.... Research it, and you cam make your own conclusions. Look what you are injecting into your loved ones whether they be human or animal. they take the infected pus from monkeys and use it to make the vacs from, did you know that? Do you think that is what God intended to be injected into a persons body? Thanks for taking the time to look into this. Sincerely Susana

Re: Did Bachmann overblow Gardasil side effects? What are the risks?

Jenny Hatch — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 17:18:51 -0000

I put together seven videos on my blog mostly produced by Family Members detailing the DEATHS around the Gardasil Vaccine.http://jennyhatch.com/2011/09/13/gard... also wrote an article for Blogging Mothers Magazine that details the many attempts made on my life as a Blogging Mother who began warning families about the Gardasil Vaccine before it even hit the market. I believe I have been protected by God these past few years as those tied to the Pharma Companies have attempted to silence my voice:http://bloggingmothersmagazine... Hatchhttp://WWW.JennyHatch.com

Re: Vaccine watchdog group asks FDA to review Gardasil for possible contamination

Ginny Auldridge — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 04:41:40 -0000

tainted vaccines are not good for women

Re: Did Bachmann overblow Gardasil side effects? What are the risks?

Marciainbelmont — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:44:04 -0000

Why aren't doctors promoting informed choice to parents, rather thanjust jumping on the CDC/government bandwagon in pushing this vaccination. Our doctor wanted to give my daughter Gardasil at the age of 11! She is 14 now and she will never get the vaccination!

Re: Did Bachmann overblow Gardasil side effects? What are the risks?

Jollyd — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 12:39:24 -0000

Not to mention that testing of 100 samples of the vaccine were shown to be contaminated with the live GM virus.

Re: Video links young woman’s illness to Gardasil vaccinations

Myleen201 — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 14:01:06 -0000

God Bless you and keep you Gabby.The FDA members have a special hell waiting for them!But its heaven for you sweetie!

Re: FDA records raise new concerns about Gardasil safety

Guest — Thu, 28 Jul 2011 09:25:43 -0000

this is the official new report by the CDC and the FDA using all registered VAERS about gardasil real safety in the USA, updated to june 2011!
this is the link: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafe...
it explains clearly VAERS, how it works, and the studied relation between the reported adverse events around Gardasil.it states that no death was considered related to Gardasil, that Guillain-Barre syndrome (characterized by muscle tyreness) present usually in teen girls, on a rate of 1-2 /100,000 people, and incidence of it is comparable to normal population and no relation was found for gardasil beeing the cause. the same with blood clots as patients that presented them had more than one real blood clot risk factors.32 million doses only in the USA (over 90 million worldwide) is a good number to say the vaccine is actually safe!

Re: Gardasil rushed to market despite low benefit vs risk ratio

Mindanoiha — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 14:06:46 -0000

“Replacement” is a normal phenomenon in which virus strains which have been removed by a vaccine are always replaced by new strains.

Gardasil is marketed as a cancer preventive. However, the complete opposite may occur: It is not known by anyone at all whether the new strains will be more carcinogenic than the ones which have been removed.

In other words, Gardasil may actually increase the risk of cancer.

Re: Cervical cancer vaccine may cause women to skip vital screening

Eliz52 — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 22:59:16 -0000

I know many believe the pap test is the most effective screening test in history. I can’t agree…

There are no RCT’s for pap testing and also, this was always a rare
cancer, in decline before screening started and those factors are still
having an effect on the incidence and death rate. Dr Gilbert Welch
points out things like better hygiene and less sexually transmitted
disease in his book, “Over-diagnosed”. I’d add more hysterectomies (1 in
3 US women will have one by age 60!), fewer women smoking, better
condoms etc…

It’s true that stomach cancer has also fallen by a similar or greater
margin with no screening at all, yet you can bet if there was a
screening test, they’d be grabbing the credit.
The thing that writes off cervical screening for me: vast
over-detection and potentially harmful over-treatment. I also hate the
way cancer screening is regarded as compulsory for women, elective for
men. Women don’t get balanced and complete information and our legal
right to give informed consent for cancer screening is dismissed…in the
States and Canada women are routinely coerced into cancer screening and
often, over-screening and reckless screening. (screening women not yet
sexually active from age 21)

I know American doctors refuse women birth control pills, HRT, migraine
meds and even all medical care until they agree, to not only cancer
screening, but completely unnecessary and potentially harmful breast and
gyn exams. (these exams are not recommended in asymptomatic women here
and in many other countries)

There is a double standard in cancer screening.
In Australia we also over-screen (not as badly as the States) and
there is zero respect for informed consent (for women) – our GP’s even
receive an UNDISCLOSED target payment for pap testing (about to be
raised to 65% of eligible patients)…this is unethical as it creates a
potential conflict of interest. These payments were recently changed in
the UK, thanks to the work of some amazing advocates for informed
consent for women.
Here we screen women from 18 (sometimes earlier) knowing this is of no benefit, but exposes these women to harm and great worry.
“No country in the world has shown a reduction in the incidence of or
the mortality from cervical cancer in women under 30, irrespective of
cervical screening. Many countries do not perform cervical screening on
women under 30″…”Cervical cancer screening” a handout for doctors (not
women!) in “Australian Doctor” 2006 by Assoc Prof Margaret Davy and Dr
Shorne.

Still we continue to test young women….thank goodness more young women are getting to the truth and refusing pap tests. It concerns me that people like Dr Pesce still scold young women when they know these women are making the right decision, one that will protect their health.I have to wonder about the motives of doctors, medical groups and screening authorities/Govt who deliberately give women incorrect advice? Are young women being used as part of an unauthorised experiment to determine whether Gardasil is indeed reducing the number of cervical lesions or warts? This is unethical without the consent of the women however, informed consent is a joke in women's cancer screening, so no doubt few would worry about more unethical conduct.These young women would have a strong case against their doctors and the govt - many will be left worried sick after false positives and even damaged after unnecessary biopsies and procedures. My GP now advises young women not to screen - she's given up on the the govt doing the right thing and can't stand by watching young women being worried and harmed. This evidence has been around for many years, it is not controversial...it's a fact - there is no benefit testing women under 30, but it causes great harm - ask Assoc Prof Davy!
Finland has the lowest rates of cc in the world and sends the fewest
women for colposcopy/biopsies (fewer false positives) – they offer 5 to 7
tests in total, 5 yearly from age 30. (even this schedule sends 35%-55% at some
stage for follow-up)

Australia often boasts about having the lowest mortality rate in the
world, but we keep our shameful over-detection and over-treatment rates
under wraps. This low rate is achieved at a terrible cost paid by the
healthy population of women – the more than 99% who’d never have an
issue with this cancer and all with no informed consent.
Dr Angela Raffle, UK screening expert showed that 1 in 3 pap tests
will be “abnormal” in women under 25 – false positives caused by normal
changes in the maturing cervix and from harmless and transient
infections. Cervical cancer is rare, very rare before 30 and screening
doesn’t change the incidence or death rate in young women anyway.

It is unethical to test women under 30 and definitely before 25 and to test any woman without informed consent.
We also test 2 yearly and this means lots of false positives for no additional benefit – it’s over-screening.

77% is the lifetime risk of referral for colposcopy and usually some
sort of biopsy to cover a 0.65% lifetime risk of cervical cancer. Take
out false negative cases and considering other factors are affecting the
incidence and death rate – fewer than 0.45% of women are helped
(assuming any woman is helped) The States it’s even higher – lifetime
risk of referral – 95%…(DeMay article at Dr Sherman’s site)

This amount of over-detection and over-treatment IMO, makes this testing
unsuitable for population screening. I don’t believe it would be
approved today.

Now we have a program that is highly lucrative, very political and
highly emotive….it helps few and harms (to some degree) many….

Some women end up worse off after unnecessary biopsies and procedures
like LEEP – cervical stenosis, (infertility, infections, endometriosis
and may need surgery if the cervix is scarred shut) cervical
incompetence – miscarriages, high risk pregnancy that may require
cervical cerclage, more c-sections, premature babies and
psych/psychosexual issues.

No one seems to care about these women and there are lots of them – the
entire focus is on screening and the incidence and death rates for this
rare cancer.

My own younger sister had a cone biopsy after a false positive pap test – a devastating experience.
It’s the same with mammograms – we don’t get honest and complete information and there is no respect for informed consent.

Thankfully, the UK has some great people prepared to speak up and warn
women of the risks. Professor Michael Baum, UK breast cancer surgeon
gave another informative lecture at UCL recently, “Breast cancer
screening: the inconvenient truths” – at the Medphyzz site.

It’s also possible to get to the facts behind cervical screening – Dr
Joel Sherman’s patient privacy site under women’s privacy issues has
lots of great references, including research by Angela Raffle. “1000
women need regular smears for 35 years to save one woman from cc”
(BMJ:2003/4) plus over-detection and over-treatment rates.
It’s hard to understand why we spend a small fortune “fighting” this
rare cancer when there are FAR greater threats to our lives out there…it
says to me that these programs have little to do with our health. The
priorities are skewed by pressure/lobby groups, political and vested
interests. ($$$)

I think cancer screening is a great threat to our health, rights and lives.

I made an informed decision, as a low risk woman, not to have pap
testing more than 25 years ago and more recently, rejected mammograms. I
didn’t get the information I needed from my doctor.

More than ever before we need to do our own reading, spread the word and
make informed decisions about our health care. I don’t give a damn
about screening targets or my GP’s incentive payment…

Is this really in MY best interests?

Re: New Zealand parents holding off on Gardasil vaccine for their children

Stenton501 — Wed, 09 Mar 2011 19:30:58 -0000

shame on anyone who defends this deadly coctail. The rich get richer the takers of this can get killed by it. u weigh it up fools

Re: HPV authority says pap tests make Gardasil vaccine unnecessary

guest — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 02:02:00 -0000

One more thing? The vaccine is only effective if given BEFORE someone is infected. So I wonder what Dr. Harper advises a parent who has a daughter who has hands covered in warts to do? Fact: the daughter is already a carrier for HPV. Fact: young girls masturbate. Fact: by giving the child the immunization at an early age, there's a good chance to help minimize her chances of infecting herself with HPV that could potentially set her up for problems later on in life-because we aren't going to take an 11 yr old girl in for Pap smears to check for cervical changes. In fact, I don't think anyone would expect us to take her in at 14, or even 16, for Pap smears (unless she were to become sexually active, which she hasn't to date-she's 14 now). So tell me...what does a parent do? As the step-mother, I've been unable to convince her father to take action, and her mother is too paralyzed by websites like this one which help foster the sense that the immunization is worthless in every case and will only give her lupus or something else equally horrific. You must be so proud.

Re: HPV authority says pap tests make Gardasil vaccine unnecessary

Scseery — Mon, 22 Nov 2010 01:54:33 -0000

While properly done Pap screens do a great job at catching early stage cervical cancer, which is generally easily treated, your argument falls short. The part of the truth that nobody seems to want to talk about is that girls in their late teens and early twenties are notoriously bad about doing things like keeping those critical once a year appointments, and as legal adults, parents don't have the pull over them we had when they were younger. As a result, it's not unusual in the medical clinic where I work to see a twenty-something college girl, who only has come in because she's having "problems". Upon examination, we'll find that she's missed her yearly exams for at least one or two years, she's had multiple partners (even if it wasn't for true intercourse) in the interim, and that she's now scared, worried, and desperately wishing she had taken part in some preventative care. Right about then, everyone in the room thinks the patient should have had the Gardasil series-she's the ideal candidate. Since 60% of college age women contract some form of HPV at some point, and 40% of the strains of HPV can cause some kind of genital "problems", it only make sense that until these women are at an age where they are going to settle down into a monogamous relationship, they really need to be protected as much as possible. Furthermore, while cervical cancer IS one of the easiest to treat when caught early...well, if you don't catch it early, it's nearly always fatal, with a IIa or greater rated cervical cancer, the survival rate drops to 80% at 5 years; at IIIA it drops to 30%, and at IVA? Only 16%. That really is a slap in the face for all the people who think that cervical cancer is nothing to worry about. The harsh fact is that if you DON'T get a yearly exam, if you DON'T have a monogamous relationship, if you are casual and carefree and just think that HPV and cancer can be fixed with a magic wand? Well, you're playing with fire. Gardasil wasn't developed just because there was nothing good on TV. It was developed because there was a need to try to stop a trend of younger and younger women developing these low grade cervical cancers. The fact that it happened to be able to prevent genital warts was just a bonus. Yes, there ARE side effects, as with any vaccine, and yes, any intelligent patient should educate herself-however, I would caution her to avoid chat rooms, websites run by legal teams, churches, or any other potentially biased groups. Try peer reviewed journal articles from the library for your best source of honest, unbiased information, and discuss it at length with your doctor.

Re: FDA records raise new concerns about Gardasil safety

Ana — Fri, 05 Nov 2010 18:50:33 -0000

I really hope that parents learn to educate themselves about vaccines.

Re: Gardasil puts new emphasis on value, safety of childhood vaccines

Skyehealing — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 00:15:29 -0000

It is so sad how many young teens are misinformed by the government telling them its healthy to get on birth control pills and get vaccinated. Do the research, it is a serious life choice to get vaccinated. If the body is healthy and the immune system is strong, any virus can be kept away.
Skye Davis
www.earthtoskye.com