Is Fast Tracking Vaccines Dangerous? Ask Gabrielle about Gardasil.

Preventing Gardasil Vaccine Injuries & Deaths
by Barbara Loe Fisher
 
She is just 16: the intelligent, lively pretty girl from Kansas, who was a high school gymnast and cheerleader and got straight A’s until, in 2008, three Gardasil shots changed her life and she became one more Gardasil reaction statistic.

Today, Gabrielle never knows when she will be back in the hospital emergency room. Diagnosed with inflammation in the brain and body, the brain seizures won’t stop. She has had strokes. The right side of her body is weakened. She is in almost constant pain.  Gabi has developed lupus now. Her doctor says she could die.
 
Fast-Tracked Vaccine
 
Gardasil vaccine was fast tracked to licensure by the Food and Drug Administration in 2006. It contains genetically engineered virus-like protein particles (VLPs) and aluminum, which affect immune function. The exact mechanism of protection is unknown and the vaccine has not been evaluated for the potential to cause cancer or be toxic to the genes. It is a vaccine that, by the summer of 2009, already caused more than 15,000 thousand reports of vaccine reactions, including more than 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths…..
 
Read more with live links to references and watch a VIDEO HERE.

Barbara Loe Fisher is the President of The National Vaccine Injury Center.

 

Comments

[Bob Moffitt]

"My question for you is, what makes the vaccine argument more compelling than the cellphone argument?"

Ben..with all due respect...try relying upon your own common sense to get your answer.

[hera]

Hi Ben; firstly, thanks for the reply.

Secondly, I didn't consider it a loaded question, but instead very germane to the discussion, particularly as you felt that your position was misrepresented when someone suggested you considered the 500 injured girls an acceptable risk.

I understand that you would prefer to believe that the vaccine has no side effects.
However, this may not in fact be true.

I was asking you to consider for one moment if your position might not be similar to many of ours, if you did consider the side effects to be a real phenomenon.

Then again,you might actually feel that these injuries and deaths are acceptable.

Some scientists have said they feel that even if there is a risk of autism for some from vaccines, the benefits of vaccines are still worth it overall. You might feel the same.It's why I asked.

Re your studies; two flaws that can be noted.
Firstly, obviously the information gathered is only as good as the study design and follow up. We know that these studies apparently were unable to capture even the apparently reasonably common "on the spot" side effect of fainting.
I believe this side effect was common enough that the injection protocol has been changed to encourage post injection obseervation and provding seating??
yet the studies quoted did not capture it at all.
How likely then is it that they were well designed enough to capture a long term slow neurological decline??
The second flaw is your suggestion that if most of the population is not reacting to a shot, then the probability that anyone is reacting is low.
Peanut butter is a case in point. Lots of people can eat large amounts of this non toxic substance day after day.You could say that again and again it has been proven to be completely safe. Yet for a small percentage of people, it can be so toxic that they can die reacting to it.

[Cherry Sperlin Misra]

Ben, Yes, it does seem at first glance that the disorders attributed to vaccines are varied and unrelated. Some of them are actually related as various results of immune dysfunction- much as the disorders lupus and multiple sclerosis are very different in nature but are both autoimmune dysfunction. It is not surprising that vaccines have an effect on the immune system. Research at the University of Manitoba shows that the chance of ever developing asthma goes down dramatically if a child receives his first DPT vaccine after four months of age. Now here is what drives everyone at AOA crazy- Will this cause any doctor to give DPT later than is shown on the schedule? No it wont- They dont even care about their own scientific research ! Regarding diabetes- You can look at what happened in Finland, a country with a very good reporting system- When they introduced Hib vaccine, they got a clear increase in childhood diabetes. Now, that is just a word= "diabetes". But talk to the parents who have such a child- They report that they never get a full nights sleep. Their children will often die young on top of that- so in its own way it is a killer disease. As far as ADD and Autism being unrelated- in fact they are very much related. Many of the kids with autism are severely hyperactive . ADD first increased in the US as use of thimerosal in vaccines increased, and I would suspect, mercury in the environment was also increasing. Then from about 1987 as vaccine mercury was further increased, we got autism plus ADD.
What simultaneously angers and breaks the heart of parents of autistic kids is that medical systems just do not seem to care about kids. I have had to sit here in India and watch a gigantic cohort of autistic kids develop since the year 2000, when India added many new doses of mercury vaccines to the schedule. Now , how did the Indian Pediatric Association do that?- Add more mercury at the very time when the US was stopping mercury in most vaccines? The doctors will not listen to me,; the only thing that makes them use non-mercury vaccines is when the parents start asking about the mercury and they think they might lose some clients.
Now to the topic of large scale testing- Here is an example of safety- A new MMR plus chickenpox vaccine was tested in Oregon. Several parents only realized that their child had become autistic after weeks or months. (Not that they didnt see symptoms- Its just that it often takes parents and doctors some time to admit the truth) Those parents didnt know to whom they could report this. Well- so the vaccine was safe- No one reported any problems. This is just one small example- There are so many. You see, if you dont look for adverse effects or just call them coincidence- They dont exist in the data. We were all brainwashed to think that vaccines, which in fact are invasive treatments, are always safe, that the public is easy to convince. As Mary points out, the parents of the Gardasil victims must have turned a deaf ear to the cries of the parents of autistic kids.

[julie]

I don't waste my time arguing with shills and propagandists. But I will say this: the vaccine injured and their families are sick and f---ing tired of being told we don't exist. No more.

[ben]

To hera, that's a loaded question, I am not going to answer it.

To Bob, I find those sites numbers convincing and you don't. That is fair and I can't sway you on that. As for a vaccinated vaccinated study, the reason that will never happen is that under current understanding, the risk to the children in the vaccinated population of this study is to great. I have read on this site that there is a study planned that will follow children and track many variables, and that since some of these children will ultimately be of parents who choose not to vaccinate, some useful information on this topic will be obtained.

My question for you is, what makes the vaccine argument more compelling than the cellphone argument?

[hera]

Ben,
Does that mean that if you were convinced that these reactions were related to the vaccine, that you would in fact feel that something should be done??
or would it be okay anyway?
What about with other vaccines such as the MMR?If they did in fact cause autism in some children would you feel the good still outweighed the bad, or would you argue for a change in schedule?
Just interested in your point of view.
hera

[Bob Moffitt]

Ben...I read the sites you provided.

The Bogota, Columbia study of 4,000 found "The quadrivalent HPV vaccine is efficacious in women aged 24-25 years of age". The CDC studies of 11,000 most likely included the 4,000 from Columbia.

In any event, the CDC and FDA approved and recommended Gardasil for ages 9 through 26 and neither study you cited mentioned how many girls between 9-13 years of age were involved? Indeed, where there ANY studies done on 9-13 year olds before the FDA and CDC recommended and approved this vaccine for them...if so, please feel free to cite them.

The CDC VAERS report you cited claimed: "To date, the manufacturer, Merck and Co., has distributed over 16 million doses of Gardasil in the United States. Given the large number of doses distributed, it is expected that, by chance alone, serious adverse events and some deaths will be reported in this large population during the time period following vaccinations."

What do they mean by "distributed"? Do they mean doses shipped but sitting on shelves awaiting opportunity to administer them? Why "distributed" and not "administered"...and..why should I be required to ask for clarification?

The VAERS report continues: "Concerns have been raised about reports of deaths occurring in individuals after receiving Gardasil. As of June 30, 2008, 20 deaths had been reported to VAERS. There was not a common pattern to the deaths that would suggest they were caused by the vaccine. In cases where autopsy, death certificate and medical records were available, the cause of death was explained by factors other than the vaccine.

HOW MANY OF THE 20 DEATHS REMAINED UNEXPLAINED?

Isn't it conveniently odd the CDC uses global figures when it suits them and limits less favorable figures to VAERS alone. They report 20 deaths in US and NVIC reports 48 deaths worldwide.

Regardless of how reliable you consider the "large" studies already done, the fact remains, this vaccine has not been studied for long term effects...such as...fertility, cancer and damaged genes. Unfortunately, these long term effects will not be known for decades to come.

I am sorry you think the CDC report of 1 in 6 American child suffering some childhood development problem is as "non-sequitor".

Perhaps you agree the time is long past due for public health officials to publicly support pending federal legislation that seeks to fund a scientific, independent study of "vaccinated vs. unvaccinated" populations to ascertain if BOTH populations have suffered the same, inexplicable, dramatic increase in childhood development problems?

I think such a study deserves a far higher priority than say...a study of cell-phone use?

[ben]

hey Julie you claim that i feel that these women are expendable, but nothing I said supports that statement. I presented evidence that the vaccine had nothing to do with these women at all. Statistically, it seems that the fact they had just been vaccinated is a probably coincidence. Now you may disagree with that statement, but given that I claim these issues were a coincidence, that means I never made the claim that there lives were acceptable risk. Those were your words not mine.

[julie]

Well, Mr Ben, you seem to be of the opinion that young girls and women are disposable. What's 500 females, anyway? Just cattle right? Big Pharma profits are much too important to be derailed by a few crippled girls.

[ben]

I was asked to define my statements.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19493565?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

there is a study of almost 4000 women that reported no serious side effects. That seems large to me.

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaers/Archived/FDA_and_CDC_Statement.htm

according to the CDC, it was tested in over 11000 women, that to me is a large clinical trial.

Of about 20 million doses of Gardisil administrated, about 500 women have complained of serious side effects. This to me clearly defines low probability. In the opinion of the CDC, there is not enough evidence too state that of those 500 adverse effects, that any were even related to the vaccine. The rates at which serious side effects have occurred is about the same as the general population at large.

By well tolerated, I mean that the most common side effect reported has been fainting and pain at the injection site, neither of which is a serious medical condition.

The reason I am of the opinion that safety of gardisil has little to do with safet of childood vaccines is because it is not a childhood vaccine, furthermore it does not contain any thimerisol or live viruses, both of which are ingredients that have been implicated as the cause of sever side effects in childhood vaccines on this website.

In your last paragraph you ask me to explain why 1 in 6 children develops some sort of debilitating condition. This is a total non sequitor and I don't think it needs to be addressed. However, there are many possible reasons for this and it is facile to think it is vaccine related over any of the other possibilities. As a singular example, cellphone use has also risen dramatically in the same time period and the age at which children receive their first cellphone has been decreasing. It does not even make much biological sense to think that the cause of ADD, diabetes, and autism are related because these conditions are so remarkably different from each other.

Lastly, yo did not refute my main claim, which is that the connection of the gardisil vaccine to other childhood vaccines is tenuous at best. If there is such a pathway, it would be extremly difficult to prove and would require an enormous amount of evidence.