Boy with Autism Lets Us Into His World Via Writing
Dachel Media Review: Tasing Kids, Police Database

Free Download Post Couric Vaccine Program: Gardasil A License to Kill?

Jessica's GravestoneWe ran this post in October of 2012. Katie Couric bravely ran a program about Gardasil (HPV vaccine from Merck) and adverse reactions. The outcry from the IVID (Industry Vaccine Injury Denialists) was fast and furious.   We invite you to learn the background of this vaccine, how your tax dollars helped to bring it to market and how your government benefited from its licensing.  And how Dr. Julie Gerberding the Director of the CDC under the approval process is now the President of the Merck Vaccine Divisionl,  in the age old revolving door of corporate/government incest.

Editor's note: With permission from Skyhorse Publishing, we are Jessie_angel[1]pleased to offer you a free download of chapter 19, A License to Kill? by Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted. The article is included the just-relased paperback version of "Vaccine Epidemic," edited by Louise Kuo Habakus and Mary Holland.

According to the publishers: "Gardasil is the newest childhood vaccine to be licensed by the FDA and recommended for universal use by the CDC. Judge for yourself whether this 'public-private partnership' prioritizes the best interests of our children. Or is it a perfect example of corporate greed, biased science, and coercive government? Please let us know what you think."  (That's Jessica Ericzon who died following Gardasil vaccination in the photo. And her head stone.)

This article identifies a pattern of conflicts of interest at the Department of Health and Human Services – and ultimately throughout the federal government -- involving Merck’s controversial Gardasil vaccine against HPV, or human papilloma virus.

  • Researchers at the National Cancer Institute invented critical technology for the vaccine.
  • Another National Institutes of Health office filed for patents on the technology, licensed those patent rights to vaccine manufacturers and eventually received royalties from Merck, Gardasil’s manufacturer.
  • The Food and Drug Administration supervised the clinical trials and granted Merck a license application for the first HPV vaccine.
  • Just three weeks later, an advisory committee at the Centers for Disease Control recommended universal HPV vaccination for women from nine to twenty-six years of age, guaranteeing Gardasil would reach blockbuster status for Merck: annual revenues of well over $1 billion.
  • Subsequently, agencies within FDA and CDC have been responsible for monitoring Gardasil’s safety in the field,
  • As officials within the Health Resources Services Administration brace themselves to sit in judgment over a new wave of vaccine injury claims.

Meanwhile, key officials involved in the decisions rotate through a revolving door into private industry. These conflicts are both extraordinary in scope and poorly understood by the general public. But they are central to understanding why unsafe and unnecessary vaccines are approved and recommended – why we have a vaccine epidemic.

Download Gardasil: A License to Kill Here


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


I'll add this to my above comment:

Permission is granted to reprint this article in its entirety, for any non-commercial purpose, as long as full credit is given to the author (Mike Adams) and a clearly visible clickable link is placed back to this URL at You may also freely quote from this article with proper citation.

Sources CitedHiFi DNA Tech files lawsuit against FDA
Reclassification Petition – Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Detection Device (K063649 )…

FDA Approves Expanded Use of HPV Test…

VRBPAC Background Document, Gardasil™ HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine, May 18, 2006 VRBPAC Meeting…

Effect of Human Papillomavirus 16/18 L1 Viruslike Particle Vaccine Among Young Women With Preexisting Infection.

Journal of the American Medical Association, August, 2007


I've posted this rather long comment on another site, but I'm going to repeat it yet, here. It's SO important to read this through its entirety (some of the links I've since discovered, are no longer available, but for obvious reasons of which you will note as you read through this):


I’ll provide more than a few SNIPS from the above link:


…”This story begins at a company called HiFi DNA Tech, LLC ( a company involved in the manufacture of portable HPV testing devices based on DNA sequencing analysis. HiFi DNA Tech has been pushing to get the FDA to classify its HPV detection technology as a “Class II” virology testing device. To understand why this is a big deal, you have to understand the differences between “Class II” and “Class III” virology testing devices.

Based on FDA rules, a Class III virology testing device is one that is considered by the FDA to have “premarket approval,” meaning that it cannot yet be sold to the public. In order for such a device to be marketed to the public, it must be downgraded to Class II status, which is considered a “special controls” status. Class II devices are, “…those devices for which the general controls by themselves are insufficient to provide reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness, but for which there is sufficient information to establish special controls to provide such assurance, including performance standards, postmarket surveillance, patient registries, development and dissemination of guidelines, recommendations, and any other appropriate actions the agency deems necessary.”

In other words, a Class II device may or may not actually be safe, but the FDA considers is safe enough to release to the public.

HiFi DNA Tech has been trying to get its HPV detection device downgraded to a Class II device based on the following arguments:

• For more than 20 years, the FDA had regulated the HPV test as a “test for cervical cancer.”

• But since at least 2003, the FDA has changed its position on the relationship between Human Papilloma Virus and cervical cancer, stating that the HPV strain is “not associated with cervical cancer.”

• Accordingly, HiFi DNA Tech is arguing that the HPV test it has developed is no longer a test for cervical cancer, but is merely a test for the presence of Human Papilloma Viruses — a shift that makes the test far more reliable in its primary purpose. In other words, the test is merely detecting the presence of a virus, not making a diagnosis of a disease (which would be a much higher standard to meet).

On October 12, 2007, HiFi DNA Tech sued the Food and Drug Administration in an attempt to force it to downgrade its HPV detection technology to Class II (see ). Earlier in the year — on March 7, 2007, HiFi DNA Tech filed the HPV PCR test reclassification petition with the FDA. It is the information in this petition document that led us to the FDA’s knowledge that HPV is not linked to cervical cancer.

Got all that? This is a somewhat complex story to follow, so here it is again in summary:

• A company that manufacturers a DNA testing device that can detect the presence of HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) is petitioning the FDA (and suing the FDA) to get it to reclassify its medical device as a “Class II” device based on the revelation that the FDA has already adopted the position that HPV infections do not directly cause cervical cancer.

• This would mean that the FDA has been aware for years that HPV does not cause cervical cancer, which means that the FDA’s approval of the Gardasil vaccine — as well as the national push for Gardasil vaccinations — is based on a grand medical hoax that, not surprisingly, appears to be designed to exploit the fear of cancer to sell vaccines. The victims in all this, of course, are the young girls who are apparently being subjected to a medically useless (and potentially dangerous) vaccine.

• None of this information was apparently known during the more recent debates over the safety and efficacy of Gardasil, the HPV vaccine now in use. This means that the public debate over mandatory HPV vaccinations lacked key elements that now seem essential to reaching rational, evidence-based conclusions over the safety and efficacy of such vaccines.

Next, we reveal the FDA’s statement that HPV is “not associated with cervical cancer.”

The Text of the PetitionThe Reclassification Petition, dated March 7, 2007, is still posted on the FDA’s website:…

In case the FDA removes this document (as it has been known to do), we’ve posted a backup copy of the document on our own servers:…

This document reveals the following text:

The 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.

NaturalNews sought to verify the existence of the FDA news release referenced by this petition reclassification document and found that, indeed, the FDA news release exists. In fact, it’s still posted on the FDA website at…

In it, the FDA says, “The HPV DNA test 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.)…”


…”As the reclassification petition reveals, HPV infections are naturally self-limiting — meaning that they are controlled naturally, without requiring intervention with drugs or vaccines. It is not the HPV virus itself that causes cervical cancer but rather a persistent state of ill-health on the part of the patient that makes her vulnerable to persistent infections.

As the petition states:

“Based on new scientific information published in the past 15 years, it is now generally agreed that identifying and typing HPV infection does not bear a direct relationship to stratification of the risk for cervical cancer . Most acute infections caused by HPV are self-limiting [1, 4-7]. …Repeated sequential transient HPV infections, even when caused by “high-risk” HPVs, are characteristically not associated with high risk of developing squamous intraepithelial lesions, a precursor of cervical cancer.

A woman found to be positive for the same strain (genotype) of HPV on repeated testing is highly likely suffering from a persistent HPV infection and is considered to be at high risk of developing precancerous intraepithelial lesions in the cervix . It is the persistent infection, not the virus, that determines the cancer risk.”

The FDA agrees with this assessment of the relationship between HPV and cervical cancer, as evidenced by its 2003 news release quoted above.

Next, we reveal evidence that HPV vaccines actually cause precancerous lesions in women.

Do HPV Vaccines Increase the Risk of Precancerous Lesions?The reclassification petition cited above also reveals that Gardasil vaccines may increase the risk of developing precancerous lesions by 44.6 percent in some groups of women. This is found in a quote referencing a document mentioned in the petition, which states:

“PCR-based HPV detection device with provision for accurate HPV genotyping is more urgently needed now because 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.…

NaturalNews tracked down the correct URL of the document referenced above and found it in the FDA docket archives. We have placed a safe backup copy at:…


““Concerns Regarding Primary Endpoint Analyses among Subgroups

There were two important concerns that were identified during the course of the efficacy review of this BLA. One was the potential for Gardasil to enhance disease among a subgroup of subjects who had evidence of persistent infection with vaccine-relevant HPV types at baseline. The other concern was the observations of CIN 2/3 or worse cases due to HPV types not contained in the vaccine. These cases of disease due to other HPV types have the potential to counter the efficacy results of Gardasil for the HPV types contained in the vaccine.

1. Evaluation of the potential of Gardasil™ to enhance cervical disease in subjects who had evidence of persistent infection with vaccine-relevant HPV types prior to vaccination. The results of exploratory subgroup analyses for study 013 suggested a concern that subjects who were seropositive and PCR-positive for the vaccine-relevant HPV types had a greater number of CIN 2/3 or worse cases as demonstrated in the following table:

Observed Efficacy
- 44.6%

It appeared that subjects in this subgroup of study 013 who received Gardasil™ might have had enhanced risk factors for development of CIN 2/3 or worse compared to placebo recipients.””


This revelation should be quite shocking to anyone who has been following the debate over Gardasil and mandatory vaccinations of teenage girls. First, it reveals that Gardasil appears to increase disease by 44.6 percent in certain people — namely, those who were already carriers of the same HPV strains used in the vaccine.
In other words, it appears that if the vaccine is given to a young woman who already carries HPV in a “harmless” state, it may “activate” the infection and directly cause precancerous lesions to appear. The vaccine, in other words, may accelerate the development of precancerous lesions in women.

This is information that has simply not been made available in the debate over Gardasil vaccination policies. The pro-vaccination rhetoric has always been about “saving lives” and it carried the implied statement that Gardasil is perfectly safe for all women, posing absolutely no increased risk of cancer. What these documents reveal, however, is that Gardasil may, in fact, pose a serious increase in the risk of cervical cancer in some recipients of the vaccine.

Interrogating Young VirginsThe FDA directly admits the vaccine is utterly useless in these women, stating in the same document, “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).”
What this essentially means is that the “safe” administering of the Gardasil vaccine requires that it be administered only to virgins (because virtually all women who are sexually active carry HPV strains). That, of course, would require the direct questioning of the sexual habits of all young girls before administering the vaccine.

Is this what the Governor of Texas really had in mind when he mandated such vaccinations for all young girls in Texas? … a male doctor with a vaccination needle in his hand and a thirteen-year-old girl sitting in a private clinic room behind closed doors, with the male doctor asking her, “Have you ever had sex?”

Clearly, this kind of patient questioning crosses all kinds of ethical barriers when such vaccinations are made mandatory (as they have been made in Texas). It puts the State in the positioning of ascertaining the sexual habits of very young teenage girls and then potentially causing them harm. It’s not hard to suppose that most sexually active teenage girls would claim to still be virgins (especially if their parents were present), creating a situation where vaccines would be routinely administered to precisely the HPV carrier subgroups for which it has been demonstrated to greatly increase the risk of precancerous lesions…”

ALARMED YET, anyone? You should be. If reading the above doesn’t make you spitting mad, I don’t know what will.

I’ve spoken with the Moms of these DEAD GARDASIL GIRLS myself – on the phone, a couple of years ago. There are many more girls on a global basis who have suffered untold serious, life-threatening reactions from this damned vaccine.

Please don't tell me (those who may comment here and are pro-Gardasil) that the Gardasil vaccine is wonderful and can save SO many lives. Damned pack of lies.

The opposite is the Truth...

It is morally reprehensible to me that this type of marketing chicanery has been perpetrated on a highly unsuspecting and TRUSTING populace. Then, on the other hand, perhaps it takes something such as this massively fraudulent marketing scheme to get the masses to WAKE UP to the dangers of vaccines.


Our government has failed to protect our kids no doubt about it. the drug industry is global. The US gets 80% of the active pharmaceutical ingredients in our drugs from factories in India and China. 80%! counterfeiting is rampant and there are weaknesses in the drug supply chain. Free trade zones make it very difficult if not impossible for inspectors to regulate these drugs as they move through the global market place and yes, bad drugs are getting in to the US and reaching consumers

Watch: Dubai RX: A Conduit for Fake Drugs- New York Times video report

The Panama Syndrome -New York Times video report

Fake Drugs, Real Problems". ABC News report

Cherry Sperlin Misra

With sadness in the heart, I would say that Why should we blame China when they can clearly see that our nation will not protect its citizens even from vast tragedies such as autism and Alzheimers ? See how little it took for Japan to stop supporting Gardasil. See how European countries allow their citizens not to vaccinate their kids. And "In Statins We Trust"


Sarah: Dr. Russell Blaylock warned in a 2008 lecture that China was eventually going to be the biggest manufacturer of vaccines used by our country in just a short time. I didn't doubt him at the time, but in reviewing the above links, I can certainly see he knew what was going on.

I hope more people wake up to what is really happening with all of this. There have been a handful of honest to goodness journalists who have been writing about this issue for quite some time, but it seems as though all of this info. falls on deaf ears.

There IS an agenda with all of this, but most are simply loathe to accept it (and it's not just about the money).


It's clear to me that the Big Pharma has hijacked our government...they ARE the government with regard to the FDA, HHS, CDC as well as their cronies in congress who sponsor bills authored by Big Pharma and get legislation to protect them. they embed their people and control from within and now Big Agri is following the same roadmap as Big Pharma by getting the Monsanto Protection act signed by Obama. They are basically given legal authority to poison us with GMO pesticide laden food and toxic drugs that are likely manufactured overseas where product safety and quality control is non existent. the international drug web is complex and secretive. so who is Big Pharma? Follow the money because what these Pharma cronies don't understand is that communist goverment control the worlds drug manufactering so these traitors are doing the bidding of communists undermining our personal liberties and poisoning our kids.

Read. Are We Sure Our Drugs Are Safe" by John Dingell:

"A Toxic Pipeline" New York Times

"A Poisonous Path from China to Panama" New York Times

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)