AUTISM, MITOCHONDRIAL DISEASE AND THE NEW YORK TIMES
HECKENLIVELY ON THE OMNIBUS AUTISM PROCEEDING: 5/30

GARDASIL AND ANTI-VACCINE ACTIVISTS

Safety_firstTime Magazine writes about Gardasil and the efforts of "Anti-vaccine" activists.

Gardasil has been a shot in the arm for pharmaceutical giant Merck. The company had been reeling from the withdrawal of its anti-arthritis drug Vioxx because of increased risk of heart attacks and resulting lawsuits. Now, however, Merck's new vaccine against the human papilloma virus (HPV) — aimed at combating cervical cancer — has been deployed worldwide, earning an estimated $1.5 billion in sales. But the drug is coming under increasing fire from anti-vaccine activists. Already very vocal about childhood innoculations, now they are expressing concern about the effects of Merck's drug on young girls, a primary focus of the company's big ad campaign.

Read the full article HERE.

Comments

healingjack

Hmmmm.......who want's to be "one less??"

What You Need to Know about Gardasil By Erica McPhee

Here is a must read. Erica McPhee, a homeopath, examines the benefits versus risks of the Gardasil vaccine.

http://www.foggyrock.com/Library/TopicDisplay/51/115.html

Kelli Ann Davis

"With all the data piling up about serious side effects, why should Merck be allowed to expand the market to young boys?"

Cuz, they want to.

Doreen Carlson

GET YOUR CALCULATOR - there is no bigger waste of money than Gardisil for improving the health of women in the U.S. Cases of HPV cerv. cancer addressed by the vaccine among our population equal a miniscule 7/1000's of 1%. DIGEST that number. 10,000 cases out of 151 million females. Even if EVERY female was innoculated and the vaccine 100% effective (what a laugh) it would not effect mortality/health even 1%. This is why healthcare costs are #1 and results #30 in the U.S. Merck profiteers are the only winners.

Anne Dachel

In the article, Gardasil Not Approved for Older Women,
http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/3348
it was reported,
"Many have questioned Merck’s heavy-handed attempts to make Gardasil mandatory, as well as the company’s claims that it is virtually side effect free. Earlier this month, the European Medicines Agency reported that two young women died shortly after being administered Gardasil, and three such deaths have been reported in the US.

A 2007 analysis by Judicial Watch of Gardasil adverse event reports revealed that there had been at least 3,461 complaints of adverse reactions to the Gardasil vaccine, and there could have been as many as eight deaths attributable to Gardasil. According to Judicial Watch, in several instances, blood clots were reported to have occurred after the administration of Gardasil. The Gardasil side effect reports also included 28 women who miscarried after receiving Gardasil. Other side effects reported to the FDA included paralysis, Bells Palsy, Guillain-Barre Syndrome, and seizures were also reported. Oddly, Judicial Watch was only able to obtain the FDA’s reports on Gardasil after it filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the agency.

"As some have pointed out, Judicial Watch is a conservative organization with an agenda. But Judicial Watch is not along in voicing concerns about the safety of Gardasil. In May, Dr. Diane Harper, a top expert on the HPV who, while working as a professor at Dartmouth College, served as a researcher on study trials for Gardasil, questioned efforts to make the vaccine mandatory. In an interview with a Florida TV station, Dr. Harper said that there has not been enough post-marketing surveillance of Gardasil to insure that it is free of side effects that could prove particularly dangerous to young girls. 'We don’t know yet what’s going to happen when millions of doses of the vaccine have been given and to put in place a process that says you must have this vaccine, it means you must be part of a big public experiment. So we can’t do that until we have more data.' she said."

With all the data piling up about serious side effects, why should Merck be allowed to expand the market to young boys?

Anne Dachel
Media editor

lisa

I sent an email to Gardiner at the NY Times in response to his latest article about austism/mitochondrial disorders. Perhaps you can help me set him straight. My email to him is posted at the bottom of his message, and here is his reply:

there is no credible way to compare vaccinated and unvaccinated children for
such health outcomes. first, there are no great numbers of unvaccinated children
in this country (thank God). and many of the under-vaccinated children, such as
the amish, are genetically very similar. for diseases that have strong genetic
causes, then, comparing a limited genetic pool to a larger one makes no sense,
and people calling for such studies either know very little about science or
they are deeply cynical.
thanks,
gardiner

Thank you for covering this story. I hope you will continue to investigate this
issue. I am still waiting, however, for the NY Times to undertake the most
straightforward and necessary study -- comparing children who have received no
vaccinations with those who have been vaccinated according to the
CDC-recommended schedule. How do health outcomes compare in both groups? Are the
vaccinated children faring better or worse in terms of overall health and
development? What is the incidence in both groups of: autism, ADD, ADHD,
learning disabilities, Type 1 diabetes, asthma, and cancer, as well as the
diseases that the vaccines are intended to prevent. We know, for example, that
there have been recent outbreaks of measles in unvaccinated children, but have
there been any deaths or long-term disabilities associated with measles among
that group, or was the illness generally mild and easily cured? What a fantastic
investigative report this would be for the NY Times to undertake! If I were you,
I would love to have my byline on such a report, whatever the results. We know
the CDC does not want to see such a study done, for obvious reasons. But why
would the Times not want to undertake such a project (except, of course, to the
extent that it might reduce the stock value of some big pharma, which sponsor
the Times)?

Twyla

This article starts out by saying that, "the drug [Gardasil] is coming under increasing fire from anti-vaccine activists... The movement's efforts and propaganda are particularly viral on the web." Once again, those who raise safety concerns about vaccines are portrayed as anti-vaccinists -- primarily emotional parents -- whose views contradict science.

Yet, reading through the article, there is actually a lot of good information for our side, such as:

- First paragraph states that this vaccine is a "shot in the arm" for a company "reeling from the withdrawal of its anti-arthritis drug Vioxx because of increased risk of heart attacks and resulting lawsuits." Vaccines are big business for a profit-driven company known to have compromised safety in relation to Vioxx.

- The adverse reaction to Gardasil of a 14-year-old girl is described, and a link to VAERS is provided. We are then told that her symptoms may not be the result of the vaccine, yet this article brings these issues to the attention of people who were not already aware. Then, this paragraph ends by mentioning Sandy Gottstein's website vaccinationnews.com! Anyone who goes to this web site will find lots of info as well as links to AoA, Evidence of Harm, NVIC and more.

- The article then mentions "a study of VAERS reports of fainting among Gardasil recipients — the medical term is syncope — published in the Journal of the American Medical Association this month". This is treated as not serious -- never-the-less, the average reader may begin to wonder about the safety of a vaccine that causes fainting.

- Barbara Loe Fisher is described as "president of the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) who became an activist after a serious reaction in her son to a DPT vaccine" -- not "alleged reaction". Readers who were not aware of these issues can now Google Barbara Loe Fisher and NVIC for more info.

- The article concludes with the Dr. Kahn (Kuhn?) -- the vaccine supporter -- saying that parents "should bring up any concerns that they have and make sure that all of their questions are answered before agreeing to any vaccine for their child." This is a far cry from telling parents to blindly follow the CDC's schedule and leave all the decisions in the hands of the experts and not raise any questions because diseases are so dangerous. If I had heard this before my son was born, perhaps I would have questioned why he was to receive the HepB vaccine at birth.

Just raising awareness can be enough for a parent to seek and find information to at least prompt avoidance of thimerosal and of multiple vaccines at the same time.

So, oddly, to me this article is progress -- better than the complete avoidance and silence regarding vaccine safety issues, which was formerly -- and often still is -- the norm.

Cathy

I have to keep remembering NOT to read AoA before I go to bed...It took me an hour to fall asleep (although I was dead tired) after reading all this bad news...ugh. Only daytime reading for me.

Gabo

According to Publishers Information Bureau, "Drugs & Remedies" is the sector that spent the most magazine advertising dollars in 2007. Their spend was up 7.1% in dollars, with a 3.1%increase in ad pages bought. The amount spent totaled $2,584,622,229. That's $2.6 BILLION dollars.

In that same period, TIME magazine's ad revenue declined by 18% on a 6.9% drop in ad pages. I haven't been able to break out TIME's revenue by sector to find out how much Pharma spends there specifically.

Merck's board includes Rochelle Lazarus, CEO of Ogilvy & Mather advertising, who is also a director of GE where Robert Wright (Autism Speaks) was Vice Chairman. She is also a director of a nonprofit called The Partnership for New York City, Inc. Fellow directors of this organization include Robert Wright and Richard Parsons, CEO of AOLTimeWarner. Ms. Lazarus sits on the Public Responsibility committees for the boards of both Merck and GE.

Also on the board of Merck is Thomas Glocer, CEO of Reuters. Reuters does seem to be accurately reporting on Gardasil's uptakes and it's recent FDA expansion setback, but there is no mention of side effects or deaths in a search on their website. Reuters also has reported on pneumonia deaths increasing with Glaxo's Rotarix vax, but does not appear to have reported the intussusception death caused by Merck's RotaTeq.

Gabo

According to Publishers Information Bureau, "Drugs & Remedies" is the sector that spent the most magazine advertising dollars in 2007. Their spend was up 7.1% in dollars, with a 3.1%increase in ad pages bought. The amount spent totaled $2,584,622,229. That's $2.6 BILLION dollars.

In that same period, TIME magazine's ad revenue declined by 18% on a 6.9% drop in ad pages. I haven't been able to break out TIME's revenue by sector to find out how much Pharma spends there specifically.

Merck's board includes Rochelle Lazarus, CEO of Ogilvy & Mather advertising, who is also a director of GE where Robert Wright (Autism Speaks) was Vice Chairman. She is also a director of a nonprofit called The Partnership for New York City, Inc. Fellow directors of this organization include Robert Wright and Richard Parsons, CEO of AOLTimeWarner. Ms. Lazarus sits on the Public Responsibility committees for the boards of both Merck and GE.

Also on the board of Merck is Thomas Glocer, CEO of Reuters. Reuters does seem to be accurately reporting on Gardasil's uptakes and it's recent FDA expansion setback, but there is no mention of side effects or deaths in a search on their website. Reuters also has reported on pneumonia deaths increasing with Glaxo's Rotarix vax, but does not appear to have reported the intussusception death caused by Merck's RotaTeq.

Garbo

Propaganda. And no mention of deaths. And no mention of FDA's refusal to expand the recommendations to older women because of as-yet unrevealed concerns. I really wonder about the ties between Pharma and TIME.

Anne Dachel

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/health/main204.shtml
CBS News told us recently that Merck is seeking approval to license this vaccine for boys as well as young girls. CBS even found another Dr. Offit (Bonnie) to promote the shot.

There's no reason to worry about the vaccine, only positives things were reported--certainly no mention of the concern over the aluminum content of this vaccine.

See: MERCK'S GARDASIL NOT PROVEN SAFE FOR LITTLE GIRLS http://www.909shot.com/PRESSRELEASES/pr62706gardasil.htm

Anne Dachel
Media editor

David Taylor

Soon as you read this:

"The movement's efforts and propaganda are particularly viral on the web."

Propaganda?
Viral? (re: virulent, like a disease)

You know you're dealing with the Lamestream Media, corporate-owned, corporate-controlled.

And no mention of the leading risk factor for cervical cancer: smoking.

Keith

"When you read everybody's stories, they're too similar not to be related,"

gee
THAT sounds familiar


Gatogorra

Hard to take Hilary Hylton's propaganda on "inoculation" seriously when she can't even spell the word. It's kind of insulting that hacks are always handling this story but, on the other hand, maybe it's a sign that more seasoned writers are less willing to touch the topic?

Its TIME

"Gardasil has been a shot in the arm for pharmaceutical giant Merck."

I hope that shot makes its way to mark the end of the pharmaceutical giant's gigantic blunders. Many many lives have been injured beyond repair and many more lost. All those souls are waiting in the sidelines, looking to be avenged for their untimely loss. The time has come for all of this to come to an end. And not a moment too soon.

Gayle

I remembered reading about how Gardasil actually increased the risk by 44.6% of "developing high-grade precancerous lesions in women who are already sero-positive and PCR-positive for vaccine relevant genotypes of HPV." This information comes from VRAN (Vaccination Risk Awareness Network), and they were citing FDA documentation of the actual Gardasil trials. This should be recommended reading for all parents. Of course, no girls are actually screened for HPV prior to receiving their Gardasil vaccinations. That is a real reason for concern about Gardasil in addition to all of the other horrific neurological events associated with this vaccine.

Tanner's Dad

"utilitarian rationale" and said too often the numbers are dismissed as a small sacrifice necessary for the greater good. "How many is too many?" she asks.

I think I just added a new phrase to my vocabulary. One day this era, if we do not drive ourselves to extinction, will be looked upon with great distain because of our lack of thought about how the individual parts ultimately effect the whole.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

Working...
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.

Working...

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.)