Weekly Wrap: Six of One
Open Letter to Autism Speaks' Suzanne Wright

Too Much Too Soon Too Little Too Late: HPV Vaccine Safety Lessons

GardasilBy Cathy Jameson Cervarix

For years we’ve been bombarded with multimillion dollar advertisements promoting the HPV vaccine known as Gardasil.  Commercial after commercial, whole page magazine ads and posters at subway stations sent more fear than facts to the public about the human papilloma virus (HPV) and its role in cervical cancer.  

Even though I do not care for this particular vaccine, I make an effort to stay updated whenever news comes out about it.  I do this because my oldest falls into the age category for which the vaccine is recommended.  The vaccine, originally designed and heavily pushed on the teenage population, can be administered as early as 9-years old.  After a rather hasty vaccine “safety” study period, the 3-series Gardasil vaccine became available in 2006.  Cervarix, also marketed as a cervical cancer prevention vaccine, debuted in 2009 is an alternate to Gardasil.  

Like every vaccine that came before these two, reactions post-vaccination were documented and reported in the VAERS database (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System).  Currently, almost 32,000 adverse reactions have been reported as well as 144 deaths.  Despite growing concerns about Gardasil and Cerivax, and about the increasingly serious and fatal reactions young girls have had from them, it was suggested in 2011 that boys as young as 11-years old also receive the 3-shot series.  

During the campaign to sell, sell, sell this product, we were told that the HPV vaccine would be an answer—an answer to help prevent cervical cancer.  We were told those who got the vaccine would be One Less:  One Less to chance it.  One Less to catch the disease.  One Less cancer victim.  We were also told that 3 doses were recommended for the series to be effective.  Reports are now saying 3 vaccines may be two too many though.

Good news for less jabs, right?  

What, then, should we tell the girls, and now possibly the boys, who got sick from their 2nd dose of the vaccine?  Who tells them, “Oops, sorry.”

What do we tell the families of those who died after continuing the series with their 2nd or 3rd doses?  Does anyone say, “Well, were wrong.  We should have said two less; two less vaccines, that is.”    

I highly doubt that anyone will utter that kind of apology.  Those promoting and inflicting the most damage, including death, will likely get to walk away.  They do not have to handle the irreparable harm done.  They will not witness adverse reactions that lead to future health problems.  They are not left with a lesson to be learned either, unless that lesson is to publicly continue to herald their own efforts while hiding behind the protection they’ve been granted by the government.

What irks me when I read articles like the one suggesting that only one HPV vaccine is needed, besides the fact that that this vaccine was made out to be the vaccine that would save the most lives, is that our nation’s children have once again become pin-cushioned guinea pigs.  With all safety cast aside, our children have become part of an experiment and not a solution.  

If ever there was a reason for someone to learn how to educate themselves before choosing to vaccinate, this ‘whoops, two less vaccines’ discovery is more than reason enough.  Being fully informed before opting for any unavoidably unsafe product like a vaccine is better than finding out too little too late.  Fortunately, being informed is something anyone, including my pre-teen daughter, and the girls she is talking to, can do.

First, start learning the facts, all of the facts.  Learn as much as you can about vaccines and particularly the ones you’re opting for.  Look at the track record of each.  Listen to what your doctor or provider has to say about them, and then, research what they’ve shared.  Research what they didn’t share also.  

Read more than just the Vaccine Information Sheet  the medical staff is required by law to give you, too.  Instead, request, read and study (or download) the 30 pages of each vaccine insert: Gardasil  and Cervarix.

Look up what’s being reported in the news about the growing list of negative side effects making sure the news comes from a reputable source.  Read as much as you can, and continue to read some more.

Know that this vaccine proposes to protect only 4 out of the 40 known strains of cervical cancer. 

Realize, too, that this vaccine hasn’t been around all that long.  Long-term studies don’t happen overnight; they take years to be conducted and only after gathering hundreds of pieces of data—data gotten from those who received the vaccine, including from the ones who escaped vaccine injury to the ones who succumbed from it.  Remember that while some side effects from vaccines can be seen immediately (fainting, nausea, dizzy spells and seizures), others take time to be discovered and subsequently reported.  Understand that through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Fund, the US government has awarded $6 billion toward 49 cases of HPV vaccine injury and death.  (Keep in mind that while 49 may not sound like a lot, over 200 claims have been filed and that all of them have yet to be processed.)  And finally, remember that you have a choice; a choice to say yes, no, or not right now until you know as much as you need to know.  Vaccine choice is a benefit, but being fully informed about a vaccine can have a much more lasting effect.  

I’ve come to realize that the best way to be avoid vaccine injury or death resulting from vaccines is to abstain from vaccinations.  My daughter, and now her middle school friends are well aware of this too.  My daughter will continue to use her recess time to talk about vaccines, particularly the HPV vaccine.  She does this not because she’ll be getting it, but because she personally knows girls who have received it, and she is genuinely concerned about their future health.  I don’t blame her for wanting to stay as informed as I do or for attempting to educate others.  With how things have gone for so many HPV vaccine recipients, one more conversation on the playground could very well lead to one less tragedy.  

Cathy Jameson is a Contributing Editor for Age of Autism.


Jenny Allan

@ally coleman - so sorry about your HPV status, but don't despair. Not every HPV infection leads to cancer. Get regular pap smears and any pre cancerous cells CAN be safely removed.

There are around 100 DIFFERENT HPV strains. I assume you received either Cerverax, (which prevents 2 strains) or old style Gardasil, (which prevented 4 strains). The vaccines target the HPV strains considered most likely to cause cancer, but there are still several other cancer causing strains NOT covered by the vaccines. I suspect your HPV infection involves one of these.

The new Gardasil now has 8 HPV strains, which is more or less an admission the 'old' vaccine was ineffective!!
Good Luck.

ally coleman

okay i dont know if this site stays updated or not.. but I have actually recieved the shot 8 times... between living with two different parents and starting the series and then restarting it, some how my first pap ever came up positive for hpv.. now i am at high risk of cervical cancer so i guess my question is, if you get this vaccine too many times could it end up giving you what its supposed to be protecting against? just curious because it has been a struggle inside me for years trying to figre this out. I need answers.

Jeannee Waseck

Hi! TY for this ... I wound-up on this page because I was reading an anon woman's online posting that talked about how - after her daughter recv'd her 3d dose of Gardasil, she came down with type one diabetes - the mother wasn't seeing a possible cause and effect, but I was!, so I started a Google search ...

TY again!

Betty Bona

Hi Amber, I hope someone else answers your question better than me with an analysis of the costs and benefits. I personally would never continue, but I can not tell you that's the right choice for you. One important thing you should weigh in your decision is whether your daughter had any adverse reactions to the first two shots. I have a niece who didn't take note of my warnings about the hepatitis B vaccine until her son had already received two shots. Of course her pediatrician said she would lose all benefit from the shots if she didn't get the third one, and she proceeded on with the shot. That's what she needed to do to feel like a good mother. She has kept a journal of her son's life so far for family to read, and I could see that he had his first extreme inconsolable crying event on the evening after his second shot. He was in intensive care after birth, and didn't get the first shot until the day before he went home, right before they let my niece care for him overnight at the hospital. He was unmanageable for her that night in the hospital, unlike he had been before, but she and the staff attributed it to the fact that she was a new mother. I had that very same experience with one of mine. My great nephew is still too young to show signs of autism, and I hope he doesn't, but the previous reactions would have been a red flag for me. Just be sure you think long and hard about any reactions your daughter might have had to the previous shots, listen to what other parents say, and really, listen to your gut. Young women in the US should be able to expect to avoid cervical cancer with regular pap smears, but I have no idea how that would be affected by two HPV vaccinations.


Hi Amber,
There were articles published recently saying that one or two doses may be enough (or are enough). Google - one HPV dose enough - you'll find lots of articles.

Amber Miller

I have the same question as another reader had but I didn't see an answer. Also skeptical of the vaccine and against my gut instinct, I trusted the Dr and went along with it. My daughter has had the first two doses but I'm considering not getting her the third dose. Which will cause more harm? Finishing the third dose or not finishing the third dose. I'm so afraid to make the wrong decision. I need some HONEST, Straight up answers.


Have there been any cases of the teen boys who have got this shot? My son who is 12 has received the first two, now I am a little concerned on finishing out and getting the 3rd one.


Frida, that is great to hear that Katie Couric is covering this. We need to know the truth, not what some pharmaceutical company wants us to think.

Mindano Iha

Perhaps Dr Moriarty should be asked to provide unbiased answers with documentation for all of the following questions which neither Merck nor other Gardasil promoters including doctors and health authorities have yet answered?

Whether Gardasil prevents cancer, necessity for boosters, whether it increases the risk of cancer due to the ingredients, whether there is increased risk of cancer due to the strains which are removed being replaced by more carcinogenic ones, whether there is increased risk of cancer due to the unexpected discovery by an independent laboratory of aluminium bound recombinant HPV DNA, whether Gardasil vaccinated may donate blood without the aluminium bound recombinant HPV DNA causing serious health consequences for the recipient, whether there is increased risk of autoimmune disorders due to the recombinant HPV DNA, if cervical cancer is caused by HPV or if there must be a necessary additional factor for this to occur, if HPV is necessarily an infection transmitted by sexual intercourse, whether the vaccine causes genotoxicity, whether it targets the relevant virus strains in different demographics, whether the strains change in the course of time, adverse events due to concomitant administration with other vaccines, the true numbers and extent of serious adverse events, long term serious side effects, what the results would be if a true placebo had been used in all the clinical trials, what the results of clinical trials would be if Merck had not used their own exclusion criteria, whether there is increased risk of blood clots with or without hormonal contraceptives, whether there is an increased risk of brain damage, consequences of “bridging” - the extrapolation of study results from one group to another, potentially serious consequences if the vaccine is not thoroughly shaken, whether the vaccine will increase the risk of infertility due to polysorbate, whether polysorbate is carcinogenic, health consequences due to the presence of the combination of polysorbate and l-histidine, whether aluminium adjuvant is safe, consequences due to the presence sodium borate (borax), whether the vaccine will increase the risk of miscarriages, stillbirths or babies born with anomalies, whether Gardasil is excreted in human milk, the complete list of ingredients, whether possible benefits outweigh the risks.


Dr. Moriarty,

If I think that I'll be healthier if I make you sick, is it ok if I make you sick?

If I think that I'll be healthier if I murder you, is it ok if I murder you?

Out of a group of 50 children, if we think that murdering one will make the others healthier, is it ok to murder that one? Yes or no? If no, when does it become ok? one out of 100, 1,000, 10,000? When is murder justified?


When will the segment air on the Katie Couric show?

Judy Brasher

“The stories of these young women are sad, upsetting and tragic. Because one event occurs after another event does not mean that the first event is caused by the second event…..A scientific review of these particular women and their stories would either lend credence to cause-and-effect or would disprove cause and effect,” Richard Moriarty, MD.
I can assure you Dr. Moriarty that the majority of the people reading AOA want scientific review more than you do. The HPV vaccine is one of many issues needing a closer look.
• We would like a scientific review addressing the safety of the current vaccines given simultaneously as they routinely are.
• We would like a scientific review that addresses the safe level of mercury that can be injected into humans of all ages.
• We would like a scientific review that addresses the safe level of aluminum that can be injected into humans. (The FDA website that gives a level without backing up how they got that figure does not count.)
• We would like a scientific review that addresses the synergistic effect of mercury and aluminum in vaccines. Since aluminum and mercury are both known neurotoxins and the rate of children with a learning disability is now 1:6, shouldn’t there be a long term study of the neurological outcome of those who are vaxed vs. those who are totally not vaxed. to see if one or both of these vaccine ingredients are implicated?
• Cases of juvenile diabetes have risen exponentially. Merck states in the MMR package insert (PI) that diabetes mellitus is an adverse reaction. At least 2 other vaccines are possibly linked to juvenile diabetes also. We would like a scientific review to see if the rate is the same in children who have received the present CDC recommended schedule of vaccines and vs. a group of totally unvaccinated children. When I discussed my grandson’s 5 months regression into autism after 9 vaxs. in one day with his pediatrician, the response was that he was more concerned about the rise in juvenile diabetes than he was autism. When I replied that it was listed in a least one vaccine package insert as an adverse reaction the statement was met with disbelief. You would think that a pediatrician would have known this. You would think that pediatricians would know that Merck didn’t put it there to just fill up space. You would think that pediatricians would insist on knowing if the MMR booster, which was recommended to pick up the 5% not immunized with the first vaccine, increases the risk of diabetes in their patients.
• Since the hepatitis b vaccine PI lists multiple sclerosis and apnea, how about a scientific review to see how much that vaccine affects the rate of MS in children and SIDS.
• Juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is also on the rise. Several vaccine PIs list arthritis as an adverse reaction but state that it is USUALLY transient. Is it? We would like a scientific review that looks at the rate in vaxed vs. unvaxed to see if there is a difference in the incidence of RA in the two groups?
• Several other autoimmune disorders such as Crohn’s and Celiac disease are on the rise in children. Asthma and food allergies are no longer uncommon. Is there a difference in the incidence in vaxed vs. unvaxed? Could the present vaccine schedule be over stimulating the undeveloped immune system of children to the point that the body starts attacking itself?
• How about a scientific review of the rate of autism in vaxed vs. unvaxed? In epidemiological studies the results can be manipulated too easily. We need large unbiased studies that compare children fully vaccinated on the CDC’s recommended schedule vs. children who are totally unvaccinated. This disorder is too prevalent and devastating to depend on tobacco science.
If pediatricians put the health of their patients over the health of the vaccine program, they would demand a large study of vaccinated children vs. totally unvaccinated children. This would as you stated, Dr. Moriarty, either lend credence to cause-and-effect or would disprove cause and effect. The unvaccinated children are here: in 48 states which have non-medical waivers, in a large segment of homeschooled children, and in groups such as Homefirst. The people at the NIH and CDC who say that the study would be unethical are bureaucrats. We expect more from pediatricians.
There are tens of thousands of families like mine who know that they had a normal healthy toddler until a battery of vaccines. I did not realize at the time just how much my grandson was above the milestone markers. 20 words at 12 months are impressive. However, 9 vaccines in one day silenced the words for 2 years, took away all of the social skills plus damaging the gut severely. You would think that the pediatrician who wrote normal healthy toddler on a child on the day of vaccines and received a consult letter 5 months later from a developmental pediatrician whose impression of the same child was autism would connect the dots and want answers.
You would think pediatricians would put their patients first. Not so. Pediatricians who could save the next generation of children are turning their eyes away from what is happening to this generation. Dr. Moriarty, I am surprised at someone your age being so blinded to obvious evidence. How many times growing up when all kids had measles did you hear of complications or death? They did occur but were very rare. If you have children, how many times when they were toddlers up did you worry about them gaining skills and then losing them? Such a thing was practically unheard of until 20 or so years ago.
Deaths and disabilities resulting from diseases are devastating just as the deaths and disabilities from vaccine injury are. All I am asking is for pediatricians to acknowledge the latter. Seizures, asthma, severe food allergies and diabetes kill. Some of my autism friends have children trapped in bodies that are as frightening as the iron lungs were. It is time to take a critical look at the present vaccine schedule. It is time for more pediatricians to have the courage and integrity of Dr. Elizabeth Mumper.

Jenny Allan

An interesting Government sponsored HPV virus prevalence research study in Scotland has just been published in an ‘open access ‘ report:-

Extracts From above:-
Estimation of pre-immunisation prevalence of HPV and distribution of HPV types is fundamental to understanding the subsequent impact of HPV vaccination. We describe the type specific prevalence of HPV in females aged 20–21 in Scotland who attended or defaulted from cervical screening using three specimen types; from attenders liquid based cytology and from defaulters urine or self-taken swabs.

The prevalence of any HPV in young women aged 20–21 was 32.2% for urine, 39.5% for self-taken swab, and 49.4% for LBC specimens. Infection with vaccine specific types (HPV 16, 18) or those associated with cross-protection (HPV 31, 33, 45, 51) was common. Individuals were more likely to test positive for high-risk HPV if they resided in an area of high deprivation or in a rural area. The overall distribution of HPV types did not vary between defaulters and attenders. Multiple infections occurred in 48.1% of high-risk HPV positive individuals. Excluding vaccine types the most common pairing was HPV 56 and 66.
The cancer causing HPV viruses are listed as follows:-

“12 types in Group 1 with “carcinogenic” status: HPV 16,18,31,33,35,39,45,51,52,56,58,59, the single type in Group 2A with “probably carcinogenic” status: HPV 68 and 6 types from Group 2B with “possibly carcinogenic” status: HPV 26,53,66,73,82. Other HPV types, including types 6 and 11 are not differentiated but identified as “HPV other”.

The incidence of HPV viruses in the young women tested was found to be as follows:-

“Four grouped definitions were created; positive for any HPV type, positive for the vaccine types 16 and 18, positive for the HPV types where some vaccine cross-protection has been demonstrated – HPV 31, 33, 45 and 51 [10] and finally, positive for any high-risk type (Group 1 and Group 2A [9]). In addition, individuals with multiple infections (infected with more than one HPV type) were identified.

The prevalence of any HPV was 32.2% for the urine, 39.5% for the self–taken swab, and 49.4% for the LBC samples (Table 2). Type 16 and/or 18 was detected in 10% of the urines, compared with 16.6% of the self-taken swabs and 23% of the LBCs. For any high-risk HPV, the respective prevalence estimates were 19.1%, 29.1% and 41.2%, for high-risk types excluding 16 and 18, 13.2%, 20.6% and 32.3% and for high-risk types excluding the cross protection types,”

For those persons not ‘au fait’ with interpreting scientific data presentations, (and this report seems to be deliberately obfuscating), the prevalence of cancer causing HPV viruses 16 and 18, the two strains for which the HPV vaccines are targeted, is low, only detected in 10% - 23% of the samples, considerably less than a quarter of the population studied. Other high risk HPV strains, namely 31, 33, 45 and 51, are tentatively claimed to also be included in ‘vaccine cross protection’, particularly from Cervarix vaccine, but in the UK Gardasil is the Governments’ vaccine of choice because it is claimed to also protect from genital warts.

This survey does demonstrate HPV viruses are widespread in Scotland, although the vast majority of HPV infections clear up spontaneously. There is some very worrying evidence emerging that protecting young women from two high risk HPV strains, (plus possibly one or two others), could cause them to develop cancer from the high risk strains, not protected by the vaccines. A significant proportion of young women in the survey were infected with multiple HPV strains.

I must commend Freda Birrell for her unstinting campaigning work in Scotland, attempting to get our HPV vaccine concerns over to the Scottish Government, an uphill task. This report was only mentioned in a small Scottish Mail on Sunday article (with no internet link).
From the MOS report:-
" A spokesman for the Scottish Government said 'Gardasil, the recommended vaccine, protects against the HPV types that cause more than 70% of all cervical cancers. This new data supports the assertion that the HPV vaccination programme is highly likely to be cost effective."

Someome should tell him/her about the $millions being paid out in HPV vaccine compensation in the US.


Ohhhh sigh;
That was the same tired argument the ped gave me after the third reaction to a DPT shot in my son - third was very serious - encephalopahty. He also gave this argument after the first one an the second one.

You guys are not listening.
Perhaps ---
don't really give a damn.


So the next idea will be take an almost worthless vaccine and call it "new and improved" ???

Cervical cancer rates are about 1.5% mostly in women 45-55.

It will be 40+ years before it is known if millions of doses of Gardasil for 9 year old girls has been effective.

Freda Birrell

As promised these are the comments posted by Norma Erickson who has just returned from New York after the Katie Couric show. This show I believe and have been told has a potential audience of 100 million - this is the biggest opportunity we have ever had. This can help you good people too and that is our wish. We have always maintained that the Gardasil/Cervarix girls are the voices of the little ones who have been seriously injured by vaccines and who cannot say what is wrong. This is what Norma reported, more to come in the days ahead:
Message from Norma Erickson: Emily, Rosemary and Lauren did an absolutely outstanding job of representing the victims of HPV vaccines around the globe. They not only had the audience in tears - the production crew was also. God Bless them for having the courage to speak from their hearts.
Diane Harper also did a wonderful job of explaining just how little real benefit HPV vaccines offer - the entire audience was completely shocked at some of her relevations - including the one that as long as the bad things that happen after injections occur at a certain rate (below the population-based rate), there is no obligation to report them. Guess who determines the population-based rate?
We also owe a big thanks to Katie Couric's staff - they did a wonderful job so far. I cannot wait to see the final production - I think it will be amazing!

Freda Birrell

Three of the ladies from SaneVax, Norma Erickson, Rosemary Mathis, her daughter Lauren Mathis, and Emily Tarsell were interviewed on Friday on the Katie Couric tv show in New York. Diane Harper was also on the show. I will pick up Norma's comments which have been posted to give you a flavour of how wonderful this show has gone for us regarding the HPV vaccines and the dangers they cause to young lives. To answer a question above there are many incidents of infertility, some cases of ovarian failure, serious menstrual problems with girls vaccinated with HPV. If you wish to see this we have charts summarising this - reports from VAERS and comparing against all other vaccines - HPV has most serious reaction. You can ask for Freda at [email protected]

John Stone

But Dr Moriarty it is no good is it? Each one of the cases is entitled to full scale investigation - this was how Andrew Wakefield short circuited the system of denial because he was insisting on the systematic investigation of adverse vaccine events, which is why the British government and the industry put a stop to it. Resort to statistics does not answer the question in specific cases and it does not answer the question even in lots of cases. It is also still a matter of faith whether the vaccine has any real or long term benefits.

I have no faith in CDC employed researchers in the one study or the industry funded researchers in the other. The basis of trust has long since evaporated.


Dr Moriarity-

Your concern about soft tissue cancer brings a tear to my eye. You are so noble.

What do you know about the exponential increase in such and other "soft tissue cancers" cancers after SV 40 accidentially contaminated early pplio shots?

What is "acute flacod paralysis" and how does it relate to polio shot?

How many cases of cervical or throat cancer have HPV shots prevented, ever?

Would peiatricians practice medicine any differentially
If the was no VICP? Id so, how and why?


The kids will become infertile.
This is about business and increasing Merck's profits and stock price.Health? There is NO money in health,only in sickness.
A recent article I found may indicate that Gardasil is a mitochondrial toxin.Boric acid can alter energy mechanism in muscle mitochondria- "Acute toxicity of boric acid on energy metabolism of the breast muscle in broiler chicken" an(animal study).Polysorbates together with Boric acid can easily damage the mitchondrial membranes,many of the girls also have fatigue and muscle pain and weakness.They do NOT care about us and this garbage Gardasil needs to be taken off the market. This toxic aluminum adjuvanted Gardasil is nothing more than a lie and a fast tracked help pay for vioxx vaccine.It creates sickness,not health.IT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OFF THE MARKET,long term adverse effects unknown,most likely infertility will sky-rocket.The kids quality of life also will be shorter.Fascism arrived/never left to America.

Cat Jameson


Older news reports show that Spain and India halted their HPV vaccine programs. Spain restarted administering the vaccines soon after halting it though.

I don't see too much from India's decision in the news to know if the vaccine is still banned. At one time, the HPV vaccine program was under investigation because it "had breached medical ethics and violated Indian regulations on clinical trials." http://www.bmj.com/content/347/bmj.f5492

France and the United Kingdom had issues with the vaccine also. But the issue was that it was being falsely advertised. France banned advertising the HPV vaccines in 2010. India also had issues with how the vaccine was being promoting.

I see more and more articles about this vaccine weekly. Sadly, not much of the news I read is good news.


Dr. Moriarty,
Young girls do not just up and die for no reason. Going to the movies is not the same as having an injection. The CDC is, very unfortunately, not a reliable source. More than 90% (I think 95%?) of HPV infections are cleared naturally by the immune system. Merck's principal investigator for the HPV vaccine, Diane Harper, came out years ago saying that it was being over marketed.

It seems that since the rationale for preventing cervical cancer is not solid, that the disease mongers have now changed the story and it's head and neck cancers in 20-40 year olds that they're trying to prevent. I want to see hard data, not from the CDC, before I believe any statistics. Further, if there really is, as you say, a frightening increase in head and neck cancers in the young, I would suspect the use of cell phones and other wireless technologies to be the cause. Even if HPV were found in these tumors, since HPV is not new, I would suspect that the radiation from the unchecked, inadequately regulated increased use of these devices, has in some way interfered with normal immunity in fighting these viruses that mankind has evolved with. But, as I said, I want to see real proof first.


then there are the side effects like infertility that remain hidden. I expect we'll see and explosion of infertility in these girls but of course they'll blame everything under the sun except the vaccine

Richard Moriarty, MD

The stories of these young women are sad, upsetting and tragic. Because one event occurs after another event does not mean that the first event is caused by the second event. If someone goes to a movie then dies the next day, the movie is not necessarily the cause of his/her death. If someone eats a particular food and then dies the next day, that food might or might no be the cause of his/her death. A scientific review of these particular women and their stories would either lend credence to cause-and-effect or would disprove cause and effect.

14 million people will become infected with HPV this year and 26,000 people will develop HPV-related cancers. (data from Centers for Disease Control).
Many medical centers around the country are seeing frightening increases in HPV-related head and neck cancers in 20-40 year olds and it is expected that this number will continue to grow in the next 10 years.
HPV vaccine has already been shown to decrease the incidence of HPV infections in recipients. (The Journal of Infectious Diseases 2013;208:385–93). In a large study of almost a million patients in Denmark and Sweden, there was no increased incidenc of autoimmune or neurologic or thrombotic diseases in vaccine recipients compared to those who did not receive vaccine (published October 9, 2013 in the British Medical Journal).
The stories of young women who have suffered or died from HPV-related cancers are similarly sad, upsetting and tragic. See them at http://shotbyshot.org/story-gallery/

Jeannette Bishop

There's a recent USA Today article/video attacking Burzynski, implying that comparatively Gardasil, among others, is a well-researched effective treatment, and implying that "regulators" aren't doing their jobs "well enough" in the "Burzynski controversy." If you've followed even somewhat the unreported (in the mainstream) governmental responses of hounding and restricting Burzynski, with bogus NIH research attempting to discredit this treatment, it appears obvious that at the top helping people with cancer is not even on the agenda.

On the "mainstream" hand we have a vaccine against only a fraction of strains of a virus linked to cancer, not covering the ones with highest mortality association, and without even understanding if there is a causal relationship with the HPV virus and no knowledge as to whether in the long run the vaccine will prevent any cancers. The vaccine was only ever tested against other vaccine components in all "placebos" with a high rate of adverse events in all groups, with some data showing much higher cancer risk if the vaccine recipient has already been exposed to the virus (indicative of bad vaccine practice or bad research or what?) and with some research suggesting the virus may not be just be an STD (my links to such case reports that once worked all failed just a few months later). Then our "regulators" fast-tracked the vaccine onto the liability-free "recommended" schedule to a celebratory response from a Vioxx-controversy-clouded industry and all who work for them in one way or another.

barbara j

I know only five young women who have taken the shot, all appear healthy, HOWEVER, three now have polycystic ovary disease and have become overweight. Is there a connection or is pod just rampant these days?


According to this Nov 3rd WSJ article, Merck is planning on replacing Gardasil with a new HPV vax that should bring in more than $1 billion a year:

"Merck experimental vaccine shows promise in cancer trial: WSJ"

"The U.S. pharmaceutical company said the study results support its plan to submit the new vaccine, code-named V503, for U.S. regulatory approval by year's end, which could lead to market launch next year at the soonest, the paper said...

The article said Merck expects health-care providers to eventually switch to V503 if the product receives marketing approval."



Besides Japan, what other countries have withdrawn gov't recommendation for this series?

The package insert reveals the duplicity- the two largest groups compared received vaccine and the "control group" received the entire vaccine as well- except for the viral agent. All the adjuvants, metals, dna fragments etc etc. The smallest group= 1/10 the size of the other two- received saline.


"A Lobbying Effort From Manufacturers

But Dr. Diane Harper, a professor at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, says the vaccine is being way oversold.

That's pretty striking, because Harper worked on studies that got the vaccines approved. And she has accepted grants from the manufacturers, although she says she doesn't any longer.

Harper changed her mind when the vaccine makers started lobbying state legislatures to require schoolkids to get vaccinated.

"Ninety-five percent of women who are infected with HPV never, ever get cervical cancer," she says. "It seemed very odd to be mandating something for which 95 percent of infections never amount to anything."

Bob Moffitt

I believe our country was far better off when liquor and cigaretts were the main advertisers on major television networks .. because:

#1 .. Children were not legally permitted to either buy or use these products.

#2 .. Public health agencies and spokesmen were "in our face" warning the viewers of the dangers of cigarettes and liquor.

#3 .. Main stream media and television news broadcasts routinely reported the latest "science" .. mainly statistical .. showing the high risks of cancer and cigarettes .. while at the same time reporting diligently on efforts of law enforcement officials and Mothers Against Drunk Driving .. to severely punish those arrested in drunk driving incidents where someone was killed.

Common sense suggests the financial burden of removing these two products from network advertising was huge and it would have to be replaced. Unfortunately, the lucrative advertising revenue that was lost .. was soon replaced by allowing pharmaceutical companies to advertise their products. Ergo .. adds for Camel cigarettes were replaced by adds for Gardasil. Consider the difference:

#1 .. Gardasil is not only recommended and approved for children as young as nine .. there are some instances where State legislators do not require parental consent for the child.

#2 .. Public health agencies and spokesmen are "in our face" warning parents to allow their child be the "one less" promised by Gardasil.

#3 .. Main stream media and television news broadcasts are loathed to report ANY science .. let alone the latest .. showing the growing numbers of adverse event reports being filed in the name of victims who suffered severe adverse reactions .. including death .. while at the same time reporting diligently on the efforts of public health agencies to promote Gardasil as "safe and effective".

Most recently .. major news outlets eagerly broadcast "new recommendations that call for prescribing statins to an estimated 33 million Americans who don't have cardiovascular disease but who have a 7.5 percent or higher risk for a heart attack or stroke over the next decade".

The cynic in me suggests the pharmaceutical companies had to find a way to fund the recent settlement cases that have cost them BILLIONS of dollars .. such as .. Johnson and Johnson's settlement that could reach up to 4 billion to resolve thousands of lawsuits filed by patients injured by a flawed all-metal replacement hip .. or ... Merck's agreement to pay $688 million to settle a class action lawsuit for concealing poor results of a clinical trial of the anti-cholesterol drug Vyorin .. which followed on the heels of another Merck agreement to pay $4.85 billion to resolve lawsuits contending its Vioxx painkiller caused heart attacks.

What better way to recoup some of those massive losses .. than to instantly "grow the market" of prescribing statins .. by the estimated 33 million Americans now "eligible" for prescription. Think about it .. 33 million Americans suddenly being recommended and approved for prescription statin drugs.

What does it all look like to me?

It appears medical care in the United States has become captive of .. and .. a willing partner to .. a pharmaceutical industry that seems far more concerned with "marketing" their products .. then providing the critical information that doctors require to give their patients the best care possible.


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.)