Heigh Ho! Heigh Ho! It's Off to Vaccinate We Go!
By Linda1
Just when I thought it couldn't get any worse than the Surgeon General using Elmo on Sesame Street to hawk vaccines to the tiniest and most impressionable among us, Forbes steps up to the plate this month to compete for Most Disgusting Abuse of Marketing Drugs Directly To Children Award.
In Forbes' Jan. 20th "Pharma & Healthcare" section (where they tell us what Pharma wants us to "know"), there is an article titled, "Even Disney Princesses Need HPV Shots, Cervical Cancer Screenings and STD Testing". In this activist sales pitch dressed up as science journalism, Forbes contributor and self-assigned savior of the world's children from their own parents (and non HPV vaccine prescribing doctors), Tara Haelle, reports how "writer and sex ed speaker Danielle Sepulveres and artist/illustrator Maritza Lugo...collaborated on a series of illustrations at Sepulveres' Tumblr showing Disney princesses visiting their gynecologists to raise awareness for Cervical Cancer Awareness Month and all the healthy behaviors that women can take to reduce their risk of this almost completely preventable cancer." Apparently "Sepulveres became frustrated last fall when she and fellow writer friends had trouble successfully pitching stories to write about Gynecological Cancer Awareness Month in September. After sharing her frustration in a blog post at a cervical cancer "cervivors" site, she decided she needed a new approach to catch people's attention when January rolled around." So she teamed with artist Lugo "whose website features a style well suited to placing icons like Cinderella and Mulan in a new context".
Sepulveres and Lugo show the Disney cartoon characters that millions of children love and admire in various medical situations. Tiana is shown getting an HPV vaccine. Mulan is in the gynecologist's examination chair shaking his hand before putting her feet into the stirrups for her "cervical cancer screening". Belle is shown in the clinic picking up (I kid you not) "emergency contraception" (behind her are brochures on Birth Control, one partially hidden by the nurse's (?) head says in red "Your Sexual...", and then right behind Belle's head is a large picture of an IUD, white and blue on bright red).
Then there's Cinderella's "new context". You didn't think that Cinderella, who has been a teenager since 1950 when she debuted in her first Disney film, got away without having sex all this time, did you? Can't let a storybook princess maintain her decades long reputation for innocence, not in 2016 when there are so many drugs and medical services for her to sell - to children. Nope. Cinderella is all grown up now. Cinderella is shown in the lab with a needle in her arm getting blood drawn to test her for STD's, because, as the poster on the wall behind her head says "ONE IN TWO SEXUALLY ACTIVE YOUNG PEOPLE WILL GET AN STD BY 25". You just can't make this stuff up. CINDERELLA. What age is into Cinderella? 3? 5? 7? 9? Oh, now, wait a minute. Nine year old girls ARE targeted (their word, not mine) for the HPV vaccine. So, they get the babies ready for the idea that they're going to get this vaccine when they are just barely out of diapers so that by the time they reach the ripe old age of 9, they accept it without questioning because all their Disney friends got it and did just fine. Slick.
I saw one more. Jasmine and Aladdin are shown discussing family planning options with a doctor. Can you imagine your 7 year old proficient reader asking you, "What's family planning, Mommy?" "What's an STD?" "What's emergency contraception?".
There is a positive aspect to this sorry hijacking of fairy tales by Pharma and Fiends though. While consistently loyal Pharma friendly Forbes published this piece by Haelle, Sepulveres indignantly reveals on her Tumblr blog that plenty of other editors rejected the story:
*Important to note that this month, pitches to female editors about this topic were ignored or rejected by The Daily Beast, Cosmopolitan, The Establishment, Buzzfeed, Glamour, The Cut and several others.*
So, it is good to think that other editors realized how outrageously inappropriate this is on so many levels. Science journalists influencing minors to opt for certain medical and pharmaceutical products and services with or without using beloved Disney characters is marketing directing to children and it is disgusting. It's not that cervical cancer isn't a problem. There are lots of problems. It's that these women are not the children's parents and they are overstepping their bounds. They are trampling on parental rights and authority. They are trying to wedge their message between young children and their parents using Disney characters. If these women want to teach, they can reach out to parents with their message and then they should politely and respectfully wait for acceptance or rejection of that message. And they should take yes or no for an answer and know that there are BOUNDARIES. They have no right to push parents aside and go straight to the children with their biased, controversial, agenda. That goes for Surgeon General Murtha and Sesame Street too.
Unicef's Bo Viktor Nylund outlines the problem in an article in The Guardian, "Marketing and advertising to children: the issues at stake",
Marketing to children has expanded to include messaging at points of sale, children’s clubs, sporting events, concerts, websites, social networking sites and even in schools. Marketing messages may introduce children to inappropriate content like violence, sexualization and unrealistic body images....
Nylund's article was not specifically about HPV vaccine and sex education linked to various products and services, but it applies to these products and services as well, even and especially when they are marketed to children by government officials like Murtha. It is an overreach to market drugs and medical services directly to children that parents may not agree with. Birth control and cultural/religious ideals of sexual practices are personal as are decisions over what services and products will be chosen for use. These are not decisions for minors (no matter what California has decided - if they think children are able to make medical decisions then they should also grant children over the age of 12 the right to vote, but I digress). It is most interesting that the article states that Disney is one of a number of companies that has "already taken steps to integrate children's rights considerations into their marketing and advertising strategies."
So, would Uncle Walt and his successors at Disney approve of Tiana, Cinderella, Alladin, Belle and Mulan being used to sell controversial vaccines, IUDs and emergency contraception directly to kids (or even to adults for that matter)? I wonder, has Disney approved? If so, I want to know if Disney was paid for the use of these characters, how much and by whom?
Outrageous marketing of "sex ed" to very young children without their parent's consent aside, some may be thinking that this campaign is ok because HPV vaccine is proven safe and effective and necessary to prevent cervical cancer and other conditions linked to HPV viral strains. That's the sales pitch - the message the CDC puts out. But it isn't true. HPV vaccine is extremely controversial and has been from day 1 when the first version was introduced in 2006 (we're on version 2 now with the poorly tested Gardasil 9). In 2013 the Japanese government withdrew their recommendation for the vaccine because of concerns of serious adverse side effects. The HPV vaccine is also in big trouble in other countries including India, France, Spain and Denmark. Gardasil's history can be found in "Gardasil, License to Kill?", which is chapter 19 of the book, Vaccine Epidemic. That chapter is downloadable for free here.
No one knows if the HPV vaccine can or will prevent cervical cancer, but we do know that some children who receive this vaccine get very sick and many have tragically died. In his January 16, 2016 open letter of complaint to WHO, Dr. Sin Hang Lee explains the scientific rationale behind the serious adverse events including deaths after HPV vaccine. He conclusively shows that these illnesses and deaths are not coincidental to the vaccine's administration and he also proves using emails that he obtained that the damning science has been deliberately hidden from policy makers and the public.
Tara Haelle is one science journalist who needs to catch a scientific clue and she needs to learn her place. Her place is NOT between parents and their children. Her place is not in raising other people's kids. Like "The Daily Beast, Cosmopolitan, The Establishment, Buzzfeed, Glamour, The Cut and several others", Tara Heale and her Forbes' editors should have had the sense and (we can only hope) scientific understanding to reject Sepulvedes' transgressive and grossly inappropriate campaign.
Postscript: At the end of Haelle's Forbes' piece, she announces that she is writing a parenting book with Ms. :o) Emily Willingham, titled, The Informed Parent: A Science-Based Resource for Your Child's First Four Years. That's right, folks. These two will be explaining the "science" of parenting a child up to age 4 (notably a particularly vaccine intensive time) to parents so that parents no longer have to rely on, to paraphrase the intro to their book on Amazon: know-nothing friends, other parents, in-laws, and I will add, the growing number of doctors and scientists who don't agree with the Haelle/Willingham(Pharma/CDC) definition of "credible" science. Haelle with her infamously opinionated and not very scientifically credible partner, Willingham, apparently have their sights set on getting in between everybody because they're the experts and no one you know, including your doctor, knows as much as they (and their puppeteers) do.
Getting our little girls ready for sex. ISIS would be so proud. Are we going to see Mickey and Aladdin getting their HPV shot or practicing putting a condom on a banana? I know the latter was featured in one video but there is definitely a female demographic that is being targeted and it's creepy, and shameful!
What's the next video going to be, "How to get the best price for your parents when they sell you to your handsome Saudi prince"?
Posted by: Annie | January 27, 2016 at 09:24 PM
Hi Erica, Sorry to hear you have "metastatic cervical cancer". I know this to be an advanced prognosis. However, I do wonder why you failed to get those annual pap smear tests you mentioned? These would have picked up pre cancerous cell changes, and you could have had these cells removed before they became cancerous.
The HPV vaccine Gardasil, does not protect against all cancer causing HPV strains. For this reason in the UK, pap smears have been retained, in addition to the HPV vaccines.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | January 27, 2016 at 02:16 PM
Erica,
One more point: Back when they were telling women that cervical cancer is a slow growing treatable cancer when caught early, they were also telling people that it was an undisputed, evidence-based, scientific fact that uncircumcised males were a risk factor for the development of cervical cancer in their later partners. This was stated as a benefit of circumcision and no doubt swayed many parents to opt for the procedure. The medical community now says that they were wrong, that circumcision does not reduce risk. But for all the years that the medical community were wrong, circumcision was never mandated as a global health strategy to prevent cervical cancer. As far as I know, there were no WHO meetings to brainstorm about what to do about circumcision hesitancy in countries around the world. There were no meetings about how to raise funds to get physicians and circumcision equipment to the far corners of the earth. And isn't it a good thing that they didn't try to coerce the circumcision of every baby boy born on this planet, because they were wrong and even if it turned out that they were right, the decision should be made by parents using the most accurate information available without coercion of any kind.
Many think that the HPV vaccine is a scam, including an outspoken physician who is a former Merck employee:
"The physician confirms that Gardasil is useless, costs a fortune and that decision-makers at all levels are aware of it. “I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all times because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine, technical and scientific feat that it may be, has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers,” Dr. Dalbergue says. He adds that there is far too much financial interest or [sic] the vaccine to be withdrawn."
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2014/04/merck-dr-exposes-gardasil-scandal-ineffective-deadly-profitable/
Posted by: Linda1 | January 27, 2016 at 01:26 PM
Hi Erica,
The "Decade of Vaccines" was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2010. Simply put, the goal of the Decade of Vaccines is to put tremendous resources toward vaccine development and to have effective programs in place that will provide maximum delivery of vaccines to every person on earth by the year 2020 - and to make sure that those vaccines are received, whether global citizens want them or not. The Gates Foundation has chipped in $10 Billion toward the effort.
On the surface disease prevention via medicine might seem like a good thing, but there are major problems. Vaccines are not all they're cracked up to be and those of us who think we're voting for our leaders in democratic societies will be surprised to find out that our public policies are being formed by external entities, namely WHO. Of course, we don't vote for those people. And, it is my understanding that WHO, a UN agency formed in 1948, now gets more funding from Pharma than from world governments. That is a big problem.
Coercion by special interest backed global public health leaders to force populations to take bad drugs is one of the biggest dangers threatening global health. They are endorsing bad science, suppressing good science, and denying or making light of vaccine adverse effects and vaccine failure. They are using every trick to persuade people to take these drugs. Convincing the "vaccine hesitant" is a major focus (please see link below). Refusal is not an option. They have infiltrated all aspects of society with their message (even using Disney princesses) and are working toward censoring dissent, demonizing, marginalizing and penalizing those that question and refuse. It's hard to believe but it is true that they even hire people to pose as disease victims on blogs like this in order to scare and confuse the public. These hired trolls can often be identified by their apparent lack of genuine emotion and their use of certain buzz words like - "credible" science and "peer-reviewed". Not that those words aren't legitimate. It's all in how they're used.
Cervical cancer is certainly nothing to be taken lightly. When I was young I was told that it was a very slow growing cancer, taking 10 years to develop, and that if it was detected early through yearly Pap smears, it would be almost 100% curable. It seems that since the lucrative vaccine has been developed, cervical cancer information has changed. The push for HPV vaccine uptake may be coloring the cervical cancer narrative as told in 2016. I'm not sure. But there is no doubt that the vaccine is dangerous and has devastated and even taken many lives. That, like the disease that the vaccine is supposed to prevent, is unacceptable.
In answer to your question...please see the links embedded in the post and in the other comments here. And I wish for you a full recovery.
http://www.who.int/immunization/programmes_systems/vaccine_hesitancy/en/
Posted by: Linda1 | January 27, 2016 at 11:48 AM
Erica, these are not "so many scare tactic stories". These are people telling heartbreaking stories of life-changing vaccine injuries.
A "tactic" is "an action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific end". What would be the end, the goal, of teenagers and their parents telling these stories? There's nothing in it for them. They're not making it up.
For years, accounts of typically developing toddlers receiving a round of vaccines and regressing into autism with severe impairment have been dismissed as "coincidence". Now we have hundreds of families from around the world telling similar stories of serious reactions to HPV vaccines. These are girls and young women (and some boys) who have experienced years of health and normal development and success in academics and sports, and then their lives change after receiving this vaccine. Danish health authorities estimate that 1 in 400 recipients have had serious adverse reactions to HPV vaccines.
Most people fight off HPV virus with no ill effects. So most people don't even benefit from this vaccine. And whether it will actually prevent cancer is unknown.
Dr. Diane Harper, an HPV expert who helped develop Gardasil, now doubts whether the potential benefits outweigh the risks.
An Interview with Dr. Diane M. Harper, HPV Expert
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-g-yerman/an-interview-with-dr-dian_b_405472.html
I'm so sorry that you have cancer, and hope that treatments will be effective.
Posted by: Twyla | January 27, 2016 at 01:34 AM
We should all listen to this young man who sings acapella as he tells Disney Lies. Should we get together and try to contact him. The songs are beautiful-listen in!https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIQr_TrFTUk
Posted by: Shelley Tzorfas | January 26, 2016 at 08:46 PM
I am a woman currently undergoing treatment for invasive metastatic cervical cancer, a cancer which we could eradicate through the HPV vaccine, well woman exams annually, Pap tests, and HPV tests (preventative healthcare). I would love to see any peer reviewed medical documentation which indicates that the HPV vaccine leads to deaths. There are so many scare tactic stories out there, however, I've yet to see a credible peer reviewed medical document to support these stories.
Posted by: Erica | January 26, 2016 at 07:10 PM
More seriously than my last post, at least the fact that they are informing the public that this is a vaccine to protect from an STD will allow children and their parents to decide that they don't need protecting from a lifestyle choice, at least, not for a long time.
Posted by: Grace Green | January 26, 2016 at 04:08 PM
Disney has custom cake decorators afraid of crack-downs on custom cakes bearing their images. Though I don't expect them to crack down here, except maybe as theater, if their image and bottom line suffers...but from what is out there, Disney may have been far more deserving of boycott and bankruptcy than Forbes for some time before this point...another source of potentially great disillusionment (somewhat like vaccination) that I don't have the desire(?) so far to really make sure I understand all of what they may be and may have been about.
Anyway, some may find Disney images completely appropriate in this context and not because they believe vaccines are the major life-savers they are claimed to be.
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | January 26, 2016 at 03:56 PM
On the artist's home page, she expresses joyous shock that her "art" has now been picked up in by "reputable" publications and bloggers the UK and in Brazil. #SoFamousNow!
Well lady, welcome to the cult. You're the tool of the day. Enjoy your royalty checks and don't forget to stay away from garlic and sunlight.
Posted by: Joy B | January 26, 2016 at 03:20 PM
Where's "Anonymous" with the leaked phone calls/emails that must certainly exist between the WIllingham's and their handlers, the Dorit Reiss's, and so on and so on right up to the top of the whole thing?
This is the next logical step, yet it's not happening.
Posted by: Joy B | January 26, 2016 at 03:04 PM
The fact that Disney did not immediately come out denouncing this Forbes article and use of its princess images is very telling. Looks like we need to add yet another company to the list of companies to which we no longer give our business...my but that list is getting SOOO long!
Thank you, Linda1, for writing about and exposing this egregious article/agenda, and for warning parents about this author's new book with co-author Emily Willingham.
Posted by: Laura Hayes | January 26, 2016 at 12:26 PM
"hi ho, hi ho! You might get STD you know!" Disney's Diseased Princesses. Yikes.
Posted by: C Thompson | January 26, 2016 at 12:13 PM
Quote from above:- "Belle is shown in the clinic picking up (I kid you not) "emergency contraception" (behind her are brochures on Birth Control, one partially hidden by the nurse's (?) head says in red "Your Sexual...", and then right behind Belle's head is a large picture of an IUD, white and blue on bright red)."
We CAN'T have Belle, (the 'beauty' from 'Beauty and the Beast'), getting preggers with a litter of wee beasties!! ...and to think naive mums and grandmas like me thought those goings on at the 'enchanted' castle, were all about tea parties and chaste walks around the rose garden. Bedroom sex scenes? NEVER!!
Forbes has plumbed new depths with this. I hope the Disney organisation puts a stop to this slur on their much loved animated traditional fairytales.
Posted by: Jenny Allan | January 26, 2016 at 11:53 AM
Will there be a sequel, in which some of the Disney princesses are bedridden with chronic pain, fatigue, seizures, migraines, and various autoimmune disorders?
http://truthaboutgardasil.org
http://sanevax.org
Danish documentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO2i-r39hok
Posted by: Twyla | January 26, 2016 at 11:52 AM
Nanny state gone crazy? I received a letter after complaining to Disney about this. They stated that the matter was confidential in nature and something along the lines of "thanks for letting us know and we take the use of our images seriously." This is sick. Especially as so many girls have been harmed by this particular vaccine.
Posted by: Disgusted | January 26, 2016 at 11:16 AM
"Mummy, Mummy! What's an STD?"!!
Posted by: Grace Green | January 26, 2016 at 11:13 AM
I understand Disney & Monsatan have ties with each other ?
http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2016/01/25/complete-history-of-monsanto-worlds-most-evil-corporation/
1950s: Closely aligned with The Walt Disney Company, Monsanto creates several attractions at Disney’s Tomorrowland, espousing the glories of chemicals and plastics. Their “House of the Future” is constructed entirely of toxic plastic that is not biodegradable as they had asserted. What, Monsanto lied? I’m shocked!
Posted by: Georg Elser | January 26, 2016 at 09:59 AM
This is really sick. Maybe they will start putting stickers on pre-school toys saying "Get your ______ shot. 20% off coupon." Kind of like all the signs at CVS, Rite-Aid, Walgreens, etc., for the seniors to "Get your flu, shingles, pertussis, etc., shot for 20% off your shopping bill." Just sick. Using fear tactics with Disney Princessses - Inspired marketing.
Posted by: Jill | January 26, 2016 at 09:02 AM