Print
E-mail
Gardasil Researcher Drops A Bombshell
Harper: Controversal Drug Will Do Little To Reduce Cervical Cancer Rates
By Susan Brinkmann, For The Bulletin
Dr. Diane Harper, lead researcher in the development of two human papilloma virus vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, said the controversial drugs will do little to reduce cervical cancer rates and, even though they’re being recommended for girls as young as nine, there have been no efficacy trials in children under the age of 15.
Dr. Harper, director of the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group at the University of Missouri, made these remarks during an address at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination which took place in Reston, Virginia on Oct. 2-4. Although her talk was intended to promote the vaccine, participants said they came away convinced the vaccine should not be received.
“I came away from the talk with the perception that the risk of adverse side effects is so much greater than the risk of cervical cancer, I couldn’t help but question why we need the vaccine at all,” said Joan Robinson, Assistant Editor at the Population Research Institute.
Dr. Harper began her remarks by explaining that 70 percent of all HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment within a year. Within two years, the number climbs to 90 percent. Of the remaining 10 percent of HPV infections, only half will develop into cervical cancer, which leaves little need for the vaccine.
She went on to surprise the audience by stating that the incidence of cervical cancer in the U.S. is already so low that “even if we get the vaccine and continue PAP screening, we will not lower the rate of cervical cancer in the US.”
There will be no decrease in cervical cancer until at least 70 percent of the population is vaccinated, and even then, the decrease will be minimal.
Apparently, conventional treatment and preventative measures are already cutting the cervical cancer rate by four percent a year. At this rate, in 60 years, there will be a 91.4 percent decline just with current treatment. Even if 70 percent of women get the shot and required boosters over the same time period, which is highly unlikely, Harper says Gardasil still could not claim to do as much as traditional care is already doing.
Dr. Harper, who also serves as a consultant to the World Health Organization, further undercut the case for mass vaccination by saying that “four out of five women with cervical cancer are in developing countries.”
Ms. Robinson said she could not help but wonder, “If this is the case, then why vaccinate at all? But from the murmurs of the doctors in the audience, it was apparent that the same thought was occurring to them.”
However, at this point, Dr. Harper dropped an even bigger bombshell on the audience when she announced that, “There have been no efficacy trials in girls under 15 years.”
Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil, studied only a small group of girls under 16 who had been vaccinated, but did not follow them long enough to conclude sufficient presence of effective HPV antibodies.
This is not the first time Dr. Harper revealed the fact that Merck never tested Gardasil for safety in young girls. During a 2007 interview with KPC News.com, she said giving the vaccine to girls as young as 11 years-old “is a great big public health experiment.”
At the time, which was at the height of Merck’s controversial drive to have the vaccine mandated in schools, Dr. Harper remained steadfastly opposed to the idea and said she had been trying for months to convince major television and print media about her concerns, “but no one will print it.”
“It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11 to 12 year old girls,” she said at the time. “There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue.”
When asked why she was speaking out, she said: “I want to be able to sleep with myself when I go to bed at night.”
Since the drug’s introduction in 2006, the public has been learning many of these facts the hard way. To date, 15,037 girls have officially reported adverse side effects from Gardasil to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). These adverse reactions include Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation and many others. The CDC acknowledges that there have been 44 reported deaths.
Dr. Harper also participated in the research on Glaxo-Smith-Kline’s version of the drug, Cervarix, currently in use in the UK but not yet approved here. Since the government began administering the vaccine to school-aged girls last year, more than 2,000 patients reported some kind of adverse reaction including nausea, dizziness, blurred vision, convulsions, seizures and hyperventilation. Several reported multiple reactions, with 4,602 suspected side-effects recorded in total. The most tragic case involved a 14 year-old girl who dropped dead in the corridor of her school an hour after receiving the vaccination.
The outspoken researcher also weighed in last month on a report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association that raised questions about the safety of the vaccine, saying bluntly: "The rate of serious adverse events is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer."
Ms. Robinson said she respects Dr. Harper’s candor. “I think she’s a scientist, a researcher, and she’s genuine enough a scientist to be open about the risks. I respect that in her.”
However, she failed to make the case for Gardasil. “For me, it was hard to resist the conclusion that Gardasil does almost nothing for the health of American women.”
Dr. Harper, director of the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group at the University of Missouri, made these remarks during an address at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination which took place in Reston, Virginia on Oct. 2-4. Although her talk was intended to promote the vaccine, participants said they came away convinced the vaccine should not be received.
“I came away from the talk with the perception that the risk of adverse side effects is so much greater than the risk of cervical cancer, I couldn’t help but question why we need the vaccine at all,” said Joan Robinson, Assistant Editor at the Population Research Institute.
Dr. Harper began her remarks by explaining that 70 percent of all HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment within a year. Within two years, the number climbs to 90 percent. Of the remaining 10 percent of HPV infections, only half will develop into cervical cancer, which leaves little need for the vaccine.
She went on to surprise the audience by stating that the incidence of cervical cancer in the U.S. is already so low that “even if we get the vaccine and continue PAP screening, we will not lower the rate of cervical cancer in the US.”
There will be no decrease in cervical cancer until at least 70 percent of the population is vaccinated, and even then, the decrease will be minimal.
Apparently, conventional treatment and preventative measures are already cutting the cervical cancer rate by four percent a year. At this rate, in 60 years, there will be a 91.4 percent decline just with current treatment. Even if 70 percent of women get the shot and required boosters over the same time period, which is highly unlikely, Harper says Gardasil still could not claim to do as much as traditional care is already doing.
Dr. Harper, who also serves as a consultant to the World Health Organization, further undercut the case for mass vaccination by saying that “four out of five women with cervical cancer are in developing countries.”
Ms. Robinson said she could not help but wonder, “If this is the case, then why vaccinate at all? But from the murmurs of the doctors in the audience, it was apparent that the same thought was occurring to them.”
However, at this point, Dr. Harper dropped an even bigger bombshell on the audience when she announced that, “There have been no efficacy trials in girls under 15 years.”
Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil, studied only a small group of girls under 16 who had been vaccinated, but did not follow them long enough to conclude sufficient presence of effective HPV antibodies.
This is not the first time Dr. Harper revealed the fact that Merck never tested Gardasil for safety in young girls. During a 2007 interview with KPC News.com, she said giving the vaccine to girls as young as 11 years-old “is a great big public health experiment.”
At the time, which was at the height of Merck’s controversial drive to have the vaccine mandated in schools, Dr. Harper remained steadfastly opposed to the idea and said she had been trying for months to convince major television and print media about her concerns, “but no one will print it.”
“It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11 to 12 year old girls,” she said at the time. “There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue.”
When asked why she was speaking out, she said: “I want to be able to sleep with myself when I go to bed at night.”
Since the drug’s introduction in 2006, the public has been learning many of these facts the hard way. To date, 15,037 girls have officially reported adverse side effects from Gardasil to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). These adverse reactions include Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation and many others. The CDC acknowledges that there have been 44 reported deaths.
Dr. Harper also participated in the research on Glaxo-Smith-Kline’s version of the drug, Cervarix, currently in use in the UK but not yet approved here. Since the government began administering the vaccine to school-aged girls last year, more than 2,000 patients reported some kind of adverse reaction including nausea, dizziness, blurred vision, convulsions, seizures and hyperventilation. Several reported multiple reactions, with 4,602 suspected side-effects recorded in total. The most tragic case involved a 14 year-old girl who dropped dead in the corridor of her school an hour after receiving the vaccination.
The outspoken researcher also weighed in last month on a report published in the Journal of the American Medical Association that raised questions about the safety of the vaccine, saying bluntly: "The rate of serious adverse events is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer."
Ms. Robinson said she respects Dr. Harper’s candor. “I think she’s a scientist, a researcher, and she’s genuine enough a scientist to be open about the risks. I respect that in her.”
However, she failed to make the case for Gardasil. “For me, it was hard to resist the conclusion that Gardasil does almost nothing for the health of American women.”
 |
 |
|
| Philadelphia’s Field of Dreams: 2009 Phillies Like 1929 Athletics | Russia Violating Treaty By Developing Missile |
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of thebulletin.us.
Dexter wrote on Oct 28, 2009 1:55 AM:
" This article is a bit on the disturbing side. From the reporting, it sounds like Dr. Harper has an agenda, something other than medical issues driving her comments. Is that yellow journalism in action, or was this really Dr Harper's intent?
The question people want addressed is, why get the vaccine? Her comment that the vaccine will not affect the cc rate is inconsequential to the decision. It sounds like that is what the article implies, but it is in fact shown to knock out about 2/3 of the strains of hpv that cause cc. No, it won't affect the rate in the near term - cc develops over many years, so no drop should be expected for quite a while, even if everybody were to get the vaccine. But a vaccinated individual does not drop their risk by the national statistical cancer rate! The individual is likely dropping their risk by 2/3! very significant.
Dr Harper says the risk for cc is very low. The rate is 8.2/100,000 each year for women. After 70 years, that is a 1/200 chance of acquiring cc. 1/600 chance of dying - she calls that "low?" - ??? Well, thems bad odds at the poker table, but in the cancer ward, that sounds pretty dang high to me, when the ante is passing up a simple vaccine.
She points out newer treatments are reducing the risk of death and complications, the article's implication being the vaccine will be outmoded anyway. Great for the statistics, but again, what about the individual?? Who, given the choice, would choose to just go ahead and get a killing disease because treatment prognosis is getting better? Or will just wait it out because something better might come along later?
Is it possible that the journalism has skewed Dr Harper's message, or has Dr Harper's consciousness surrealistically seeped into the pages of a "Statistics for Dummies" tome?
According to the CDC, there are not documented statistically significant complications from gardasil. If Merck is sitting on their hands about follow up safety studies, that is important to know. Absent that, the Harper presentation sounds like it was meant for an evangelical audience.
The fact that the article brought up the death of a British girl (via grossly malignant tumor - nothing at all to do with the vaccine) coincident to her receiving cervarix pretty much seals the deal. Did Dr. Harper bring this up, or does this show that the article's bent comes from journalistic prerogative. So, is the agenda political, journalistic, or is money involved?
I wonder what it's like having your daughter die, and just by chance, become the poster child for extremists peddling hogwash? "
The question people want addressed is, why get the vaccine? Her comment that the vaccine will not affect the cc rate is inconsequential to the decision. It sounds like that is what the article implies, but it is in fact shown to knock out about 2/3 of the strains of hpv that cause cc. No, it won't affect the rate in the near term - cc develops over many years, so no drop should be expected for quite a while, even if everybody were to get the vaccine. But a vaccinated individual does not drop their risk by the national statistical cancer rate! The individual is likely dropping their risk by 2/3! very significant.
Dr Harper says the risk for cc is very low. The rate is 8.2/100,000 each year for women. After 70 years, that is a 1/200 chance of acquiring cc. 1/600 chance of dying - she calls that "low?" - ??? Well, thems bad odds at the poker table, but in the cancer ward, that sounds pretty dang high to me, when the ante is passing up a simple vaccine.
She points out newer treatments are reducing the risk of death and complications, the article's implication being the vaccine will be outmoded anyway. Great for the statistics, but again, what about the individual?? Who, given the choice, would choose to just go ahead and get a killing disease because treatment prognosis is getting better? Or will just wait it out because something better might come along later?
Is it possible that the journalism has skewed Dr Harper's message, or has Dr Harper's consciousness surrealistically seeped into the pages of a "Statistics for Dummies" tome?
According to the CDC, there are not documented statistically significant complications from gardasil. If Merck is sitting on their hands about follow up safety studies, that is important to know. Absent that, the Harper presentation sounds like it was meant for an evangelical audience.
The fact that the article brought up the death of a British girl (via grossly malignant tumor - nothing at all to do with the vaccine) coincident to her receiving cervarix pretty much seals the deal. Did Dr. Harper bring this up, or does this show that the article's bent comes from journalistic prerogative. So, is the agenda political, journalistic, or is money involved?
I wonder what it's like having your daughter die, and just by chance, become the poster child for extremists peddling hogwash? "
MrFreethinker wrote on Oct 28, 2009 8:34 AM:
" Since the introduction of this poisonous vaccine (are there any non-poisonous?) I've been arguing, particularly with family members and friends, that this should not be given to anyone, particularly children. Gardasil, in particular, has been shown time and again to have such serious side effects that those who receive it might as well be given their last rites, and that parents who allow their children to receive this "vaccine" should be prosecuted for criminal abuse of their children. People who don't review the "ingredients" of these vaccines and take it on blind faith that they are effective because those in authority say so really are the "useless eaters" that the criminal Henry Kissinger claims they are. What's worse, those same brain-dead people are standing in line waiting to get the H1N1 vaccine, H1N1 being the swine flu, which is no more harmful to the body than the common cold.
Wake up, people, before its too late. Oh, it already is.
Peace and love. "
Wake up, people, before its too late. Oh, it already is.
Peace and love. "
sf1975 wrote on Oct 30, 2009 2:06 AM:
" Looking at the numbers I was skeptical from the beginning. It only takes a quick look at the comments to see that a few are quite well crafted... Can't blame pharm for protecting their interests $$$$. Mandating it is a cash cow. "
Stansfield wrote on Oct 30, 2009 1:38 PM:
" Parents, For accurate information about vaccines from a source that is NOT funded by the government or pharmaceuticals, visit the National Vaccine Information Center, www.nvic.org. There you can find information on specific vaccines, their ingredients, history of injury or deaths, history (or not) of trials, the effectiveness and necessity of individual vaccines, and your legal rights. PLEASE inform yourself so you can make the best decision for your child. As the mother of a vaccine injured child and a professional who works daily with children with autism, I cannot express how crucial it is for every parent to learn about the known risks of vaccines BEFORE they visit their pediatrician. "
SkeptVet wrote on Oct 30, 2009 2:55 PM:
" There are a number of things highly suspicious about this article. For one, several of the facts attributed to Dr. Harper are incorrect, including the fact that the vaccine has been tested in girls 9 and older, which can be found on the FDA and CDC web sites. The meeting she was addressing, furthermore, is a faux scientific conference set up as a political event by the notorious anti-vaccine National Vaccine Information Center, and many of the speakers were staunch opponents of all vaccines. Finally, both the Joan RObinson quoted in the article and the journalist who wrote it are affiliated with conservative religious groups who oppose, among many other things, birth control and any apporach to reducing the risks of sexuality other than abstinence.
Here is a blog post that examines some of the hidden agendas behind this propaganda masquerading as journalism:
http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2009/10/anti-vaccine-activists-and-conservative-christians-vs-hpv-vaccination/ "
Here is a blog post that examines some of the hidden agendas behind this propaganda masquerading as journalism:
http://skeptvet.com/Blog/2009/10/anti-vaccine-activists-and-conservative-christians-vs-hpv-vaccination/ "
Sally_Oh wrote on Oct 30, 2009 3:38 PM:
" On the CDC website, all the information on an HPV vaccine use the word "may": as in may prevent cervical cancer, as in may cause it. Yeah, Google is your friend. If you aren't too scared to get the vaccine, you haven't read enough. I've been reading on vaccines for over a year. They are poison and they are dangerous. All of them.
The notion that a teen dropped dead from a tumor coincidentally an hour after receiving a vaccine is such an outrageous story, I'm amazed anyone believes it. So, she was going to drop dead anyway, vaccine or no? Some people will believe anything.
The lid is coming off the vaccine mania, just a matter of time. I'm grateful to the H1N1 hysteria for pushing it forward. There is a God. "
The notion that a teen dropped dead from a tumor coincidentally an hour after receiving a vaccine is such an outrageous story, I'm amazed anyone believes it. So, she was going to drop dead anyway, vaccine or no? Some people will believe anything.
The lid is coming off the vaccine mania, just a matter of time. I'm grateful to the H1N1 hysteria for pushing it forward. There is a God. "
AustImages wrote on Nov 1, 2009 9:58 PM:
" There are so many errors in the figures and conclusions presented in this article, that it's hard to know where to begin.
As such, I'll deal with only the most serious accusations, those relating to the deaths allegedly caused by Gardasil.
The article implies that the CDC acknowledges Gardasil has caused 44 deaths in the US, according to the VAERS database. This is not correct. While the database does list 44 deaths 'following' the administration of Gardasil, NONE were deemed related to the vaccine. Most occurred many weeks or months following the vaccination, and the cause of death was from various pre-existing conditions. One of the 'deaths' was from a cocaine overdose, yet the antivaxxers somehow blame Gardasil for this??? To summarise the 44 events:
• In 22 cases there is no evidence that a death had even occurred. These were heresay reports of supposed deaths that were unsupported by any evidence that anyone had actually died, or in fact received a vaccine. There were no dates, names, places, doctors or hospitals known for these events.
• In 16 cases the cause of death was determined to be unrelated to vaccination. Most were related to a pre-existing condition.
• In 3 cases, the cause of death was determined as unlikely to be related to vaccination. Most were related to a pre-existing condition.
• In 3 cases, the cause of death was undetermined with no evidence to link to the vaccination. Most occured suddenly many months after vaccination.
All the above information can be verified by checking the VAERS database.
In addition, the "British girl that dropped dead at school" following vaccination had a known heart defect, and the cause of death was given as that defect following an autopsy. "
As such, I'll deal with only the most serious accusations, those relating to the deaths allegedly caused by Gardasil.
The article implies that the CDC acknowledges Gardasil has caused 44 deaths in the US, according to the VAERS database. This is not correct. While the database does list 44 deaths 'following' the administration of Gardasil, NONE were deemed related to the vaccine. Most occurred many weeks or months following the vaccination, and the cause of death was from various pre-existing conditions. One of the 'deaths' was from a cocaine overdose, yet the antivaxxers somehow blame Gardasil for this??? To summarise the 44 events:
• In 22 cases there is no evidence that a death had even occurred. These were heresay reports of supposed deaths that were unsupported by any evidence that anyone had actually died, or in fact received a vaccine. There were no dates, names, places, doctors or hospitals known for these events.
• In 16 cases the cause of death was determined to be unrelated to vaccination. Most were related to a pre-existing condition.
• In 3 cases, the cause of death was determined as unlikely to be related to vaccination. Most were related to a pre-existing condition.
• In 3 cases, the cause of death was undetermined with no evidence to link to the vaccination. Most occured suddenly many months after vaccination.
All the above information can be verified by checking the VAERS database.
In addition, the "British girl that dropped dead at school" following vaccination had a known heart defect, and the cause of death was given as that defect following an autopsy. "
jodispeaks wrote on Nov 12, 2009 10:36 AM:
" My daughter, Victoria, has been ill since February 2008. She had her first Gardasil vaccination November 2007. Her second vaccination was in the beginning of February 2008. Immediately after her second vaccination, Victoria experienced severe diarrhea, vomiting and was nauseous for about eight weeks. She had blood work done many times and doctors thought it was just a virus. On March 31, 2008, she had her first seizure.
My daughter has had several CT scans, MRI's, MRA's, EEG's, blood work and was hospitalized at an epilepsy center in the video EEG monitoring unit for two separate weeks in May 2008 and September 2008. She attempted to undergo a spinal tap in September 2009, but doctors were unable to obtain any fluid. On November 11, 2009, she underwent a lumbar puncture with fluoroscopy. She was put on many different seizure medications, however, after normal EEG results, she was taken off all medications. Her SED rate was high and she did have protein in her urine, but doctors do not seem concerned. I was told that her red blood are small and that she may have Thalasemia, but this apparently is not concerning either.
My daughter has been seen by several neurologists, a psychiatrist, psychologist, several neuropsychologists, an immunologist, several infectious disease doctors, and also treated a at Wellness Center for a period of time. My daughter currently experiences the following symptoms: non-epileptic seizures, severe jerking movements of her whole body, especially her mouth and extremities, migraines, fainting, tremors, twitches, numbness, intermittent leg paralysis, hand/arm paralysis and facial paralysis, tingling, staring or blank episodes, eye pain, joint pain, neck pain, back pain, memory loss, confusion, brain fog, regression, mood swings and severe chronic fatigue. She continues to have bouts of nausea and diarrhea and stomach pain. She has not been in school since April 2008. My daughter cannot be left home alone. She cannot go to school, go out with her friends or work or has little "normalcy" in her life. She has very few good days and always says she doesn't feel good. Victoria should have graduated high school in June 2009 and would have been enrolled in college.
I do not know which way to turn for help. We have seen so many doctors and I can't seem to find anyone willing to help my daughter. There are so many other young girls who have the same exact symptoms as my daughter and the one thing that all of the girls seem to have in common is the Gardasil vaccination. Many doctors are all over the country are beginning to question the safety and also the effectiveness of the vaccine. Other “doctor” are willing to "try" treatment, most of which is "homeopathic" in nature and extremely costly. Once again, I must reiterate that there are so many other young girls experiencing negative symptoms.
Each day, I cry and wonder if Victoria will be next one to die from adverse reactions to Gardasil. Please feel free to forward this information.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Jodi Speakman
jodispeaks@aol.com
(267) 939-0591 "
My daughter has had several CT scans, MRI's, MRA's, EEG's, blood work and was hospitalized at an epilepsy center in the video EEG monitoring unit for two separate weeks in May 2008 and September 2008. She attempted to undergo a spinal tap in September 2009, but doctors were unable to obtain any fluid. On November 11, 2009, she underwent a lumbar puncture with fluoroscopy. She was put on many different seizure medications, however, after normal EEG results, she was taken off all medications. Her SED rate was high and she did have protein in her urine, but doctors do not seem concerned. I was told that her red blood are small and that she may have Thalasemia, but this apparently is not concerning either.
My daughter has been seen by several neurologists, a psychiatrist, psychologist, several neuropsychologists, an immunologist, several infectious disease doctors, and also treated a at Wellness Center for a period of time. My daughter currently experiences the following symptoms: non-epileptic seizures, severe jerking movements of her whole body, especially her mouth and extremities, migraines, fainting, tremors, twitches, numbness, intermittent leg paralysis, hand/arm paralysis and facial paralysis, tingling, staring or blank episodes, eye pain, joint pain, neck pain, back pain, memory loss, confusion, brain fog, regression, mood swings and severe chronic fatigue. She continues to have bouts of nausea and diarrhea and stomach pain. She has not been in school since April 2008. My daughter cannot be left home alone. She cannot go to school, go out with her friends or work or has little "normalcy" in her life. She has very few good days and always says she doesn't feel good. Victoria should have graduated high school in June 2009 and would have been enrolled in college.
I do not know which way to turn for help. We have seen so many doctors and I can't seem to find anyone willing to help my daughter. There are so many other young girls who have the same exact symptoms as my daughter and the one thing that all of the girls seem to have in common is the Gardasil vaccination. Many doctors are all over the country are beginning to question the safety and also the effectiveness of the vaccine. Other “doctor” are willing to "try" treatment, most of which is "homeopathic" in nature and extremely costly. Once again, I must reiterate that there are so many other young girls experiencing negative symptoms.
Each day, I cry and wonder if Victoria will be next one to die from adverse reactions to Gardasil. Please feel free to forward this information.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Jodi Speakman
jodispeaks@aol.com
(267) 939-0591 "
You must register with a valid email to post comments. Only your Member ID will be posted with the comments.
Registered users sign in here: |
Become a Registered User |
member0001 wrote on Oct 28, 2009 12:14 AM:
Reliable information on incidence and treatment of HPV can be found here : http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/hpv-genital-warts/hpv-treatment-is-there-hpv-cure
The quoted attendee is the sole voice of "participants" who "said they came away convinced the vaccine should not be received". This attendee is identified as an Assistant Editor for PRI. A brief review of that organization's website reveals them as trying to present evidence of a worldwide conspiracy to control the world's population as well as to sell the books authored by the president of PRI (everyone has to make a living).
If you care about this issue, please think critically about the information you receive and don't accept, without question, the statistics and assertions without doing your own verification and research into the backgrounds of the speakers. Google is your friend.
Think! It's patriotic. "