Glad we passed on the Gardasil vaccine

[3jsmommy]

How Merck got politicians and parents to put Gardasil up there in importance with vaccines for such deadly diseases as polio and smallpox, explains why Gardasil was named “Brand of the Year” by Pharma Executive Magazine, and won the 2008 Pharmaceutical Advertising and Marketing Excellence awards. According to The New York Times, Merck paid hundreds of doctors and nurses $4,500 for each 50 minute talk performed on Gardasil over Merck-sponsored meals. Many even got paid just to attend “advisory board” meetings on the vaccine. Despite the vaccine’s questionable effectiveness for young women in their late teens and early twenties, Gardasil has got promoted from college campuses to ads airing before “Sex and the City” at movie theaters. Merck pays Cornerstone Government Affairs to lobby Congress and the CDC for more federal money for vaccines.

Virginia will become the only state requiring girls get Gardasil to go to school, unless parents opt out. Governor Kaine signed the legislation after Merck said it would spend $57 million to expand its Elkton plant that makes the vaccine. $193 million more was pledged by Merck after the governor signed the bill, with the state providing a $1.5 million grant (on top of a $700,000 grant from an agency that is part of the executive branch). Lieutenant governor Bolling is an active participant in the “Ending Cervical Cancer in Our Lifetime” campaign of the NLGA, financed by Merck and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), who has a competing vaccine awaiting FDA approval. Mandatory Gardasil for school girls in Texas was signed by the governor and overturned by the legislature after the governor’s former chief of staff was hired by Merck and contributed $6,000 to Governor Perry and $38,000 to other state legislators.


All politicians might not accept bribes, but the drug companies sure are making it hard for them aren't they?

 

[Geoff_M]

Merck Researcher Admits: Gardasil Guards Against Almost Nothing

http://www.pop.org/merck-researcher-admits-gardasil-guards-against-almost-nothing
...

In the clinical studies alone, 23 girls died after receiving either Gardasil or the Aluminum control injection. 15 of the 13,686 girls who received Gardasil died, while 8 died among the 11,004 who received the Aluminum shot. There was only one death among the group that had a saline placebo. What this means is that 1 out of every 912 who received Gardasil in the study died.9, see p. 8 The cervical cancer death rate is 1 out of every 40,000 women per year.10

Hold the phone a second... the dude that wrote this pulls an interesting slight of hand to make you think that the deaths were vaccine related and higher for the vaccine. Here's what the study actually says:

Deaths in the Entire Study Population
Across the clinical studies, 37 deaths (GARDASIL N = 18 or 0.1%; Placebo N = 19 or 0.1%) were reported in 29,323 (GARDASIL N = 15,706; AAHS Control N = 13,023, saline placebo N = 594) individuals (9- through 45-year-old girls and women; and 9- through 26-year-old boys and men). The events reported GARDASIL® were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations. The most common cause of death was motor vehicle accident (5 individuals who received GARDASIL and 4 individuals who received AAHS Control), followed by drug overdose/suicide (2 individuals who received GARDASIL and 6 individuals who received AAHS Control), gun shot wound (1 individual who received GARDASIL and 3 individuals who received AAHS Control), and pulmonary embolus/deep vein thrombosis (1 individual who received GARDASIL and 1 individual who received AAHS Control). In addition, there were 2 cases of sepsis, 1 case of pancreatic cancer, 1 case of arrhythmia, 1 case of pulmonary tuberculosis, 1 case of hyperthyroidism, 1 case of post-operative pulmonary embolism and acute renal failure, 1 case of traumatic brain injury/cardiac arrest, and 1 case of systemic lupus erythematosus in the group that received GARDASIL; 1 case of asphyxia, 1 case of acute lymphocytic leukemia, 1 case of chemical poisoning, and 1 case of myocardial ischemia in the AAHS Control group; and 1 case of medulloblastoma in the saline placebo group.

Note three things:
1) "(GARDASIL N = 18 or 0.1%; Placebo N = 19 or 0.1%)" the rates were the same for the vaccine and the placebo.
2) Look at the causes and how many of them were cleary not vaccine related... unless you think that the vaccine causes car accidents too.
3) "The events reported GARDASIL® were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations."

No, I have read the whole thread. I have done quite a bit of research on Gardasil, and none on Advil, so I really don't feel comfortable commenting on something I am not well versed on.

So, what again is the basis for the claim that it is a proven "fact" that Gardasil is killing girls and young women that are given it? You've only pointed to the VAERS data (which is just like the AERS data for Advil), and the article from "Steve" that doesn't jibe with what the study report actually says. You have proof of the correlation, what is the proof of causation? The Gardasil study report doesn't show an elevated risk vs control, and neither does the postlicensure surveillance study of the 23 million doses given.

 

[Geoff_M]

Yes, that is exactly what I said.

You believe most are honest and I believe most aren't. Problem?

I didn't say "honest", I said "took bribes".... it's nuanced, I know.

 

[3jsmommy]

The lead researcher of the vax has stated that giving it to young girls is a "great big public health experiment"!
I guess it's safe to say that if you or someone you love has not (yet anyway) been on the losing end of that experiment that you are ok with that.
I am not OK with a huge multi billion dollar snake oil campaign influencing lawmakers and doctors.

 

[luvmy3]

Hold the phone a second... the dude that wrote this pulls an interesting slight of hand to make you think that the deaths were vaccine related and higher for the vaccine. Here's what the study actually says:Note three things:
1) "(GARDASIL N = 18 or 0.1%; Placebo N = 19 or 0.1%)" the rates were the same for the vaccine and the placebo.
2) Look at the causes and how many of them were cleary not vaccine related... unless you think that the vaccine causes car accidents too.
3) "The events reported GARDASIL® were consistent with events expected in healthy adolescent and adult populations."

I just read that info on Guardasil's website earlier today. Funny that the author of that article left that vey important info out. I guess it can be said that those working for big pharma and politicians aren't the only ones telling us what they want us to believe

 

[rie'smom]

The lead researcher of the vax has stated that giving it to young girls is a "great big public health experiment"!
I guess it's safe to say that if you or someone you love has not (yet anyway) been on the losing end of that experiment that you are ok with that.
I am not OK with a huge multi billion dollar snake oil campaign influencing lawmakers and doctors.

Actually, there were 3 different quotes dealing with these issues:

"We don't know yet what's going to happen when millions of doses of the vaccine have been given and to put in place a process that says you must have this vaccine, it means you must be part of a big public experiment. So we can't do that until we have more data." - Dr. Diane Harper

"If we vaccinate 11 year olds and the protection doesn't last... We've put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit. The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers."
- Dr. Diane Harper

"It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11- to 12-year-old girls There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue. This vaccine has not been tested in little girls for efficacy. At 11, these girls don't get cervical cancer - they won't know for 25 years if they will get cervical cancer. To mandate now is simply to Merck's benefit, and only to Merck's benefit." - Dr. Diane Harper

 

[3jsmommy]

Actually, there were 3 different quotes dealing with these issues:

"We don't know yet what's going to happen when millions of doses of the vaccine have been given and to put in place a process that says you must have this vaccine, it means you must be part of a big public experiment. So we can't do that until we have more data." - Dr. Diane Harper

"If we vaccinate 11 year olds and the protection doesn't last... We've put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit. The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers."
- Dr. Diane Harper

"It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11- to 12-year-old girls There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue. This vaccine has not been tested in little girls for efficacy. At 11, these girls don't get cervical cancer - they won't know for 25 years if they will get cervical cancer. To mandate now is simply to Merck's benefit, and only to Merck's benefit." - Dr. Diane Harper

Um, yes she did say other things also, all of which just reinforced my statment.

 

[rie'smom]

Um, yes she did say other things also, all of which just reinforced my statment.

I was trying to reinforce your statement.

 

[3jsmommy]

I was trying to reinforce your statement.

Thanks you did a good job!

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

For the record, I don't look down on anyone who chooses the vaccine. We are all just mothers trying to make the best choices for our children. I am just trying to share the dangers as I feel that alot of the time we are not given this information before we make the choice.

I do not think you are trying to share the dangers - but are trying to make yourself feel better about your decision.

Look at the actual data.

How is a car accident related as a gardasil death ?

 

["Got Disney"]

I have been a labor and delivery nurse for 18 years. One of the reasons this vaccine was invented was more due to the persons that get ******l warts and never go get paps. Vag warts are extremely extremely wide spread. Most woman have them. I myself have had them. Had Cryo to get them gone long long time ago.

Not only do woman get them but men get them also. They are called Penile warts. They also freeze or burn them off. But on men they grow back easier.

These warts have been around for a very very very long time. Most cause for abnormal paps....matter of fact 30-40 years ago when woman got them they/Doctors did a hysterectomy to get rid of them.... but heck they did hysters for every reason back than...

If woman/girls are responsible enough to have a pap every 2 years than she will be fine, and this will help it be caught early. They are very slow growing. I have a friend that was 32 years old...would never get a pap...I fought with her all the time...she started to have bad fatigue and so she went to be checked ..they did a pap and found out she had cervical CA....she has no children and wanted to someday bad....but she did not do what she needed to do...no one could tell her...

These are the persons that need to have this vaccine....ones that will not pay attention.

As for this vaccine....lots of problems with it...even published in the AMJ about the complications of the vaccine and if the cure will out weigh the risks......I think for some it is important ans for others it is not....and not at an age of 11....

 

[robinb]

[quote="Got Disney";34149646]
If woman/girls are responsible enough to have a pap every 2 years than she will be fine, and this will help it be caught early.[/quote]Sorry Robin, that is just not true for everyone. I had regular PAPs and when I was in my late 20's I had a bad PAP after a number of good ones. I had 3, count them THREE, procedures to my cervix and when I finally became pregnant at the age of 38 my cervix was so damaged and thin that they were talking about sewing it shut just to keep my baby inside me. I ended up promising to stay in a reclining position for 23.50 hours per day for 4 months and had my cervix checked weekly. That is not "fine" and as a L&D nurse you are not there for the happy conclusions, not the heartbreaking appointments in the neonatologist's office.

 

[JoanGirardi]

Well, I'm happy for those of you that are at peace with your decision not to give the vaccine, and I'm pretty sure that those of us that did give the vaccine are at peace with our decision too. If you aren't sure, I'm sure that articles like the original one posted will make you feel better. For me, it came down to this--Could I live with it if my daughter got cervical cancer down the line from HPV that could have been prevented with this vaccine? After reading everything I could get my hands on, I believed it was worth the risk of giving her the vaccine. She participated in the decision, but I accept the responsibility that it was my decision. It's not a responsibility that any of us take lightly. Those of you that decide differently take the same responsibility. I pray that it works out well for all of us.

 

[Took]

I just read that info on Guardasil's website earlier today. Funny that the author of that article left that vey important info out. I guess it can be said that those working for big pharma and politicians aren't the only ones telling us what they want us to believe

Yes. MTE. But of course, the journalist who wrote the article (and left out stuff) can't possibly be taking a bribe from a competing pharm company to badmouth Merck....OR, alternatively, he can't possibly be "biased" (the correct spelling, BTW) about STD-related issues (that are tied up with 'wicked' sexually liberated types....)...

​

 

[dismom2]

But there was a very obvious problem if they had to put a law in place, right? Nobody would deny that, would they? So what does that say about all the drugs and vaccines that came out before this law started a year ago and the doctors that pushed them?

And most immoral people don't stop being immoral just because a law is in place.

Most politicians are honest?

I truly believe that most people that have power will abuse it eventually. Here is the article I just got done reading. Nothing shocking at all about it because it is a daily occurrence in our society.

http://www.clickorlando.com/education/21479695/detail.html

True--laws are not made if there is no problem.

 

[dismom2]

Well, I'm happy for those of you that are at peace with your decision not to give the vaccine, and I'm pretty sure that those of us that did give the vaccine are at peace with our decision too. If you aren't sure, I'm sure that articles like the original one posted will make you feel better. For me, it came down to this--Could I live with it if my daughter got cervical cancer down the line from HPV that could have been prevented with this vaccine? After reading everything I could get my hands on, I believed it was worth the risk of giving her the vaccine. She participated in the decision, but I accept the responsibility that it was my decision. It's not a responsibility that any of us take lightly. Those of you that decide differently take the same responsibility. I pray that it works out well for all of us.

Hopefully, later on down the road your daughter doesn't have any negative effects from Gardasil. Some of the PP's seem to think that if their child did not have an immediate reaction to the drug, they are home free. You do realize that terrible things could happen years down the road, don't you? I have to wonder how much research some people are actually doing (and how one sided it is). Personally, I don't want my daughter to be that one-in- whatever (insert number here) person that dies, or maybe can't have children later on, or other terrible effect. It has to be somebodys child....how do you know it won't be yours?

I don't personally know anyone with cervical cancer, but I know some of you have said you do. This drug doesn't even prevent cancer. Is anyone reading exactly what this drug does, or just got it because their doctor said to?

I'm not ant-vac...but I think only a fool wouldn't ask questions, or do a little research. And take into consideration the sources... and do a little research on some of the companies that you think are "safe" and "believable". You'd be surprised.

 

[rie'smom]

True--laws are not made if there is no problem.

And we know no one ever tries to get around a law, right? Hmmm, seems like there's a saying that goes something like,"Rules are meant to be broken." and from the news it seems that this has become the mantra for many politicians that and taking money etc. from lobbyists.

 

[Kirby]

It has to be somebodys child....how do you know it won't be yours?

We don't know but it was our decision to make. Just like getting a flu shot. Some people, like my husband refuse to get one. Says he never gets the flu. I've had the flu and so I get a flu shot every year. Same for the Swine flu shot. I'm going to get one if I get a chance. But since I'm about at the bottom of the list, I doubt I will.

My daughter may or may not have a reaction to the Gardisil shot on down the road. It's a chance you take. Some are willing to take it and some are not.

It's like paying car insurance for years and never needing to make a claim. Or homeowners insurance. Some people will need it and some will not.

Don't mean to seem like it's no big deal but in my eyes, it's no different.

 

[dismom2]

We don't know but it was our decision to make. Just like getting a flu shot. Some people, like my husband refuse to get one. Says he never gets the flu. I've had the flu and so I get a flu shot every year. Same for the Swine flu shot. I'm going to get one if I get a chance. But since I'm about at the bottom of the list, I doubt I will.

My daughter may or may not have a reaction to the Gardisil shot on down the road. It's a chance you take. Some are willing to take it and some are not.

It's like paying car insurance for years and never needing to make a claim. Or homeowners insurance. Some people will need it and some will not.

Don't mean to seem like it's no big deal but in my eyes, it's no different.

Yes, but death, or maybe never being able to have children, or having a child with a birth defect, having neurological problems in your later years, or a number of other consequence, is life altering, and far worse than losing some money. You really can't even compare the two.

I am not here to tell anybody what to do. I firmly believe we all have the right to make our own decisions. I think people should do research on both sides (not just one side) and, also, take a closer look at the so-called "credible sources" before you believe everything they say.

Make your own decision, and hope for the best....

 

[Geoff_M]

Yes, but death, or maybe never being able to have children, or having a child with a birth defect, having neurological problems in your later years, or a number of other consequence, is life altering, and far worse than losing some money. You really can't even compare the two.

This thread has been very enlightening to me. I realize that Gardasil is somewhat of a unique case because it isn't aimed at preventable childhood diseases or stopping a pandemic, but I've been really vexed at why many parents seem to react in a seemingly illogical manner when it comes to vaccinating their children in general. They seem perfectly willing to exchange what normally is a chance equal to or less than that of being struck by lightning that their child might suffer a severe adverse reaction to a vaccine for a greater risk of a serve medical incident involving catching the disease. In addition, they are perfectly happy with letting their children engage in activities that carry a far higher risk of serious injury or death in their normal lives (bicycling on streets, playing sports, driving the family car or riding with friends, etc.). If "playing the odds" to try and avoid a bad outcome were the driving force than many many more people would vaccinate their kids. The most often cited severe adverse reactions to our flu vaccines, GBS may carry with it a 1:1,000,000 risk, while the flu's risk is much higher. Why do many parents react counter to this?

This is where this thread, and others on the DIS come in. More than once I've read about how terrible it would be for a parent to have to watch their child suffer, or die, after being given a vaccine. That's when the answer to my question came: What drives many parents isn't "Fear of a bad outcome", it's "Fear of personal guilt". Children don't choose to be vaccinated, it's a choice we make for them... not so if the tragedy happens when the child is doing something of their own choosing like riding a bike or going to a movie with some friends in a car. Parent's whose child suffers a tragedy after a vaccination would very likely feel that they would bare direct responsibility for it happening. With a car accident, bike accident, sports injury, etc. there'd likely be someone else responsible for being the direct trigger of the tragedy. The loss would still be terrible either way, but at least they wouldn't feel the full self-blame on top of that.

What about the fear of guilt of a parent that doesn't vaccinate their child, and then they pay the price with the disease? Well there are plenty of personal testimonies on that side of the equation too... but still, hindsight is 20/20 and beforehand there's the knowledge that if they do contract the disease, then it'll be someone else that'll actually be responsible for passing it on to them.

I think this, fear of guilt instead of fear of outcome, goes a long way to explaining why many parents are willing to roll the dice with odds that aren't as much in their child's favor. At supper last evening I became to lay all of this out to my wife and was building up to the explanation... when she beat me to the punch and finished the thought for me... "They're afraid of the guilt."

I think people should do research on both sides (not just one side) and, also, take a closer look at the so-called "credible sources" before you believe everything they say.

This line of reasoning can be heard pretty much within any given group of conspiracy theorists. Beyond the rejection of "official" sources, anyone that doesn't adhere to their understanding of events simply just hasn't done enough "research". Anyone that's done the right "research" will naturally agree with their views. Just do some "research" and you'll have your eyes opened. Most recently, these sentiments were on full display with the so-called "9/11 Truthers".