Do you know that “Gardasil might actually increase your risk of Cervical Cancer?”
I have done a rundown of significant facts and risks about HPV which one should NOT ignore. CLICK/READ: 10 Must-know HPV Facts, Risks & CANCERs -for all Ages & Genders! .
However, I would love everyone to be AWARE of the other side of the coin on the HPV Vaccines reported by Dr Mercola.
“There are currently 2 HPV vaccines on the market. …
GARDASIL, was licensed by the FDA in 2006. … now recommended as a routine vaccination for girls and women between the ages of 9-26 in the US. …
CERVARIX, was licensed in 2009. …On October 25, 2011, the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices also voted to recommend giving the HPV vaccine to males between the ages of 11 and 21.
If there was any regard for sound scientific evidence, neither would be promoted as heavily as they are.
An oncology dietitian pointed out significant discrepancies in a new HPV vaccine effectiveness study published in the Journal of Infectious Diseases, which evaluated data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES), 2003-2006 and 2007-2010. … In her article, Sharlene Bidini, RD, CSO, points out,
“If the study authors were trying to determine vaccine effectiveness, why did they include the girls who had not received a single HPV shot or did not report having sex?”
Reduction in HPV prevalence can NOT be claimed to be due to the effectiveness of HPV vaccinations. On the contrary, the data clearly shows that it was the unvaccinated girls in this group that had the best outcome!
“In 4 out of 5 different measures, the unvaccinated girls had a lower incidence of HPV”
Furthermore, in the single instance where unvaccinated girls had a 9.5% higher prevalence of HPV, a note stated that the relative standard error was greater than 30%, leading Bidini to suspect that “the confidence interval values must have been extremely wide. Therefore, this particular value is subject to too much variance and doesn’t have much value. …
Another fact hidden among the reported data was that among the 740 girls included in the post-vaccine era (2007-2010), the prevalence of high-risk, non-vaccine types of HPV also significantly declined, from just under 21% to just over 16%.
There were serious design flaws involved in this study—whether intentional or not—leading the researchers to erroneously conclude that the vaccine effectiveness was “high.” Clearly the effectiveness of the vaccine was anything but high, since the UNVACCINATED group fared far better across the board.
Rate of ANAPHYLAXIS in girls receiving GARDASIL is far higher than normal—reportedly 5-20x higher than any other school-based vaccination program.
Initially, that information came straight from Merck (Inc.) and was presented to the FDA PRIOR to approval. According to Merck’s own research, if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior to receipt of GARDASIL vaccine, you could increase your risk of precancerous lesions, or worse, by 44.6%.
Other health problems associated with GARDASIL vaccine include immune-based inflammatory neurodegenerative disorders, suggesting that something is causing the immune system to overreact in a detrimental way—sometimes fatally.” (http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/briefing/2006-4222B3.pdf)
“Serious safety concerns about the use of Gardasil have been well-founded. Public health officials should stop pushing GARDASIL on children.”
-Tom Fitton, President, Judicial Watch (government watchdog group)
“University of British Columbia showed that the vaccine’s effectiveness is NOT only overstated (through the use of selective reporting or “cherry picking” data) but also UNPROVEN.”
“Clinical trials data have not demonstrated to date that the vaccines have actually prevented a single case of cervical cancer (let alone cervical cancer death), nor that the current overly optimistic surrogate marker-based extrapolations are justified. … the notion that HPV vaccines have an impressive safety profile is only supported by highly flawed design of safety trials and is contrary to accumulating evidence from vaccine safety surveillance databases and case reports which continue to link HPV vaccination to serious adverse outcomes (including death and permanent disabilities). We thus conclude that further reduction of cervical cancers might be best achieved by optimizing cervical screening (which carries no such risks) and targeting other factors of the disease rather than by the reliance on vaccines with questionable efficacy and safety profiles.“
BETTER EFFECTIVE HPV TACKLING METHODS than CDC’s VACCINE:
- Strong Immune System (90% clear within 2 years by itself)
- Condom Use (reduced risk by 70%)
- Abstinence/Lifestyle CHOICES
NOTE: Most Emphasis & Italics are mine.
JOIN: NVIC Advocacy for updates on threats to vaccine exemptions .