Posted on 12/22/2011 5:35:47 AM PST by markomalley
It was too late for 21-year-old Christina Tarsell and 17-year-old Jessica Ericzon. Both healthy, athletic young women suddenly dropped dead shortly after receiving their final injection of Gardasil, a vaccine developed by Merck to protect girls and young women from cervical cancer caused by the human papilloma virus (HPV).
But when Christina’s and Jessica’s shocked families tried to get the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to investigate a vaccine it had inexplicably fast-tracked through the approval process even though only one percent of all cancer deaths are due to cervical cancer, they hit a brick wall.
The Tarsells and Ericzons have been vindicated by new documents just released by the FDA’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) under a Freedom of Information Act request filed by Judicial Watch.
In just one year - between Sept. 1, 2010 and Sept. 15, 2011 - 26 new deaths and many more severe adverse reactions – including seizures, paralysis, and blindness – were reported in patients receiving Gardasil injections.
The stories are heartbreakingly similar to the Tarsell and Ericzon tragedies: One healthy 14-year-old girl suffered more than 150 seizures – during which she stopped breathing for up to 40 seconds - following her third Gardasil shot. Another vaccinated 15-year-old suddenly became paralyzed from the waist down the day after receiving her second dose of Gardasil and had to be hospitalized for two months.
The grieving parents of Christina and Jessica told The Washington Examiner that the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) both ignored their repeated requests to investigate possible links between Gardasil and their daughters’ unexplained deaths. It never happened. Since then, dozens more people who were vaccinated with Gardasil have also mysteriously died, and many others experienced serious and debilitating reactions.
That alone should have triggered at least some interest in these two federal public health agencies as to whether there was a cause-effect relationship, but it never happened.
CDC still insists that ìthere was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccineî - even though VAERS itself reports 18,727 reports of “adverse events” following Gardasil injections, including 68 deaths.
"These reports raise additional concerns about Gardasil’s questionable safety and provide ample reason to end the push to give it young girls and boys. And the CDC’s continued caginess on reported deaths is disturbing," said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Do you honestly think that it's easy to avoid contracting this highly communicable disease? I don't. It is simply unrealistic to expect every person to remain a virgin and to never touch another person--which is pretty much what would have to happen to prevent HPV transmission. I'm not sure that, even if the entire population could be convinced to remain virgins, there would be much of a long term benefit to humanity. We kind of need kids to survive...
No, all you'd need is to have virgins marrying other virgins. That way each marriage remains a closed system with no disease transmission but with reproduction and the furthering of the species.
Saying that “yes there is a pattern”, is acknowledging the existence of the pattern.
“Do you honestly think that it’s easy to avoid contracting this highly communicable disease?”
Personally? Yes. I think it’s far easier to avoid a HPV infection than say the flu.
“I don’t.”
Well, then we differ on it.
“It is simply unrealistic to expect every person to remain a virgin and to never touch another person—which is pretty much what would have to happen to prevent HPV transmission.”
Again, you can’t contract HPV just from holding hands, etc.
Having sex with someone who tests clean is difficult? I can’t see why.
“I’m not sure that, even if the entire population could be convinced to remain virgins, there would be much of a long term benefit to humanity. We kind of need kids to survive.”
Complete nonsense. They can test and confirm HPV. Do so before you have sex. Problem solved.
Depending on politically motivated kickbacks, there’s plenty of explanations as to where that money goes, none of which has the slightest to do wtih testing.
Which is why the connection needs to be investigated, not dismissed. You eliminate Gardasil as the cause simply because you wish it to be so.
“The whole point of giving the HPV vaccine to young preteens is to give them an immunity before they are ever exposed. Waiting until after exposure has already occurred makes the vaccine useless!”
You’re sadly misinformed. The vaccine does work just fine on those who have contracted HPV prior and received treatment.
“There you go again, talking about HPV as if it weren’t communicable.”
It’s not. That’s a fact.
“Since it is impossible to be infected by any strain of HPV other than through contact with another person, I have no idea why you think it is non-communicable.”
As I stated earlier, communicable diseases are things like the Flu, that you can contract through casual contact. You don’t seem to like that word ‘casual’ very much and keep omitting it. It’s crucial to the point.
“FYI, those strains of HPV that are transmitted sexually”
Uh, yeah. I think I already said that about 20 posts ago. Can you contract the flu sexually? No. That’s because it’s a communicable disease, and not sexually transmitted.
“One little problem with that, is that the vaccine needs to be given to virgins to be effective.”
Absolute nonsense.
HPV vaccinations have been approved in Canada for any woman under 45. In the US it’s 26, according to the CDC.
There’s absolutely no medical reason why the vaccine must be given to children.
In that case, the number of people who have received the vaccine is substantially above 12 million.
In that case, the number of people with serious adverse reactions is substantially lower than 13 per 100,000.
While it might be nice to imagine an ideal world where absolutely no one ever has sex outside of marriage, and each person only has sex with their spouse during their life, that just doesn't happen in the real world, nor is it likely to happen.
In the real world, the situation is that most people are not virgins when they marry, nor is there any way to know. Sometimes people get raped.
No it does not need to be given to virgins. The vaccine only has short span it is effective. I don’t think they know for sure yet how long the vaccine will work.
Once it wears out, will the person still need to be a virgin to repeat the immunization?
Anyway, there is no valid reason to force this shot on kids.
MA female member of my family has POTs Syndrome. I would not take the chance that my child could be doomed to suffer this because of an unnecessary vaccine being forced on her.
I have no problem with anyone who decides they want the vaccine.
You’re just playing word games, which may or may not work if you are trying to score debate points depending on how doltish the judges are, but make no sense if we are trying to discuss the facts.
The word “pattern” is not truly applicable to what we are discussing. “pattern” suggests a series of items arrayed in a predictable order. IN this case, we have “two” items — a vaccine and a subsequent blood clot. That’s not really a pattern.
Blood clots happens to be one of the things the opponents of Gardasil have often cited as proof that the vaccine was bad. The CDC therefore addressed that charge, to indicate that the people who reported blood clots tended to be people who had a propensity for blood clots and therefore would be expected to have a higher incidence of blood clots in response to getting a needle stuck in them.
From the CDC: “There have been some reports of blood clots in females after receiving Gardasil®. These clots have occurred in the heart, lungs, and legs. Most of these people had a risk of getting blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (the birth control pill), smoking, obesity, and other risk factors.”
They clearly acknowledge that people have reported blood clots. They also provide information that discounts a particular worry about blood clots with this particular vaccine. If you wish to read that statement as validating your fear of the vaccine, go right ahead — but it isn’t a “recognition of a pattern”.
Really?
I've never had the flu. I rarely ever even catch a cold. But I've had HPV. Hmm.
FYI, warts are caused by HPV. It seems like *everyone* gets HPV.
“It is simply unrealistic to expect every person to remain a virgin and to never touch another person—which is pretty much what would have to happen to prevent HPV transmission.”
Again, you can’t contract HPV just from holding hands, etc.
Are you so sure of that? There are over 100 strains of HPV, and they use a variety of transmission methods. Even the strains that cause genital warts and cancers can pass through non-sexual contact. They can infect people's mouths and throats; babies can get them from their mothers during birth.
You’re sadly misinformed. The vaccine does work just fine on those who have contracted HPV prior and received treatment.
You're so right, I'm horribly misinformed. Instead of reading sensationalist and factually questionable stories on the internet, I engaged in actual medical research using genuine PAP samples from real HPV infected women, collected by a real gynecologist.
The vaccines work just fine for strains someone hasn't yet been exposed to, whether or not they are a virgin. But once exposure to a specific strain occurs, it's doubtful that the vaccine will do anything about it. That's because the virus lives inside cells, where the immune system does not see it. In more advanced cases, the virus integrates itself into the DNA. For this reason, it is preferable to give the vaccine to virgins, since their likelihood of having already contracted a primarily genital strain is low.
Having sex with someone who tests clean is difficult? I can’t see why.
Um, how are you going to test that person? Until it causes lesions, you can't see HPV. Since the oncogenic kinds can live on any mucous tissue, can you check every single mucous tissue? Is it possible to test every square inch of skin for HPV (you might not see the warts)? What about inside the mouth or esophagus?
Last, stop applying your own personal definition to the word "communicable." By definition, "communicable" means that it is transmissible from person to person. There simply is no way to catch HPV except from another person. Non-communicable diseases are those caught from the environment--like tetanus, legionnaire's disease, or food poisoning--and cannot be spread person to person.
Nope, Perry will probably add boys to list next year since that vaccine has also been approved.
Absolute nonsense.
HPV vaccinations have been approved in Canada for any woman under 45. In the US it’s 26, according to the CDC.
There’s absolutely no medical reason why the vaccine must be given to children.
From the CDC's website: Effectiveness of the HPV Vaccines The vaccines are less effective in preventing HPV-related disease in young women who have already been exposed to one or more HPV types. That is because the vaccines can only prevent HPV before a person it is exposed to it. HPV vaccines do not treat existing HPV infections or HPV-associated diseases.
Will sexually active females benefit from the vaccine?
Ideally females should get the vaccine before they become sexually active and exposed to HPV. Females who are sexually active may also benefit from the vaccine, but they may get less benefit from it. This is because they may have already gotten one or more of HPV types targeted by the vaccines. However, few sexually active young women are infected with all HPV types prevented by the vaccines, so most young women could still get protection by getting vaccinated.
The vaccines target the HPV types that most commonly cause cervical cancer. One of the vaccines also protects against the HPV types that cause most genital warts. Both vaccines are highly effective in preventing specific HPV types and the most common health problems from HPV.
Once it wears out, will the person still need to be a virgin to repeat the immunization?
So far, there is no evidence if or when the vaccine "wears out," so I wouldn't worry about that too much. According to current information on the CDC website:
How long does vaccine protection last?
Research suggests that vaccine protection is long-lasting. Current studies (with up to about six years of follow-up data) indicate that the vaccines are effective, with no evidence of decreasing immunity.
I already explained in other posts, and the CDC website explains, why it is preferable to vaccinate virgins. People who have already been exposed to a strain of HPV don't benefit from being vaccinated against it. The only way to maximize the possibility that they haven't been exposed is to vaccinate them while virgins, and that pretty much means pre-puberty.
“As in trials in younger women, a clinical trial of quadrivalent vaccine in women >26 years found the vaccine to be safe. This study also showed that the vaccine was effective in women without evidence of existing or past infection with HPV vaccine types.”
http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv-vaccine-young-women.htm
You are grossly misinformed. The vaccine is effective in women over 26, but is yet to be approved for this use in the US. It has been approved in Canada for use in women up to the age of 45.
“Oh, yeah, I forgot—you want to punish her for not waiting until marriage”
Not at all. You are wrong, and my motivation is to educate, so that you are properly informed.
Gardasil is effective for women up to 45, irrespective as to whether they have already contracted HPV previously.
“I already explained in other posts”
And you are misinformed. Please stop spreading false information.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.