Temp: 1°C
Feels like: -2°C
Humidity: 100%
BANNER
 
 
MUSIC LESSONS PGCITIZEN.CA

My Account

Photo Archive

 

The campaign for Gardasil flawed Print E-mail
Written by -- Marilyn Juds
Prince George
  
Wednesday, 24 September 2008

Related Items

No related items found
As ABBA sang all those years ago: “Money, money, money, it’s a rich man’s world.”
Case in point - the Harper government and the multinational pharmaceutical Frankenstein Merck-Frosst, pedlars of the HPV Gardasil vaccine. They’re both out there campaigning: one for votes, the other for drugs.
While Prime Minister Harper throws money at this or that community project, Merck throws money into slick and misleading advertising. Merck recruits sports and pop stars to endorse Gardasil with glowing testimonials - for pay - where each bottom line says do the right thing and get on the bandwagon, otherwise you’re a nobody.
Merck actually seeks out and trains doctors to give public lectures touting the benefits of the vaccine, paying $4,500 per lecture. Some have made hundreds of thousands of dollars doing this.
At the same time, the B.C. government wants to vaccinate Grade 6 and Grade 9 girls with Gardasil; it’s a series of three shots over a six-month period.
In the meantime, we see escalating problems with the drug. For two years now the vaccine has been administered to tens of millions of girls and women in 80 countries. FDA records reveal that, since Gardasil’s approval, nearly 9,000 girls have had adverse side-effects after receiving their shots.
Adverse effects, according to Judicial Watch.org, had increased on June 10 this year to 8,864, up from 6,700 just two months before. This includes 18 sudden deaths within seven days of inoculation.
Merck calls Gardasil a drug to fight certain types of uterine cancer. The word itself has frightening connotations. When people hear the word cancer, they are apt to become paranoid, making hasty and totally irrational decisions. Perhaps Merck had this reaction in mind. Dr. Mercola (mercola.com) notes that Merck’s aggressive advertising is one of the “most successful examples of baseless fear-mongering" that he ever heard of.
In the U.S., proposals have been made to mandate the vaccinations for girls in middle schools in 24 states. That would mean that these girls can be disallowed from going to school if they don’t submit to getting the entire vaccination package. Whereas in Canada, parents have the right to refuse to have their child take any vaccination that may conflict with their health practices, personal ethics or religious beliefs.
Parents should not be intimidated by in-your-face bandwagon gibberish, nor be duped by deliberate misinformation. A little research will reveal the true picture of state-sponsored vaccinations.
-- Marilyn Juds
Prince George
Comments (8)add
...
written by BDL , September 25, 2008 (08:53:15 AM)
Ms. Juds is correct in that people should not be intimidated by in-your-face bandwagon gibberish. That includes the contents of her letter and the claims by the osteopathic "Doctor" Mercola, whos web site she recommends. Osteopathy is not a scientific branch of medicine but rather a "complementary" medicine system focusing on the musculoskeletal system as the cause of ill health.

I would like to inject a note of realism into her comments. She says "tens of millions" of females have had the vaccine. "Tens" is in the plural. That means at least 20 million girls and women. Of those 20 million vaccinations there have been 8,864 adverse reactions and 18 deaths, according to her. An adverse reaction could just be a little redness or soreness, or a headache, or something major, we don't know because she doesn't say.

8864 reactions in 20,000,000 means that the adverse reaction rate is 0.044%. That is, 1 in 2,256. For every 2,256 people vaccinated, one person will have an adverse reaction, like a headache or redness or soreness that lasts a few hours. 18 deaths in 20,000,000 is too many. Nevertheless, it represents less than 1 in 1 million, using her figures.

That is why parental permission is required in Canada. Parents have to consider the risk, along with the wishes of the daughter involved, if of an age to have an opinion. It is, after all, the daughter's body.

One thing to consider is that the incidence of carcinoma-in-situ of the cervix is considerably higher than the adverse reaction rate above. In a paper entitled "Decline In the Incidence of Carcinoma in situ of the Cervix" (http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/76/11/1322?ck=nck), Chow, Greenberg and Liff say, "The prevalence of cytologic
abnormalities (dysplasia or greater) in this program has
increased from 8 to 13 per 1,000 screened women, over the
present study period." (Dysplasia is the very earliest change that leads to malignancy).

Note the rate in Atlanta, 8 to 13 likely malignancies per 1000 women. That is between 160,000 and 260,000 likely malignancies in a 20,000,000 group of women. If vaccinated, even with 8,864 reactions and 18 deaths, overall thousands upon thousands of lives can be saved, not to mention the emotional distress for the women concerned and their husbands and families.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Mike S , September 25, 2008 (09:36:21 AM)
BDL I think your last paragraph may be somewhat guilty of what you accuse the author of with her 'tens of millions' comment. By using your Atlanta example, which deals with the United States, then using the 160k to 260k numbers and stating "thousands upon thousands of lives can be saved", you give the impression that every incidence results in death. Less than 4000 women will die from cervical cancer in the U.S. in 2008. I don't think, even if all 4000 lives were saved, anyone would refer to that as "thousands upon thousands". Don't counter your perceived exaggerations with some of your own.

Also, your comment of parental permission is somewhat misleading. Parents should be aware that children can actually 'veto' their decision in some cases with a choice of their own. "..Children under the age of 19 who are able to understand the risks and benefits may consent to or refuse immunizations, regardless of the parent’s or guardian’s wishes...".
http://www.bchealthguide.org/healthfiles/hfile14a.stm#E46E7
This applies in BC, I have no idea about other provinces.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +1
The Campaign for Gardisal Flawed
written by Debll , September 25, 2008 (11:55:51 AM)
Maybe I am off base here , but the biggest problem I see with this Gardisal 'program' is that it seems to be the latest 'flavour of the month' that is being forced on us by one gov't or another . It has shades of the prov gov't's 'manditory' ban on 'junk' food or manditory fitness times in the schools - do it because WE SAY - no, don't think just follow!. IMO it is time the sheep rebelled! It is not a bad thing to question why should we follow you?!
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
We're wasting too much money on dubious vaccines
written by Aasa , September 25, 2008 (07:17:07 PM)
I totally agree with Marilyn Juds's article re Gardasil. Too many of our health dollars have been directed toward making this ill-researched vaccine available for young girls. The money that is being poured into this relatively little -researched project, could be better used elsewhere, to help already-identified children/students get more access to more support at school.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +3
amen!
written by some_gurl , September 29, 2008 (08:12:17 PM)
thank you for that :)
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by justsayno , December 01, 2008 (09:53:32 AM)
It should be interesting for all of you to realize that Health Canada only tests for impurites and makes sure the ingredients are what the monograph states. They DO NOT do any testing of the pharmaceutical drug themselves. They only ask for more information from the manufacturer until they feel that it's safe enough to issue a notice of compliance. The Federal Health Minister only has the power to recall food. Health Canada is the only entity capable of recalling pharmaceutical drugs and consumer products. Please remember that the FDA pulled Vioxx before Health Canada. We lost 113,000 Canadians to Vioxx. As of this date 279 adverse events in Canada have been attributed to Gardasil.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by Timbo , December 01, 2008 (10:18:16 AM)
"lost 113,000 Canadians to Vioxx".

Lost as in... died?
Would you like to correct your typo?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
...
written by grassick , December 01, 2008 (10:30:48 AM)
@ Timbo
Yeah, no doubt, where was everyone when that happened.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.

busy
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 24 September 2008 )
 
 
Live Free


Who's Online

We have 155 guests and 13 members online