HPV (Gardasil) Vaccine - linked to lowered probability of pregnancy

In June 2018, the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health published an article Gayle DeLong entitled 'A lowered probability of pregnancy in females in the USA aged 25-29 who received a human papillomavirus vaccine injection'. This is an everyday event - medical science publishing research and evidence about pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines. However it is one the demonstrates the dishonesty of medical science.

Gayle DeLong told the story on the 'Children's Health Defense' website on 17th December 2019

               "Data revealed that 60% of women who had not received the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, while only 35% of HPV vaccine recipients had ever conceived. The article detailed the statistical analysis as well as offered possible biological mechanisms for the results.  Three researchers peer-reviewed the article. When the article first appeared, the editors eagerly promoted it by making it free.  By early December 2019, the number of downloads reached close to 24,000."

This is how medical science is supposed to work - if it functioned honestly and openly. But, of course, it doesn't. Young girls, and their parents, who are routinely encouraged by doctors to have the vaccination, are (or at least should be) entitled to know all there is to know about the likely side effects and consequences of any medication. But pharmaceutical medicine does not work this way. It is a business that thrives on enticing patients to take drugs and vaccines, and information about side effects is not good for drug sales.

Medical journals, such as the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, should publish evidence about every drug and vaccine. This particular research was processed in the normal way, peer reviewed, and published. Then it was withdrawn - and withdrawn without any satisfactory reason being given.

All this is detailed in Gayle DeLong's piece in Children's Health Defense.

Yet the detail is not important. What we are dealing with is a medical system that does not want patients to know about the serious, life-changing side effects of their drugs and vaccines. If the conventional medical establishment was honest it would look at DeLong's findings, and be sufficiently concerned to look further into the findings. Indeed, on the basis of 'first do no harm', and the precautionary principle, it would suspend use of the vaccine.

None of this is done. Instead, the journal pulls the research. It is important to realise that medical journals survive only on the basis of funding from the pharmaceutical industry. So if drug companies don't like a piece of research, if it might have an effect on profits, it is easier to ensure that the research is pulled rather than to seek to make the vaccine safe, and free of side effects.

So it's not just that pharmaceutical medicine peddles dangerous drugs and vaccines. It is that the pharmaceutical industry has sufficient control over medical journals (a major source of information doctors rely on) to ensure that they don't have to worry about the dangers - neither doctors nor patients will get to know about them.

So our daughters are damaged....

...and the drug companies rake in the profits.

THE HPV VACCINES. Doctors insist they are safe, that our daughters should be vaccinated. So what does the Patient Information Leaflet say?

The HPV vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, have been described as "the world's most dangerous vaccine". Yet our doctors, and conventional medicine generally, continues to insist that HPV vaccines are very safe. So who is right? And in particular, does the conventional medical establishment actually know that this vaccine is causing harm to patients - as it is actually in their medical literature - and they are not telling us the whole truth?

Since 2006 conventional medicine has offered the HPV vaccine to all girls, from age 12 to 18. The human papillomavirus (HPV) is a common group of viruses that have been linked to several types of cancer, and the vaccine is supposed to protect young girls from cervical cancer, but also from rarer HPV-related cancers like anal and genital cancers, and cancers of the head and neck.

First, why has the HPV vaccine been described as "the world's most dangerous vaccine"? I was able to write this about the vaccine in September 2013, that is, a mere seven years after its introduction, and five years after its introduction in the UK. This is what I wrote.

     "It  has been calculated that 1,700 young girls have been killed or suffered permanent disability after being given the HPV vaccine, and a further 19,500 young girls have suffered 'non-serious' reactions. 

http://www.wddty.com/safe-hpv-vaccine-kills-up-to-1-700-young-girls.html

     Further, this article provides VAERS (US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) statistics showing that the HPV vaccine has caused the following adverse reactions in the USA:

• Deaths: 140
• Disabled: 952
• Did not recover: 6,032
• Abnormal pap smear: 531
• Cervical dysplasia: 214
• Cervical cancer: 64
• Life-threatening: 562
• ER visit: 10,557
• Hospitalized: 3,065
• Extended hospital stay: 234
• Serious: 4,091
• Adverse events: 30,352

In this 2013 blog "HPV Vaccine. We need to protect our daughters from this" I go into further detail of the dangers of the vaccine, including links to several actual cases of healthy young girls suffering serious, life threatening, and life transforming side effects including severe seizures, disability and death.

POSTSCRIPT (May 2019)
The manufacturer of Gardasil, Merck, has been formally accused of fraud and a host of other serious charges, including bribery, stealth marketing and 'hard selling' relating to this vaccine. 

Despite this, when we look at what the conventional medical establishment says about the safety of this vaccine, it remains very coy, and so far at least, it has been less inclined to be as honest about the dangers of HPV vaccine as they are now with the DPT vaccine, and the MMR vaccine (see both links to previous blogs).

So what does NHS says about the safety of HPV vaccines?
The NHS website, on its main pages on the HPV vaccines, demonstrates this coyness about the known side affects of the HPV vaccines. So, for instance, it begins by saying that

               "..... it's natural to be concerned that you or your child will have a side effect after having a vaccination. While all vaccines have the potential to cause side effects in some people, the reality is that most tend to be mild and do not last longer than a few days. Some people do not get any side effects at all." (my emphasis).

So the NHS website outlines a number of the more common, less serious side effects of the vaccine, which includes pain at the injection site, swelling and redness, high temperature, shivering, extreme tiredness (fatigue), headache, muscle and joint pain.

It then continues to list more serious side effects, each time describing them as 'rare', and discounting their seriousness in a number of ways. It says, for example, that to have a 'balanced' view, "the potential side effects have to be weighed against the expected benefits of vaccination in preventing the serious complications of disease" (my emphasis). 

The NHS also argues that not all illnesses that occur after vaccination will be a side effect, that as millions of people are vaccinated "it's inevitable that some will go on to develop a coincidental infection or illness shortly afterwards". So what are these 'coincidental infections or illness'?

• An immediate allergic reaction, or anaphylactic shock. It describes these as "dramatic and potentially life threatening" but then says that they are "very rare, occurring in less than 1 in a million cases, and are completely reversible if treated promptly by healthcare staff."

The Under-Reporting of Side Effects (thus making them 'Rare')

It is important to comment on the alleged frequency of these reported side effects. Several studies have calculated that only 10% of drug (and vaccine) side effects are ever reported. I wrote about this in this blog. What this means that 90% of side effects are not reported, so these 'rare' or 'uncommon' side effects are not 1 in 1,000 but 1 in 100, and 1 in 10,000 means 1 in 1,000!

Some studies indicate that 10% is actually an under-estimate, that a more accurate figure for under-reporting might be 1% - in other words that 99% of these 'rare' or 'uncommon' side effects remain unrecorded. This would mean that they happen in 1 in 100, or 1 in 10 vaccinated children.

On another NHS page there is more detail about the side effects of HPV vaccines, although it continues to discount their seriousness.

Very common side effects of the HPV vaccine

More than 1 in 10 people who have the Gardasil HPV vaccine experience:

• redness, swelling or pain at the site of the injection - the most common side effect, but it should wear off within a couple of days
• headaches - but these don't usually last very long. ( my emphasis)

Common side effects
More than 1 in 100 people, but less than 1 in 10, who have the Gardasil HPV vaccine experience:

• bruising or itching at the site of the injection
• a high temperature or feeling hot and shivery
• feeling sick (nausea)
• pain in the arms, hands, fingers, legs, feet or toes

Rare side effects
Around 1 in 10,000 people who have the Gardasil HPV vaccine experience:

• an itchy red rash (hives)

Very rare side effects
Less than 1 in 10,000 people who have the Gardasil HPV vaccine experience:

• difficulty breathing and restriction of the airways

Then more NHS coyness when they use what, to me, seems to be an entirely new defence of vaccine harm that discounts the importance of patient-reported side affects, favouring instead the evidence provided by 'medical science' in clinical trials.

               "People have reported other side effects, but because these come from people reporting side effects themselves rather than from controlled clinical tests, it's not possible to say how often they happen or to how many people." (My emphasis).

So after discounting them, the side effects of HPV vaccines that patients have reported are then listed as:

• bruising or bleeding more easily
• chills, weakness, tiredness or general feeling unwell
• swollen glands
• pain or tenderness in the joints or muscles
• being sick (vomiting)
• fits (seizures)

This is followed by yet more discounting when the NHS states that most of these symptoms are reported "after any kind of vaccination". This is a bit like saying that being knocked over by a Ford is acceptable, because other cars will do the same amount of damage! This highly defensive approach is at best suspicious, and at worst alarming. These are NOT minor side effects, they are serious, and should not be discounted in this way.

Patient Information Leaflets (PILS)
So what do the vaccine PILs, documents produced by the drug companies, say about the safety of these vaccines.

Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline)
The Cervarix PIL first outlines a long list of precautions and warnings about when the vaccine should not be taken - presumably because it would be unsafe to do so, and only the most healthy should have the vaccination.
          • if you are allergic to any of the active substances or any of the other ingredients of this vaccine (listed in section 6). Signs of an allergic reaction may include itchy skin rash, shortness of breath and swelling of the face or tongue.
          • if you have a bleeding problem or bruise easily.
          • if you have any disease which reduces your resistance to infection such as HIV infection.
          • if you have a severe infection with a high temperature. It might be necessary to postpone the vaccination until recovery. A minor infection such as a cold should not be a problem, but talk to the doctor first.

There then follows warnings about having the vaccine alongside other pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines, in pregnancy, when breastfeeding, or when driving or using machinery.

As far as side effects are concerned, there is the usual discounting of their seriousness - "all medicines can cause side effects, although not everybody gets them". These mirror the side effects already listed in the NHS webpage, but also include the following:
               • upper respiratory tract infection (infection of the nose, throat or trachea)
               • dizziness
               • other injection site reactions such as hard lump, tingling or numbness.
               • allergic reactions, including itchy rash on hands and feet, swelling of the eyes and face,
difficulty in breathing or swallowing, sudden drop in blood pressure and loss of consciousness.
               • swollen glands in the neck, armpit or groin
               • fainting sometimes accompanied by shaking or stiffness

Gardasil (Merck)
The Gardasil PIL provides very similar information to the Cervarix PIL, including several warnings and precautions about who should not have the vaccine. They should not be taken if:

               * you or your child is allergic (hypersensitive) to any of the active substances or any of the other ingredients of Gardasil (listed under “other ingredients”– see section 6).
               * you or your child developed an allergic reaction after receiving a dose of Gardasil.
               * you or your child suffer from an illness with high fever. However, a mild fever or upper
respiratory infection (for example cold) itself is not a reason to delay vaccination.
               * if you or your child has a bleeding disorder (a disease that makes you bleed more than normal), for example haemophilia
               * has a weakened immune system, for example due to a genetic defect, HIV infection or
medicines that affect the immune system.
               * Fainting, sometimes accompanied by falling, can occur (mostly in adolescents) following any needle injection.

The PIL, as usual, discounts the importance of the side effects of Gardasil, and then lists the following:

Very commonly (more than 1 in 10 patients), side effects found at the injection site include: pain,
swelling and redness. Headache was also seen.

Commonly (more than 1 in 100 patients), side effects found at the injection site include: bruising,
itching, pain in extremity. Fever and nausea have also been reported.

Rarely (less than 1 in 1000 patients): hives (urticaria).

Very rarely (less than 1 in 10,000 patients), difficulty breathing (bronchospasm) has been reported.

These side effects, apparently, were all noted in the clinical trials of Gardasil, and yet again the PIL discounts patient reports, despite the fact that patients are reporting actual side effects, actual patient harms, but this seems to be considered less important, less reliable, and less a matter of concern.

Side effects that have been reported during marketed use include:
Fainting, sometimes accompanied by shaking or stiffening, has been reported. Although fainting
episodes are uncommon, patients should be observed for 15 minutes after they receive HPV vaccine.

Allergic reactions that may include difficulty breathing, wheezing (bronchospasm), hives and rash
have been reported. Some of these reactions have been severe.

As with other vaccines, side effects that have been reported during general use include: 

• swollen glands (neck, armpit, or groin); 
• muscle weakness, 
• abnormal sensations, 
• tingling in the arms, 
• legs and upper body, or confusion (Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis); 
• dizziness, 
• vomiting, 
• joint pain, 
• aching muscles, 
• unusual tiredness or weakness, 
• chills, 
• generally feeling unwell, 
• bleeding or bruising more easily than normal, and 
• skin infection at the injection site.

What this demonstrates is that Conventional Medicine DOES know that HPV vaccines are harmful, but are reluctant to admit it until more evidence of harm is found.

So what are the side effects waiting to be found? The Drugs.com website provides details of all known Gardasil side effects, but in addition highlights several very serious side effects not mentioned by the NHS, or on the PIL. Anyone who is considering having this vaccine should visit and read this website, which is owned by a company controlled that are controlled by the pharmaceutical industry.

•     Anxiety
•     back, leg, or stomach pains
•     chest pain
•     difficulty with breathing
•     difficulty with swallowing
•     dizziness or lightheadedness
•     fast heartbeat
•     general body swelling
•     swollen, painful, or tender lymph glands in the neck, armpit, or groin
•     tenderness, pain, swelling, warmth, skin discoloration, and prominent superficial veins over the affected area
•     tightness in the chest
•     unusual tiredness or weakness
•     Diarrhoea
•     difficulty with moving
•     joint pain or swelling
•     muscle ache, cramps, pain, or stiffness
•     upper abdominal or stomach pain
•     Bloating
•     Constipation
•     Indigestion
•     pain, swelling, or redness at the injection site
•     pains in the stomach, side, or abdomen, possibly radiating to the back

The Drugs.com website also gives this information to healthcare professionals (which they will almost certainly not pass on to patients) - but it is quite horrendous.

• Injection site pruritus, injection site haematoma, injection site induration, injection site haemorrhage, injection site cellulitis
• Fatigue (54.6%), headache (53.4%), pyrexia (13%), fever of 99.5F or higher (12.9%)
• Chlamydia infection, malaise
• Asthenia, chills
• Myalgia (48.8%)
• Arthralgia (20.7%)
• Back pain
• Appendicitis, gastroenteritis
• Pancreatitis
• Respiratory
• Nasopharyngitis, oropharyngeal pain, influenza, cough, nasal congestion, upper respiratory tract infection, pharyngitis
• Pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, asthma
•  Bronchospasm
• Asthmatic crisis
• Pulmonary embolus
• Migraine
• Autoimmune disease

Drugs.com then go on to describe some 'postmarketing' reports of the following serious medical conditions.

• Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis
• Guillain-Barre syndrome
• Motor neuron disease
• Paralysis
• Seizures
• Syncope (including syncope associated with tonic-clonic movements and other seizure-like activity) sometimes resulting in falling with injury
• Transverse myelitis

And then Drugs.com moves on to some "new medical conditions potentially indicative of systemic autoimmune disorders included:

• arthralgia/arthritis/arthropathy, 
• autoimmune thyroiditis, 
• celiac disease, 
• diabetes mellitus insulin dependent, 
• erythema nodosum, 
• hyperthyroidism, 
• hypothyroidism, 
• inflammatory bowel disease, 
• multiple sclerosis, 
• nephritis, 
• optic neuritis, 
• pigmentation disorder, 
• psoriasis, 
• Raynaud's phenomenon, 
• rheumatoid arthritis, 
• scleroderma/morphea, 
• Stevens-Johnson syndrome, 
• systemic lupus erythematosus, 
• uveitis, 
• alopecia areata, 
• ankylosing spondylitis, 
• autoimmune thrombocytopenia, 
• myocarditis, 
• proteinuria, 
• skin depigmentation, 
• dermatomyositis, 
• vasculitis, 
• vitiligo

And so it goes on listing the side effects of Gardasil that are really serious medical conditions, until we come to the most horrendous admission of all

DEATH

Drug.com also mentions death as a side effect, but it is said to be "uncommon" - just 0.1% to 1% - including deaths during clinical trials "which were generally assessed as not vaccine related".

In conclusion, I have called the reluctance of conventional medicine to highlight the known and serious side effects of HPV vaccines 'discounting' and 'coyness'. This is being generous. Doctors, after all, regularly tell us that these vaccines are safe. 

Do these known side effects appear 'safe' to you?

Remember, the most serious of these known side effects are not mentioned on the main NHS page at all, and most doctors certainly do not mention them when talking to the mainstream media, and presumably to their patients too.

And it must also be noted that neither the NHS, or the PILS, mention the side effects for which the USA's Vaccine Court is paying out massive compensation, including cervical dysplasia and cancer, hospitalisation, disability and death. These 'side effects' have been reported to VAERS (the USA's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System), and if $millions have been paid out in compensation by the USA government, they would have been reported to conventional medicine, and in particular to the drug regulators around the world.

So clearly, all these conditions, including the possibility of death, should be mentioned as a possible side effect by the NHS and in the PILS. But they is not. Is the conventional medical establishment 'discounting'? Are doctors being 'coy' with the information they are prepared to give patients? Can the information we are being given about HPV vaccines be considered to be accurate, or the whole truth?

Or is the information we are getting from the conventional medical establishment both deceptive, dishonest, and detrimental to human health and wellbeing?

HPV VACCINE. What are the arguments against it? Nothing, if you believe the mainstream media! BBC News coverage hits a new low

Are vaccines safe?

• Your doctor will tell you they are. After all, they prescribe them so they would not be expected to say anything else!
• The Conventional Medical Establishment will tell you they are. After all, they have been tested, pronounced to be safe and effective, and have instructed doctors to prescribe them!

So what is all this stuff we hear about vaccine injury? Why are all these parents saying that their children have been damaged by vaccines? Why is the Vaccine Injury Compensation scheme in the USA paying out $millions every year to people who  have been vaccine damaged?

It's all nonsense, of course. Worse than nonsense too. Criticism of vaccines, we are now told, is a “global health threat” so anyone who questions the safety of vaccines can now be labeled 'dangerous” to society, stopping people from getting important medication.

And in any case, if conventional medicine was giving us pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that were harmful to our health, they would tell us. Wouldn't they? And even if our doctors didn't tell us, we can rely on the free press, our mainstream media, to do so. Can't we?

So let's examine what the mainstream media tell us about the safety of vaccines. Recently the BBC published a story about the HPV vaccine. in an article HPV vaccine: Thousands of girls did not get full dose. I pick on the BBC as it is part of our 'free press', but more than this, it is a public service broadcaster. Unlike other news organisations it does not have to 'earn a living' by selling advertising to commercial interests, it is paid for by the annual license fee. It does not have the same problem many news organisations have, where pharmaceutical company advertising can represent up to 70% of their advertising income. The BBC has no such vested interests, no requirement to protect the hand that feeds them!

Moreover, the BBC is constrained by its Editorial Guidelines, which means that, amongst other things, that they are obliged to report to us in a way that is:

• Accurate
• Impartial
• Fair

So we might expect the BBC to cover the HPV vaccine story according to these principles. So how did it do? The story, in brief, was that 1 in 3 girls, in some parts of the UK, did not have their full HPV vaccination in 2017-2018 against HPV, the virus that is thought to cause cervical cancer. In this blog I will use the words of the article itself to demonstrate its coverage, adding my own comments as we move through their article.

          "While the national target of immunising 80% of girls is being met, the rate varied between local authority areas. In total 57,048 girls did not receive the two doses required for the vaccine to be effective. Public Health England (PHE) said the vaccine programme was 'stable and consistent'."

This is presumably a statement of fact, passed to the BBC by PHE. I have no reason to doubt its accuracy. To discuss the issue further the BBC brought in the charity, 'Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust' whose spokesperson is quoted as saying that "... educating parents and young people about the Human Papilloma Virus vaccine was 'essential'.

No problem with that either. Education is vital, as long as that education is accurate, impartial and fair. But 'education' should not, of course, be confused with 'indoctrination'. In the former, all points of view are covered. In the latter there is just one point of view, and this is unquestioningly the approach taken by the BBC article. For education read "people need to be told about the importance of vaccination!".

IS THE HPV VACCINE SAFE?
So before proceeding through the BBC article, let's look at some other statistics about the HPV vaccine, not mentioned in it, but which might be of some importance and interest to parents, and their young daughters.

1. WDDTY reported in 2013 that it had been calculated that 1,700 young girls had been killed or suffered permanent disability after being given the HPV vaccine, and a further 19,500 had suffered 'non-serious' reactions.

2. This Vac Truth article provides VAERS (USA Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) statistics showing that the HPV vaccine has caused the following adverse reactions in the USA, up to 2013:

• Deaths: 140
• Disabled: 952
• Did not recover: 6,032
• Abnormal pap smear: 531
• Cervical dysplasia: 214
• Cervical cancer: 64
• Life-threatening: 562
• ER visit: 10,557
• Hospitalised: 3,065
• Extended hospital stay: 234
• Serious: 4,091
• Adverse events: 30,352

3. At least one country, Japan, has not been happy about the HPV vaccine. In 2013 the Japanese government withdrew its recommendation to use the HPV vaccine, citing concerns from the public about the adverse effects it caused. This Medscape article also mentioned the contrast between the promotion of the vaccine by the health authority and the concerns raised about it.

               "The announcement is in stark contrast to the pronouncement last week by health officials in the United States that vaccination rates in teenage girls should be increased after a study concluded that estimated vaccine effectiveness is 'high'."

Japan did not suspend the vaccine, but it instructed local governments that it should not be promoted whilst the concern about adverse effects, such as long-term pain and numbness, were investigated.

The BBC article mentioned none of these concerns. It did not ask any organisation that has these concerns to comment. As will be seen, the only people they asked about the vaccine were people, and organisations that are part of the conventional medical establishment!

IS THE HPV VACCINE EFFECTIVE?
So if the BBC felt it was not sufficientlynimportant to inform us about safety concerns, did they say anything about the effectiveness of the vaccine? Again, the BBC article is unequivocal on this matter, entirely content to rely entirely on NHS statements about the effectiveness of the HPV vaccine.

         "The NHS said the vaccine was 'effective at stopping girls from getting the types of HPV that cause most cervical cancers' but it was 'important to have both doses to be properly protected'."

That's it. Moreover, the entire article is based upon an unquestioned assumption about its effectiveness. Too many young girls are not having the vaccine, to too many women are dying of cervical cancer - and the two are linked.

          "PHE statistics showed vaccination rates ranged from about two thirds of year nine girls in some parts of London to more than nine out of 10 in other areas, such as North Yorkshire, Tameside and Portsmouth. Cervical cancer remains the most common cancer in women under 35 and kills about 850 a year."

So should the BBC have raised questions the effectiveness of the HPV vaccine. This Child Health Safety article, again published as long ago as 2013 (the information has been around for a long time), outlines some of the scientific evidence that the HPV vaccine is not only dangerous, but also wrongly promoted as capable of preventing cancer. The evidence the produced questions the inadequacy of the testing regime, which has come under serious investigation, and found it to be seriously flawed. The research reveals that the

          "... scientific and factual evidence that the data behind claims that HPV vaccines prevent cancers and save lives with no risk of serious side effects are 'optimistic' and contrary to the evidence and largely are from significant misinterpretation of available data which is 'presented to the public as factual evidence'." 

None of this evidence is mentioned by the by the NHS in its new release, or the BBC in its article reporting on the issue. The assumptions made throughout the article are three-fold, that the vaccine is:

1. Safe
2. Effective
3. Anyone not having the vaccine is risking contracting cervical cancer. 

DOES THE CONVENTIONAL MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT KNOW?
The conventional medical establishment DOES know this. This BMC article, "HPV vaccines and cancer prevention, science versus activism" says as much.

               "The rationale behind current worldwide human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination programs starts from two basic premises, 1) that HPV vaccines will prevent cervical cancers and save lives and, 2) have no risk of serious side effects. Therefore, efforts should be made to get as many pre-adolescent girls vaccinated in order to decrease the burden of cervical cancer. Careful analysis of HPV vaccine pre- and post-licensure data shows however that both of these premises are at odds with factual evidence and are largely derived from significant misinterpretation of available data." (My emphasis).

Clearly this does not stop the conventional medical establishment, and its vested interests, from claiming that it is safe and effective, but it should encourage the BBC to investigate the claims being made for the vaccine. It totally fails to do so.

The BBC article goes on to relate a case example which supports and highlights the message - it is important for all young girls to have the HPV vaccine, and that there should be no concerns about its safety or effectiveness. It concerns a mother who had cervical cancer, and who has explained to her daughter how the vaccine could "save her life". She says it is "the best protection" for girls, that she is keen that her daughter receives the vaccine as she knows, from personal experience, "how potentially devastating cervical cancer can be". The mother goes on to explain that talking about the vaccine may be "difficult to address with children" as it was connected with "sexual activity", and that some mothers "don't want their daughters to have it because they say it encourages 'promiscuity' but that is  "quite a naive approach to take with this vaccine."

There is nothing wrong with relating personal experiences, including a mother with a strong personal interest and opinion on the matter. But once again the BBC fails to offer any balance. Where are the stories of healthy young girls whose lives have been compromised by the HPV vaccine? There are plenty of them. I wrote this in a previous blog, "The HPV Vaccine. We need to protect our daughters from this."

               "There are now, on the internet, hundreds of articles outlining the personal and family tragedy that this vaccine has caused, and continues to cause. It can be likened to a game of Russian Roulette. You may, or you may not be damaged. But dangerous drugs and vaccines should not be regarded as a statistical matter. They represent human and family tragedy, all of them hard to read about. But here are a selection of these tragedies, about people who lost the game, and taken from the internet.

• Mother links daughter's mystery illness to vaccine.
• Girl severely damaged by Gardasil recounts horrifying medical ordeal while doctors call her a liar
• Young woman tells of horrific, debilitating health issues she now faces in years following Gardasil vaccination
• HPV Vaccine destroys Australian child's ovaries - manufacturer didn't check!
• Gardasil changed our dreams to nightmares.

If the BBC had wanted to write an article that was accurate, impartial and fair similar stories could also have been used. The BBC could also have referred to an increasing amount of court litigation, both in the USA and India, but chose not to do so. For instance,

• US vaccine court pays $6 million to Gardasil victims, most claims not yet settled.
• Supreme Court Suit Filed over HPV Vaccine Tragedy in India.

Instead, the BBC continued on its partial journey, bringing in other members of the conventional medical establishment to reinforce their totally one-sided message, and to give their reasons for the low up-take in certain parts of the country.

• A school administrator is quoted saying that girls needed to know the vaccine would protect them in the future. Parents, she said, should not be "frightened" of a "safe vaccine" or having conversations about it with their children.
• The chief executive of Jo's Cervical Cancer Trust said there was "wide variation" across England, and although up-take was generally high, authorities should not become "complacent". He said that there were "cultural barriers and myths" about HPV and the vaccine that could contribute to areas having lower up-take rates. He said that concerns over the safety of the vaccine can have "a very damaging impact".
• NHS teams in Brent and Hammersmith and Fulham said that language barriers and religious reasons were among reasons for a lower up-take rate than in other parts of England.
• A spokesman for Central and North West NHS Foundation Trust said the areas had a large population of "non-white residents who have different cultural and religious beliefs" and there were "more refusals in these groups of parents".
• The clinical lead of childhood immunisations for North Yorkshire and York said that some concern was "normal" from parents, that her health teams asked for consent by post, using online forms and by speaking directly with girls eligible for the vaccine.
• The head of immunisations at PHE is quoted as saying that "Girls who missed either of their HPV vaccines should speak to their school nurse or GP and arrange to get the vaccine as soon as possible as they remain eligible until their 18th birthday."

But not one word about the safety or the effectiveness of the vaccine. Vaccine scepticism is censored on the BBC. The public are not supposed to know what 'anti-vaxxers' have to say, their voice is not heard.

So the BBC blames the social media for such views. The article refers to another one of its articles, Parents' vaccine side effects fear 'fuelled by social media', published in January 2019. This article is equally inaccurate, partial and unfair.

VACCINE UPTAKE, AND INFORMED PATIENT CHOICE
So has the reason for low uptake been missed? Could the real reason for low uptake be none of the things the BBC chose to mention? Could it not be that some people have become aware that vaccines (nor least the HPV vaccine) are not safe, or effective, and that scare stories (have the vaccine or risk cancer) no longer hold sway over their decision-making?

If the public had access to ALL the information about vaccines there would probably be many more people opting out of vaccination. If the BBC understood that informed patient choice was important - if they realised that their journalism was failing adequately to inform the public - that merely parroting the message of the conventional medicine is not good journalism - if the BBC offered its license payers more comprehensive, more accurate, more impartial, and fairer information on health issues more people would be able to make an informed choice, and there would undoubtedly be many more people refusing to accept vaccination.

Big Pharma - a license to kill?

There have been a multitude of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines that have been withdrawn from the market, or banned, through the decades. The conventional medical establishment has presented each one of them to us as being both safe and effective, on the basis that medical science has tested them, and drug regulators have confirmed the 'science' that supports them.

It is on this basis that doctors have prescribed them, and on this basis that patients have taken them.

Yet, one by one, as silently as the mainstream media allows, they have been found to be unsafe, or ineffective, or both. Most have been found to cause serious disease and death. And the process goes on. The vaccines and drugs conventional doctors are giving us today are no safer that the banned drugs Big Pharma is hoping we have forgotten. Proof of this comes regularly.

MIMS has been published since 1959, and describes itself as being "the essential prescribing and clinical reference for general practice". I receive a copy of its regular updates. The most recent, published on 20th July 2016, is not extraordinary in any way, but has reported the following.

• Citalopram: suspected interaction with cocaine
• Anticoagulant linked to rare calicophylaxis risk 

MIMS prides itself itself as "the most up-to-date prescribing references for healthcare professionals", "updated constantly, with hundreds of changes incorporated every month, including the addition of new drugs and formulations and the removal of products that are no longer available". Yet what is notable about all these 'hundreds of reports' is that there is no mechanism, and usually no advice for patients taking the drugs involved to be given the information.

And the MIMS website does, indeed, list the drugs that have been removed that are no longer available.  Each month this is a long list of withdrawn drugs, but no reason for their withdrawal. Some may have been superseded. Some may have been unprofitable. But some will have been withdrawn because they were found to be either ineffective or dangerous.

And this is done with the maximum secrecy possible!

This secrecy is possible because of the vested interests of the conventional medical establishment, and the silence of the mainstream media. The drugs and vaccines offered to patients today are no safer, no more effective than the drugs and vaccines that have been withdrawn or banned over the years.

Yet the situation is worse than this. The medical establishment has created for itself, courtesy of national governments, a 'license to kill'.

An example of this is the immunity granted to pharmaceutical companies against any claims made against them. Many governments have made it difficult for patients who have suffered from vaccine injury and death to sue the drug companies. This is not the case in Japan. Recently, Vaccine Impact reported that 64 women were to sue over the damage caused to them by the HPV vaccine.

          "Unlike the U.S. where people who suffer from vaccine injuries and deaths cannot sue the drug manufacturers who enjoy legal immunity from the harm caused by their products, women in Japan have started taking legal action against the pharmaceutical companies that produce the HPV vaccine, which includes Merck’s Gardasil and Cervarix manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline."

In Britain, Europe, the USA, and elsewhere, we are not likely to read this news as the mainstream media censor any negative news regarding vaccines.

Consider, for a moment, what this means. Drug companies produce drugs and vaccines, and the conventional medical establishment prescribes them to patients as 'safe' and 'effective'. Few of them are. Most of them cause injury, many cause death. Yet the harmed patient has no redress. Many governments have given pharmaceutical companies legal immunity. They can harm us, kill us, and we have no come back.

What else can we buy, what other industry has such immunity? Immunity gives the drug companies permission to give us dangerous drugs, to make enormous profits from them, but there are no consequences for them harming and killing us!

James Bond, 007, was given a 'license to kill' by the British government. This fictional creation used it entirely for good. He only killed bad people in the interests of the greater good. The pharmaceutical industry has been given a 'license to kill', but their motivation is profit, and it operates within a profession that purports  to 'first, do no harm'. But they do harm. They kill lots of innocent people, who accept their drugs and vaccines in good faith.

It is time for the conventional medical establishment to take full responsibility for what they do to sick patients, in the name of health. Just as any other industry does!

HPV (Gardasil) vaccine. The most dangerous yet?

Perhaps the HPV vaccine has a lot of competition, but is the Gardasil, Cervarix vaccines the most dangerous to be imposed on us by the conventional medical establishment? 

Perhaps. But maybe the real problem is that this vaccine is given to strong healthy girls, who have proven their wellness and fitness for more than 10 years. Then, our lovely daughters were given the vaccine, and so often, their lives have been destroyed. 

In contrast to this, the DPT and MMR vaccines are given to very young babies and children. Parents might have thought they were normal during the first months of their lives, but perhaps they were mistaken. Perhaps they were not normal, and it was only after the vaccination that the 'abnormality' was noticed.

Just as the pharmaceutical companies had problems denying the outcome of Thalidomide, it is difficult for them to deny the dreadful consequences of taking the HPV vaccine.

And the flu vaccine is often given to older people, or people with respiratory problems. They might get ill after the vaccine, but they might have done anyway. And besides, our doctor, who we trust implicitly, told us that the vaccine was very safe! Who are we to question his judgement?

Yet this does not stop the pharmaceutical industry pushing the HPV vaccine, or governments throughout the world seeking to force it on us. For instance, the Australian government is trying to force our daughters to 'protect themselves' from cervical cancer, and giving their doctors financial incentives to do so. They are doing so as this is an important 'public health' measure. Well, we have heard it all before!

Yet, as Judy Wilyman reminds us, most infectious diseases had declined long before vaccines were introduced. It was basic health measures like better hygiene, clean water, improved diet and decent housing that contained them. Yet the Australian government is planning to expand vaccination to all individuals, with a schedule scanning from birth to death, and including the HPV vaccine. And new bio-security laws introduced in 2014 include forced vaccinations, or arrest in declared pandemics of infectious diseases. It is a land of milk and honey for drugs companies, but could herald the end of health freedom and patient choice.

Some governments have learnt from their mistake. The Japanese government, for instance, placed a moratorium on the use of HPV vaccine in 2014, and many other countries are considering similar action. Judy provides us with the following websites. 

• Gardasil The Carnage continues in France
• India: Supreme Court to Rule on Merck Fraud Regarding HPV Vaccine Deaths
• Spain: First case filed against HPV vaccine manufacturers and health authorities

Yet in truth there are a myriad of websites that speak volumes about the harm the HPV vaccine has caused - in statistical terms, in terms of the various ailments it has caused, from convulsions to paralysis, and most harrowingly of all, in terms of the sheer trauma and devastation caused to young girls, and their families. (For more information on this evidence, and a selection of websites, go to my previous blog, 'HPV vaccine. We need to protect our daughters from this').

So let's look at the conclusions reached on the harm caused by the HPV vaccine in this study, which looked at the latest information, and examined available epidemiological studies. This is the 'plain language' account given on the Med Check: the informed prescriber website.

          "Two HPV vaccines (Cervarix and Gardasil) have been marketed in Japan since 2010. More than 3 million girls were inoculated with HPV vaccines prior to the withdrawal of a recommendation for inoculation by the Japan's Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) in May 2013. 

          "Incidence of serious adverse reactions to Cervarix was 800 among 2.6 million girls inoculated (one in 3000 before withdrawal of the recommendation), while the incidence increased to 3.2% per year after the retraction, using the latest data (3,200 cases per 100,000 person years or one in 30 per year). This is similar to the frequency of serious adverse events within 1.2 years after the first vaccination (annual rate of 2.8%) reported in a well-controlled clinical study of Cervarix. In this study, annual incidence of serious reactions, autoimmune diseases and death after 3.4 years comparing with those between 1.2 and 3.4 years was estimated as 4%, 0.63% and more than one per thousand respectively. These incidence rates may also occur in Japan."  

          "The epidemiologic surveys that the MHLW used as evidence of safety have serious flaws in their methodologies. One study confuses incidence (newly occurred disease among a certain population at a certain point of time) with prevalence. The other two studies have a serious bias known as the “healthy vaccinee effects”. Those vaccinated are usually healthier than those non-vaccinated, because the latter group avoid vaccines due to health problems."

          "While there is no evidence yet that HPV vaccine decreases mortality from cervical cancer, if we assume that the vaccine could cut the cervical cancer mortality by half, the expected maximum benefit would be 2.0 less deaths per 100,000 person-years. Hence, the harm experienced is overwhelmingly greater than the expected maximum benefit."

We strongly recommend avoiding HPV vaccine.

I leave you with this devastating conclusion about a vaccine the conventional medical establishment is trying to force on us all, of course, with the assistance of compliant governments throughout the world.

HPV Vaccine. We need to protect our daughters from this

The HPV vaccine, Gardasil and Cervarix are the two main forms, is given to young girls aged 11 to 13 by the Conventional Medical Establishment to protect them from cervical cancer. But it is a vaccine that has never been proven to work, is not effective, in that it does not do what it says it will do, and worse - it harms, destroys and kills.

However, the conventional medical establishment, the NHS, and your GP are not telling us about any of this information about a vaccine that has been described "as the world's most dangerous vaccine". The official line continues to be that the vaccine is safe and effective. "According to government health authorities, medical 'experts,' and the pharmaceutical industry adverse events after vaccinations are extremely rare".

This is just not true. As the article in which this is quoted goes on to say, those who suffer adverse reactions, injury and even death, seem to be viewed as "acceptable collateral damage, nothing more than statistics". Indeed, this is the usual defence of all conventional drugs and vaccines that are known to cause patients harm, disease, and death - the 'advantages', we are told, outweigh 'the disadvantages'! But do they? Make up your own mind.

The Evidence that the vaccine kills.
It  has been calculated that 1,700 young girls have been killed or suffered permanent disability after being given the HPV vaccine, and a further 19,500 young girls have suffered 'non-serious' reactions.
http://www.wddty.com/safe-hpv-vaccine-kills-up-to-1-700-young-girls.html

Further, this article provides VAERS (US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System) statistics showing that the HPV vaccine hase caused the following adverse reactions in the US:

Deaths: 140
Disabled: 952
Did not recover: 6,032
Abnormal pap smear: 531
Cervical dysplasia: 214
Cervical cancer: 64
Life-threatening: 562
ER visit: 10,557
Hospitalized: 3,065
Extended hospital stay: 234
Serious: 4,091
Adverse events: 30,352

The news from India, where Bill Gates is providing girls with the vaccine, is little better, with 7 known deaths being reported here. An Indian parliamentary panel has described the use of the HPV vaccine 'child abuse'.

Even one of the vaccine developers has spoken out against the vaccine, and the 44 girls who "are officially known to have died from these vaccines". This article also questions the seriousness of the cancer the vaccine is supposed to be addressing.

          "Dr. Harper explained in her presentation that the cervical cancer risk in the U.S. is already extremely low, and that vaccinations are unlikely to have any effect upon the rate of cervical cancer in the United States. In fact, 70% of all H.P.V. infections resolve themselves without treatment in a year, and the number rises to well over 90% in two years".

So we have a vaccine that kills in order to prevent a cancer that is not as serious as the Conventional Medical Establishment wants us to believe.

The Evidence that it harms and causes disease.
The evidence that the HPV vaccine causes immense harm has been growing since it was first used in 2006. Gaia Health has produced this article that states the vaccine has caused ovarian failure or destruction in 4 girls, and also many autoimmune disorders, citing:

          "… numerous cases substantiating the link between adverse immune reactions and HPV vaccines, including fatal reactions".

The vaccine has even been able to cause a "deadly new autoimmune disease known as antiphospholipid syndrome". So if this deadly HPV vaccine continues to be given to our young women, we may soon be hearing more of this 'new' disease, and no doubt Big Pharma companies will want to come up with some new drug or vaccine to treat it - a 'syndrome' which they created in the first place!

But in terms of the young girls future reproductive capacity, the risks would seem to be even greater. The vaccine, apparently, is loaded with "additives known to damage female reproduction". What is worse, the drug companies "had never even conducted safety testing on Gardasil in relation to its effects on women's ovaries". According to the Australian report, "Merck had only tested Gardasil's effects on male testes" which as it is given principally to girls is perhaps not very useful!

The vaccine has also been linked to 'Premature menopause'. It is, perhaps, stunning that the conventional medical system, that is supposed to work under the premise "first, do no harm" can give a vaccine that has such a devastating impact on the reproductive future of healthy young girls.

For anyone who can still continue reading about the awful harm caused to healthy young women, the vaccine has also been linked to genital warts.

But the horror story goes on. The vaccine has also been linked with causing cancer, yes, the very disease it is supposed to prevent! Apparently, the vaccine's package insert actually admits that the vaccine has not been tested for 'carcinogenicity'.

So has this vaccine been tested?
The inadequacy of the testing regime for these drugs have come under serious investigation, and although our drug regulators, who are supposed to protect us from dangerous drugs and vaccines, have approved the HPV vaccine, the testing has been found to be seriously flawed. We have already seen that the safety of the vaccine, in terms of causing cancer, and causing harm to the female reproductive system.

This article states the the 'scientific' evidence for the HPV vaccine points to a vaccine that "is ineffective, dangerous , and wrongly promoted as 'anti-cancer". The research reveals that the

          "... scientific and factual evidence that the data behind claims that HPV vaccines prevent cancers and save lives with no risk of serious side effects are “optimistic” and contrary to the evidence and largely are from “significant misinterpretation of available data” which is “presented to the public as factual evidence“. 

The article pulls no punches in its criticism of the poor science that supports this vaccine. But there is evidence that the safety claims made for the HPV vaccines were fraudulent - fraud being something increasingly associated with Big Pharma drugs and vaccines.

One reason for this is the power of the Big Pharma companies, whose "near-total control of governmental health agency decisions" is commented upon in this article, as is the  "utter lack of concern by the decision makers". Those parts of the Conventional Medical Establishment, from politicians, to Governments, to national health service organisations, to regulatory agencies, even to our local GP's, seem completely unable or unwilling to protect patients from harm - such is the power and influence of the drug companies. In this article, 5 scientists speak out about the corruption that has surrounded the both testing and promotion of this vaccine.

Similar criticisms have been accepted by the Supreme Courts in India, a country that has suffered greatly from the HPV vaccine. Massive experimentation took place in two Indian provinces - apparently with little regard being paid to the dangers facing the children who were vaccinated.

So what we are left with is "evidence of immense harm" as described in this Gaia Health article, especially in regard to the safety data for the vaccine, which are so often described on the internet as being 'corrupt' or 'fraudulent'. As long ago as August 2012, Dr. Russell Blaylock exposed "the criminal fraud of Gardasil, HPV vaccinations" in this Natural News article, where the following claims are made:

          "The entire vaccine industry as we know it has been built on a foundation of lies, corruption, and fraud.... retired neurosurgeon and health freedom advocate Dr. Russell Blaylock explains in plain detail how many vaccines, including the ill-famed Gardasil jab for human papillomavirus (HPV), have never been proven to work, and are illegally administered to millions of people without informed consent".


          "Gardasil does not prevent HPV or cervical cancer".


          "Gardasil has injured, killed far more children than ever would have developed cervical cancer without the vaccine".

          "Since full side effects are almost never disclosed, Gardasil and many other vaccines are being illegally administered to millions without informed consent".

And more and more articles about the ineffectiveness and dangers of the HPV vaccine continue to come through on the internet. There are hundreds of them, including the following:

• Most Gardasil safety data discovered to be fraudulent.
• Gardasil provides no benefits.
• Don't give the Gardasil vaccine to your daughter - despite what your doctor says.

If you expect some kind of response from the Big Pharma drug companies, or the conventional medical establishment generally, you will be entirely wrong. Everyone, from governments to doctors, appear to ignore all the evidence. They do not seem to deny them. But they certainly do not challenge them. Instead, they just carry on promoting the vaccine - regardless.

And, of course, the mainstream media remains entirely silent on the matter, preferring to support their advertisers and payments than protect their readers or viewers. I would appear that everyone leaves parents to make a decision without full information, and our young girls to suffer the vaccine without the opportunity of saying "No"!

Japan no longer supports the vaccine.
There is one exception to this. Japan once recommended the vaccine, but after early negative experiences, they have now withdrawn their support.

HPV Vaccines. Japan leads the way.

The Japanese withdraws support for HPB Cervical Cancer vaccine on safety grounds.

HPV Vaccine Exposed As Japan Health Authorities Withdraw Recommendation To Vaccinate.

Cervix vaccine issues trigger health notice.

It is tragic, but true, that the conventional medical establishment will usually continue to push drugs and vaccines right up to the time they become entirely unsupportable, and have to be banned. Unfortunately this always takes many years, during which time many thousands of patients, who are not told the truth, have to suffer the consequences.

Just ask yourself - why is it that the Japanese feel that the HPV vaccine is dangerous, whilst our government, our NHS, our drug regulators, continues to tell us that it is safe?

The result of this vaccine - personal and family tragedy 
Many people will be given this vaccine with suffering. They will be able to withstand the assault with harm. But there are now on the internet hundreds of articles outlining the personal and family tragedy that this vaccine has caused, and continues to cause. It can be likened to a game of Russian Roulette. You may, or you may not be damaged. But dangerous drugs and vaccine should not be regarded as a statistical matter, They represent human and family tragedies which are hard to read about. But here are a selection of these tragedies, about people who lost out in this pernicious game.

• Mother links daughter's mystery illness to vaccine.
• Girl severely damaged by Gardasil recounts horrifying medical ordeal while doctors call her a liar
• Young woman tells of horrific, debilitating health issues she now faces in years following Gardasil vaccination
• HPV Vaccine destroys Australian child's ovaries - manufacturer didn't check!
• Gardasil changed our dreams to nightmares.
• HPV vaccine leaves another teenager chained to a wheelchair for life.
• Girl, 16, left paralysed in 3 limbs, after having the HPV vaccine.

The result of this vaccine - court judgements

The other result of the HPV vaccine is an increasing amount of litigation now appearing in the courts. There are two cases, of note

• US vaccine court pays $6 million to Gardasil victims, most claims not yet settled.
• Supreme Court Suit Filed over HPV Vaccine Tragedy in India.

Yet many families are unable to bring such action to court. It is prohibitively costly. And in many countries Big Pharma companies have been given legal immunity to these claims. Moreover, Big Pharma appear to take these court cases, and the fines imposed, as something akin to a business expense rather than something to respond to on behalf of the health and safety of patients! $6 million dollars may be a lot of money for most of us. But for Big Pharma it is small change compared to the profitability of selling dangerous drugs and vaccines.

Will this evidence stop the ConMed Establishment pushing the vaccines?
So will all the evidence against HPV vaccines bring about any government action? Will it lead to drug regulators taking action on behalf of patients? Will the conventional medical establishment, including our compliant doctors, and are unconcerned media, take action? From this evidence, it does not appear so.

Governments do not appear to have to have lost their enthusiam for pushing dangerous drugs and vaccines (and of course the UK government continues its programme of vaccination).

• US government spending $500k to push HPV vaccine that keeps killing young women.

And there appears to be some enthusiasm within the ConMed Establishment to give the vaccine to younger children, regardless of any evidence.

• The Coming Push to Give HPV Vaccines to Infants.

And the prospect of doubling the market for the HPV vaccine, by extending the market to boys, appears to be just too tempting for BigPharma.

• Australian boys become first male guinea pigs in global Gardasil genocide.

There is clearly more profit to be reaped in promoting this vaccine - and so a lot more human suffering is in prospect!

So if you, or your daughter or grand-daughter are offered this vaccine, just say "No"! You will certainly not be alone!

http://www.wddty.com/parents-refuse-gardasil-hpv-vaccine-for-their-teenage-daughters.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/036108_HPV_vaccines_Gardasil_backlash.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/039634_HPV_vaccines_resistance_victory.html

HPV Vaccinations are unnecessary and harmful

Vaccinations are boom business for Big Pharma - but dangerous for patients. ConMed wants all young girls to be given the HPV vaccine - Cerverix in the UK, Gardasil in many other countries. And it has proven to be a disaster to many of them. But, of course, a well-hidden secret - the mainstream media just don't seem interested in telling you about it. Well, the internet will!

Natural Health have recently published a good outline of what is happening, certainly in the USA - but it is  not much different in the UK.

http://www.naturalnews.com/030782_HPV_vaccinations_side_effects.html

It quotes Dr Diane Harpar, who helped develop Gardasil, as saying:

"Gardasil is largely unnecessary, and it has never been fully tested on females under the age of 15 ... [there`s] little need for the vaccine".

But governments, national health services, doctors, and Big Pharma are not easily deterred. Not only do they want all women aged 9 to 25 to take it, they now want men to take it too. Well, why should they deny themselves the profitability of men having it too! And perhaps they will argue they are being 'politically correct'!


And several US states are considering making the vaccine compulsory. Now, that would boast profits, and no doubt Big Pharma would want to contribute generously to the states (or perhaps just the leaders of the states) involved in such enforcement! It won't do much for patient health, though.


There is now so much evidence of the dangers of this vaccine, outlined in the Natural Health article, that the advice should be clear - don't allow ConMed to persuade you to vaccinate you daughters (or your sons) - keep them safe instead!