Vaccine Injury After Gardasil – Are Higher Rates of Adverse Reactions Real?

[Mirzam]

Quote:

Vaccines are known to cause inflammation of the brain, they are known to cause death, they are known to cause autoimmune and inflammatory conditions (see Catalogue of Science link here). What if the reason there are so many reports of adverse reactions to Gardasil is simply because the parents know the child and the child can tell the parent they feel different? What if all those supposedly “normal” reactions to vaccines like high pitched screaming, spiking a fever, being generally unsettled and not sleeping well, aren’t really that normal after all? What if some components of the vaccines are crossing the blood brain barrier... [Admin note: Edited for copyright  violation.  Quotes must be kept to 100 words unless you have permission from the author to share.]

http://www.greatergoodmovie.org/news-views/vaccine-injury-after-gardasil-are-higher-rates-of-adverse-reactions-real/

[prosciencemum]

They cite made up statistics from a hypothetical study to make a point. Not too convincing to me...

They could instead look at a real study, like the one we discussed in this thread: http://www.mothering.com/community/t/1353634/vaxxed-vs-unvaxxed-study/20

(Study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057555/)

which showed, to the accuracy of the sample size used, absolutely no difference in general health of vaxxed and unvaxxed kids (excepted that the vaxxed ones were less likely to have had a VPD). 

[Mirzam]

Prosciencemum, you are yet again quoting that study.   Thank you we have heard about it and it is junk science at its best. 

[pek64]

Can anyone post a study specifically about Guardasil?

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by pek64 

Can anyone post a study specifically about Guardasil?

What kind of study, there are several posted in the past few days and have active threads.

[Rrrrrachel]

Vaccine Injury After Gardasil

It is not junk science. You choose to dismiss it based on some arbitrary non scientific standards. That's not the same.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

It is not junk science. You choose to dismiss it based on some arbitrary non scientific standards. That's not the same.

No . I dismiss it because it is a poorly designed study.

[Rrrrrachel]

Vaccine Injury After Gardasil

No. It's not.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by Rrrrrachel 

No. It's not.

Yes it is. You want to keep going?

[Rrrrrachel]

Vaccine Injury After Gardasil

Well, I can't prove a negative so sounds like the ball is in your court. I'll tell you the design is well within typical standards for an observational study.

[Jennyanydots]

Originally Posted by Mirzam 

http://www.greatergoodmovie.org/news-views/vaccine-injury-after-gardasil-are-higher-rates-of-adverse-reactions-real/

Very, very interesting idea. Food for thought, at the least. Thanks for posting.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

They cite made up statistics from a hypothetical study to make a point. Not too convincing to me...

No they didn't, they cite an actual study.

http://www.academicpedsjnl.net/article/S1876-2859(10)00250-0/fulltext

Quote:

An estimated 43% of US children (32 million) currently have at least 1 of 20 chronic health conditions assessed, increasing to 54.1% when overweight, obesity, or being at risk for developmental delays are included; 19.2% (14.2 million) have conditions resulting in a special health care need, a 1.6 point increase since 2003.

[Rrrrrachel]

Vaccine Injury After Gardasil

I admit I hadn't researched gardasil very much before, we have about a decade before its really relevant to us. I started as a result of this thread and I'm just not finding the high adverse event numbers and deaths that have been referenced here. Could someone point me in the right direction?

[prosciencemum]

Originally Posted by Mirzam 

No they didn't, they cite an actual study.

http://www.academicpedsjnl.net/article/S1876-2859(10)00250-0/fulltext

Oh I guess I misunderstood this quote then

Quote:

What if someone were to do a study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated to unvaccinated children and found that 54% of the unvaccinated children were NOT chronically ill and 21% did NOT have developmental disabilities?

Sounds like a hypothetical study to me. 

[pollypinks]

Both hepatitis B vaccine and  one of the human papillomavirus HPV vaccines (Gardasil) contain yeast proteins.  These vaccines are made by inserting the gene that makes one viral surface protein into a plasmid (small circular pieces of DNA) and putting the plasmid into baker's yeast.  When the yeast cells grow, they also make the viral proteins that eventually become the vaccine.  Hep. B and HPV vaccines contain between one and five milligrams (thousandths of a gram of yeast proteins.  Two HPV vaccines are available:  Gardasil-This vaccine was first made available in June 2006.  It contains proteins from four common HPV types: 6, 11, 16, and 18.  Types 16 and 18 cause 70 of 100 cases of cervical cancer, and types 6 and 11 cause 90 of 100 cases of anal and genital warts.  If anyone has a severe reaction to this immunization, then they should not get any more.  However, when asking how scientists know who should get it, the answer can be found when doctors look under the microscope of pap smears.  Most women infected with HPV rid themselves of it, but in some, the virus continues to infect cells of the cervix, causing pre-cancerous and then cancerous changes.  All women who pass through three stages of cervical infection will get cervical cancer.  HPV vaccine has been clearly shown to prevent  this.  In 2009 the FDA licensed the Gardasin vaccine for boys and men between 9 and 26 years of age.  It was based on studies that showed it to be effective in preventing anal and genital warts.  Unfortunately, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices did not fully recommend the vaccine, instead giving it a permissive recommendation, meaning people can use it if they want.  Unfortunate, because now insurance companies may not pay for the vaccine for boys. And it will be harder to prevent anal and genital warts and cancers in men, and to lessen transmission of HPV from men to women.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by prosciencemum 

Originally Posted by Mirzam 

No they didn't, they cite an actual study.

http://www.academicpedsjnl.net/article/S1876-2859(10)00250-0/fulltext

Oh I guess I misunderstood this quote then

Quote:

What if someone were to do a study comparing the health outcomes of vaccinated to unvaccinated children and found that 54% of the unvaccinated children were NOT chronically ill and 21% did NOT have developmental disabilities?

Sounds like a hypothetical study to me. 

You probably didn't read the sources which were link referenced in the body of the article or you would have realized it wasn't a made up study.

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by pollypinks 

Both hepatitis B vaccine and  one of the human papillomavirus HPV vaccines (Gardasil) contain yeast proteins.  These vaccines are made by inserting the gene that makes one viral surface protein into a plasmid (small circular pieces of DNA) and putting the plasmid into baker's yeast.  When the yeast cells grow, they also make the viral proteins that eventually become the vaccine.  Hep. B and HPV vaccines contain between one and five milligrams (thousandths of a gram of yeast proteins.  Two HPV vaccines are available:  Gardasil-This vaccine was first made available in June 2006.  It contains proteins from four common HPV types: 6, 11, 16, and 18.  Types 16 and 18 cause 70 of 100 cases of cervical cancer, and types 6 and 11 cause 90 of 100 cases of anal and genital warts.  If anyone has a severe reaction to this immunization, then they should not get any more.  However, when asking how scientists know who should get it, the answer can be found when doctors look under the microscope of pap smears.  Most women infected with HPV rid themselves of it, but in some, the virus continues to infect cells of the cervix, causing pre-cancerous and then cancerous changes.  All women who pass through three stages of cervical infection will get cervical cancer.  HPV vaccine has been clearly shown to prevent  this.  In 2009 the FDA licensed the Gardasin vaccine for boys and men between 9 and 26 years of age.  It was based on studies that showed it to be effective in preventing anal and genital warts.  Unfortunately, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices did not fully recommend the vaccine, instead giving it a permissive recommendation, meaning people can use it if they want.  Unfortunate, because now insurance companies may not pay for the vaccine for boys. And it will be harder to prevent anal and genital warts and cancers in men, and to lessen transmission of HPV from men to women.

You are talking surrogate markers which is vaccine manufacturers slight of hand when they have nothing better to go on.

There is no proof that HPV vaccine prevents cancer because takes 20 to 30 years to develop from HPV, as you pointed out the vaccine has only been available since 2006, so the manufacturers have to use surrogate markers, in this case CINs (cervical intraepithelial neoplasias) lesions on the cervix, which are classed as levels 1, 2 and 3. These lesions are not cancer, and as you point out the vast majority resolve by themselves with out intervention. One study showed that in teenage girls, 38% of CIN 2 resolve after one year and 63% after 2 and 68% after three years. That is if CIN 2 is correctly diagnosed in the first place. CIN was the primary marker used by Merck for Gardasil approval. Even a CIN 3 is not a diagnosis of future cancer. The progression is very slow and some regress back to normal tissue. It takes 5 years for 20% of CIN 3 lesions to progress to cancer and only 40% have progressed to cancer after 30 years. CIN 3 is the other marker used for Gardasil. Also a lesion also does not have to be a HPV 16 or HPV 18 derived lesion.

Frankly, I would be thrilled if insurance companies denied payment for HPV vaccination for boys which is purely a marketing strategy for the product. (I would know I worked for a certain pharmaceutical company in the PR department).

Edited by Mirzam - 10/30/12 at 8:24am