Gardasil Warnings Ignored Says Researcher

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:30:47 -0500, Mike wrote:

- Dr Harper asked the Ministry of Health not to promote Gardasil as a
'cervical cancer vaccine' because, in her words, this is simply not true
- the request was ignored.

Not quite true. What she did say was "I fully support the HPV
vaccines," ... "I believe that in general they are safe in most
women."

http://www.badscience.net/2009/10/ja...as-the-cancer/


http://www.whale.to/vaccine/harper_h.html

"Peter Parry" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 10:35:42 -0000, "john" wrote:



I just wish someone had warned me about Gardasil....... My Jasmine
would still be here with us.

6 months after vaccination the girl died suddenly and unexpectedly and
her mother "just knows" the vaccination was to blame.

That is very convincing proof.


This is http://www.whale.to/vaccine/gardasil_deaths.html

On Sun, 7 Feb 2010 22:45:45 -0000, "john" wrote:


http://www.whale.to/vaccine/harper_h.html

Where you quote text from the dishonest piece from the Express "The
cervical cancer vaccine may be riskier and more deadly than the cancer
it is designed to prevent, a leading expert who developed the drug has
warned. She also claimed the jab would do nothing to reduce the rates
of cervical cancer in the UK. "

but not the abject retraction which Dr Harper forced them to make of -

"LAST Sunday we incorrectly suggested that the cervical cancer vaccine
Cervarix could be as deadly as cervical cancer and that the vaccine is
ineffective.

We now accept that there is no evidence to suggest that this is the
case and that Cervarix in fact provides protection against the viruses
that cause 70 per cent of cervical cancers.

We are happy to set the record straight and apologise for causing
undue alarm to all those women and teenage girls considering
vaccination against cervical cancer. "

Peter Parry wrote:
On Sat, 06 Feb 2010 23:30:47 -0500, Mike wrote:

- Dr Harper asked the Ministry of Health not to promote Gardasil as a
'cervical cancer vaccine' because, in her words, this is simply not true
- the request was ignored.

Not quite true. What she did say was "I fully support the HPV
vaccines," ... "I believe that in general they are safe in most
women."

http://www.badscience.net/2009/10/ja...as-the-cancer/





The key word here is "MOST". Which may mean that for some it is unsafe.

And she did suggest that it is unsafe for some women:

"I think there's a strong possibility that Gardasil was the catalyst
that set off the ALS" (Lou Gehrig's disease)
http://www.usnews.com/health/blogs/o...der-teens.html

She also said that because the vaccine is new there is not enough
data about its long term effectiveness and safety.

"“If we vaccinate 11 year olds and the protection doesn’t last... we’ve
put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit,”
says Dr. Harper. “The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no
reduction in cervical cancers, they are just postponed, unless the
protection lasts for at least 15 years, and over 70% of all sexually
active females of all ages are vaccinated.” She also says that enough
serious side effects have been reported after Gardasil use that the
vaccine could prove riskier than the cervical cancer it purports to
prevent."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5253431.shtml