|
BACK
TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
WHY WE CANNOT TRUST THE MEDICAL AUTHORITIES
ON GARDASIL HPV VACCINE
Medical health authorities have repeatedly assured us that
Gardasil, the vaccine injection given to young girls to allegedly
prevent cervical cancer, is perfectly safe. For example, the
National Advisory Committee on Immunization, a group of medical
specialists, endorsed the vaccine last February. The Society
of Gynecologic Oncologists of Canada claims the vaccine is
safe, as does Dr. David Butler-Jones, Canada’s Chief
Public Health Officer. The Canadian Pediatric Society and
the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada have
also endorsed the vaccine.
These medical authorities, however, are puzzled, and at the
same time indignant, that the use of this vaccine still remains
controversial, ever since it was rolled out in lightening
speed after Ottawa announced a $300 million funding package
for participant provinces. After all, they reason, they have
approved the drug, so what is the problem? Surely their expert
opinion should be sufficient to allay the public’s fears
about the drug?
The reason the public has good reason to distrust the judgement
of these medical authorities is because of its experience
with them. It is a fact that the public has heard many similar
assurances about other drugs, and used them to their lasting
regret. For example:
In the 1960’s, thalidomide was pronounced a safe drug
for pregnant women experiencing morning sickness. It was not
safe, as thousands of adults with flipper arms and legs can
attest.
In the 1960’s, the birth control pill was developed
and women were assured that its use had no harmful side effects.
The pill is the most popular form of contraception –
used by 12 million women in the U.S. alone. Studies now report
that the pill can be the cause of a greatly increased risk
of stroke, heart attack and blood clots if taken for eight
years or more. (British Journal of Medicine, September 16,
17, 2007.) A study in 2007 by Professor Ernst Rietzeschel
of Ghent University in Belgium has established the likelihood
of finding plaques in arteries increased by 20 to 30% every
ten years of pill use.
Merck Frosst, the manufacturer of Gardasil, also developed
a much-acclaimed painkiller called Vioxx, that was subsequently
used by thousands of individuals suffering from arthritis.
Unfortunately, the drug had the side effect of causing heart
attacks and strokes. As a result, the medication was taken
off the market in 2004 and Merck Frosst has just made a $4.85
billion settlement with 60,000 claimants in the U.S. There
has as yet been no settlement with claimants in Canada.
By 2001, 15 million women in the U.S. alone, as well a millions
of women in Canada and abroad, were taking hormone-replacement
therapy (H.R.T.). It became one of the most popular prescription
drug treatments for menopause, supposedly to allow women to
lead a long and healthier life. However, in July 2002, estrogen
therapy was exposed as a hazard to health, rather than a benefit.
It was found to constitute a potential health risk for post-menopausal
women by increasing risks of heart disease, stroke, blood
clots and breast cancer. The question lingers unanswered,
as to how many women may have died prematurely because their
physician prescribed this medication? A reasonable estimate
would be tens of thousands of women. (New York Times, September
16, 2007).
Europe’s largest drug manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline
developed and sold the diabetic drug Avandia, its second best
selling product last year, but which was subsequently linked
to a higher risk of heart attacks according to a study released
in May 2007. This caused sales of the drug to drop 38% and
gave rise to thousands of class action suits against the drug
company.
These are just a few examples of the here-today gone-tomorrow
nature of medical wisdom. What we are advised about with confidence
one year is reversed the next. One of the contributing factors
to this reversal is that the kind of experimental trials necessary
to determine the truth about the medication is excessively
expensive and time-consuming and very often does not happen.
Hence, the problem with these new drugs so enthusiastically
recommended by the medical profession.
It is alarming that Gardasil’s approval was based on
the testing of only a few thousand patients and almost not
at all (only 1200) on young girls, 9-13 years old, who are
targeted for injection of the drug. (See REALity
Sept/Oct. 2007, p. 5)
As its marketing plan, Merck Frosst used lobbyists with access
to important public officials. In Canada, Ken Boessenkool,
now with the public relations firm of Hill and Knowlton in
Calgary, lobbied the federal government on Merck Frosst’s
behalf. Mr. Boessenkool was a former advisor to Prime Minister
Stephen Harper when he was opposition leader. Jason Grier,
former executive assistant to Ontario Health Minister George
Smitherman, also lobbied on behalf of Merck and Ontario has
now decided to administer the drug to young girls. Even though
only approximately 2-5% of women have Pap smears with cell
changes due to HPV, the medication was pushed as a preventative
cure for cervical cancer. However, no mention was made of
the fact that the drug does not protect against other sexually
transmitted diseases, such as chlamydia, herpes, hepatitis,
trichomoniasis, gonorrhea, syphilis, HIV, AIDS, etc. It’s
all promotion; facts do not count.
The long-term consequences of Gardasil are not known. The
manufacturer admits this and agrees it does not know its effect
on young girls’ cancer risk, on their immunity system,
on their reproductive system, or its genetic effects. In due
course, we will know this, possibly in twenty or thirty years
from now when these young girls, the innocent subjects of
the Gardasil experiment have become grown women and then report
the consequences of their having taken the medication in their
childhood on medical advice.
American Society for Colposcopy & Cervical
Pathology FAW on their website
BACK
TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
