Daily Mail Versus the HPV Vaccine – Again

The Daily Mail appears to be attempting to undermine the HPV vaccine program by means of an anecdote and the post hoc fallacy.

On Monday the front page carried the headline:

Girl, 13, left in ‘waking coma’ and sleeps for 23 hours a day after severe reaction to cervical cancer jabs

Leaving aside the fact that “waking coma” is a contradiction in terms, the writer is guilty of the post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy. This is a logicians way of describing the false assumption that, because event B came after event A, then A must have caused B. Sunrise follows the ringing of my alarm clock most mornings but that does not mean that the ringing of the alarm causes sunrise.

The article goes on to say that of “the four million vaccinations carried out over the programme’s first two years, there were 4,445 reported side effects.” Most of these were minor but it is said that “There were four cases of Guillan-Barre Syndrome, which can lead to paralysis. Although the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency notes: ‘There is no evidence that the vaccine has increased the frequency of GBS above that expected to occur naturally in the population’.” In other words, there would have been four cases of GBS if the four million girls had not been vaccinated.

The total number of reported side-effects amounts to one per 900 girls vaccinated. When I fisked a previous anti-HPV vaccine scare story by the Mail, there were 1300 reported cases of side effects from 700,000 girls vaccinated, a rate of about one per 640 girls vaccinated. Clearly the already low rate of side effects is decreasing yet further.

Thye article does mention the reason for the vaccination program – prevention of cervical cancer deaths – but attempts to play it down by saying:

Only 5-10 per cent of women infected with the virus face the risk of the disease developing into cervical cancer.

This process usually takes 15–20 years.

Percentages are all very nice but what consequences do these lead to?

According to Cancer Research UK, there were 957 deaths from cervical cancer in the UK in 2008. Even the Mail admits that the vaccine cuts the risk of cervical cancer by about 70 percent. So had the vaccine been available in the late 1980s that would have meant 670 fewer deaths in 2008, 670 fewer grieving families. The Mail does not mention this. Instead we have Jackie Fletcher of the discredited anti-vaccination group JABS demanding that the vaccine be abandoned until it can be established beyond doubt that it is safe. If she means beyond her doubt, that means banning it forever since as her conduct in helping promulgate the MMR hoax – which resulted in a measles epidemic – made clear, she clings to antivaccination arguments such as Andrew Wakefield’s fraudulant ‘research’ even though they have lost all credibility.

If the Mail succeeds in scaring people away from the HPV vaccine, when a future Parliamentary Committee examines the reasons why there are far higher rates of cervical cancer in Britain than among our European neighbours will Paul Dacre’s successor claim it is an “urban myth” that the Daily Mail is against the HPV vaccine?

About these ads

Tags: , , ,

59 Responses to “Daily Mail Versus the HPV Vaccine – Again”

  1. josephinejones Says:

    Sense about Science have published a ‘For the Record’ piece on their site (here: http://www.senseaboutscience.org/for_the_record.php/77/quotcervical-cancer-vaccine-has-left-our-daughter-in-waking-comaquot):

    “Cervical cancer vaccine has left our daughter in waking coma”

    The Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail and the Metro, 15 November 2011.

    The articles are based purely on the parents’ tentative suggestion.Their teenage daughter has been diagnosed with chronic fatigue syndrome and the symptoms started several weeks after she received the HPV vaccine. The parents are reported to be urging other parents to “get all the facts.”

    Raj Naik, Consultant Gynaecological Oncologist and Clinical Lead of the Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre in Gateshead, UK, responds:

    “No, there is no evidence to suggest this and the article’s claims are unsubstantiated. Adolescent girls are the group most often affected by chronic fatigue syndrome; adolescent girls are the group to whom the vaccine (Cervarix) is administered. The facts about the vaccine are widely available and well documented. The HPV vaccination programme in the UK is likely to save hundreds of women’s lives each year, who would otherwise have died of cervical cancer. A study published in the British Journal of Cancer forecasts that if 80% of 12-13 year olds are vaccinated there will be a 63% reduction in invasive cancer.”

    References
    J Cuzick, A Castanon and P Sasieni 2010 Predicted impact of vaccination against human papillomavirus 16/18 on cancer incidence and cervical abnormalities in women aged 20-29 in the UK. British Journal of Cancer 102:933-939. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605528

    Document type: For The Record

    Published: 17 November 2011

  2. Cindy Says:

    With logic like that I will never get caught in the rain again without an umbrella and be able to say I am wet because it started to rain. Nope, no connection whatsoever. One of the lead researchers for this vaccine has been quoted as saying that cervical cancer is so low in the Western world that it would take vaccinating EVERY SINGLE 11-YEAR-OLD for 60 YEARS to make one iota of a difference in the cervical cancer rates.

    • jaycueaitch Says:

      Would you care to provide a link for that – since as far as I can see the consensus view seems to be that the vaccine will reduce cervical cancer rates by 70%.

      • Cindy Says:

        The researcher was Dr. Diane Harper, and that’s what she told a crowd of several hundred people at the Vaccine Conference sponsored by the National Vaccine Information Center in October 2009. I was there. I heard it. And as a newspaper reporter, I reported it. Unfortunately the stories I wrote about HPV for KPC Media Group in northeast Indiana are behind a paid wall. I was the reporter who published Dr. Harper’s now-famous quote, calling this vaccine “A great big public health experiment.”

    • deteee Says:

      Cindy, I am afraid that an astounding claim like that needs a verifiable citation, rather than what you admit is merely hearsay.

  3. SuzanneL Says:

    You can’t say that the HPV vaccine did not cause this girl’s illness. Since you weren’t there, I would more trust her parents’ direct observation of the cause & effect.

    You say the risk of the Daily Mail telling this story is that there ~might~ be a higher cervical cancer rate in 20 years. There might not be. The vaccine is not old enough to know if it even works as marketed at ~all~.

    Yet the risk of the Daily Mail NOT telling this story is several, or dozens, or hundreds, or thousands more teenage girls killed or crippled by the HPV vaccine in the next 1-5 years.

    This is a game of Russian Roulette via experimental science that sensible parents are not willing to play with their children’s lives. And you, sir, do not have the right to make that decision for them by calling for the withholding of information from them.

    • jaycueaitch Says:

      Josephinejones’ comment above answers your first point rather well.

      Consequently I think I am on safe grounds in saying that the number “killed or crippled” by the vaccine will be, if not zero, then pretty close to it. Where do you get the “thousands” from anyway? Even the Mail is not claiming that many have had serious reactions, let alone fatal ones.

      I am not calling for the with-holding of information – I am calling for the press to stop manufacturing scare stories that endanger public health. They kepth the MMR scare stories going long after all credibility was gone.

  4. Cindy Says:

    There also is absolutely zero, zip, nada proof that this vaccine prevents cervical cancer. It is NOT a cancer vaccine. It is a vaccine that can prevent severe cellular dysplasia caused by 2 viruses that cause about 70 percent of cervical cancer IF the dysplasia goes on to develop into cancer, and if it is ignored (meaning no Pap tests) and allowed to go on to develop into cancer.

    • deteee Says:

      Cindy,

      Gynecologists treat dysplasia and carcinoma in situ aggressively because they know that untreated these will progress in the majority of cases to invasive cancer. I hope you are not suggesting these premalignant grades can be ignored, are you? (because it very much sounds like it).

      The researcher you so favour, Diane Harper, herself said that 30% of invasive cervical carcinoma cases had recently had a “negative” smear.

      When the intervention you are reliant upon (smears)is only partly effective, it makes good common sense to use additional measures for protection. What could be more logical than preventing infection in the first place, rather than waiting til it gets to a premalignant stage, and crossing your fingers in the hope that smears (which many do not have regularly) might pick it up in time to avert death or disabling surgery?

  5. SuzanneL Says:

    You asked for it, you got it statistics – from the U.S. CDC (Center for Disease Control), on tens of thousands of serious adverse reactions, including over 70 deaths:
    http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gardasil.html

    This story is bigger than the U.K., and it’s bigger than just the U.S. Too many girls’ lives have already been destroyed, and the statistics show that there is the non-zero chance for every new shot given, that that child’s life will also be destroyed by that shot. So you are asking parents to play Russian Roulette with their own children’s lives, and that is reasonable.

    • deteee Says:

      You only read what you want to read, don’t you? The CDC info on the page you link to says this:
      “VAERS data cannot be used to prove a causal association between the vaccine and the adverse event. The only association between the adverse event and vaccination is temporal, meaning that the adverse event occurred sometime after vaccination. Therefore, the adverse event may be coincidental”

      You do realise that VAERS is a passive reporting system, and deaths may be reported on the basis of hearsay (“a friend of a friend said…”) and cases of girls dying of things like car accidents are listed?

      According to the CDC (your source):
      “In the 34 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.”

      Hardly the scary “OVER 70 DEATHS!!!” that the antivax lobby would have us believe.

    • deteee Says:

      And another thing – you claim that your source says there were “tens of thousands of SERIOUS adverse reactions”

      Your source begs to differ. It says there were 20,000 adverse events (in total).

      92% of these were minor (eg sore arm, dizziness), and again VAERS says of the serious events that causality is not confirmed – it is merely a report of an event some time following vaccination, which may have been entirely coincidental.

      Why are you deliberately distorting and misreporting what your sources say? Are you just illiterate, or a liar? Is your agenda here to tell the truth, or to promote your ideologically warped antivaccine agenda?

  6. SuzanneL Says:

    excuse me, ~not~ reasonable.

  7. Mike Says:

    Over 70 deaths? I presume your suggestion is that they were caused by the vaccine?

    Happily you link to a page that helpfully points out that “there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination”

    Full quote is at the bottom of my post.

    You are a fuckwit and a cunt. I really can’t be arsed to be reasonable when there are wankers like you lying, putting out false propaganda and trying to interpret surveillance data and epidemiological information when you haven’t got the faintest idea where to start. In fact, as the info on the page you linked to suggests, you actually can’t read to the end of a paragraph.

    ” Thirty four of the total death reports have been confirmed and 37 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. A death report is confirmed (verified) after a medical doctor reviews the report and any associated records. In the 34 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.”

  8. vertigowooyay Says:

    Suzanne: You seem to be ignoring wholesale the very opening paragraph of that CD article:

    “VAERS Limitations
    VAERS data cannot be used to prove a causal association between the vaccine and the adverse event. The only association between the adverse event and vaccination is temporal, meaning that the adverse event occurred sometime after vaccination. Therefore, the adverse event may be coincidental or it may have been caused by vaccination, however we cannot make any conclusions that the events reported to VAERS were caused by the vaccine.”

    I’d say that was a pretty willful omission.

    As for your point about Russian roulette, you have a point, but only if we’re being extremely charitable an assuming correlation, and of course if gun you’re using has about two thousand chambers.

    Cindy:

    So you saw an anti vaccine speech at a conference of the National Vaccine Information Centre? In other news, Republican conference has a pop at democrat policies.

    • deteee Says:

      It strikes me that relying on smears (if done on time or even at all) to avert cervical cancer is a far more lethal form of Russian Roulette.

      One that 12,000 women play each year in the US, and lose. 4000 of those go on to lose big time – they die.

  9. Becky Fisseux Says:

    @SuzanneL

    That’s an excellent link you provided. I quote:

    “VAERS data cannot be used to prove a causal association between the vaccine and the adverse event.”

    Re: Gardasil
    “Thirty four of the total death reports have been confirmed and 37 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report.”

    “In the 34 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.”

    So, no deaths actually attributable to Gardasil.

    Also:
    “There has been no indication that Gardasil® increases the rate of GBS above the rate expected in the general population, whether or not they were vaccinated.”
    and
    “There have been some reports of blood clots in females after receiving Gardasil®. These clots have occurred in the heart, lungs, and legs. Most of these people had a risk of getting blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (the birth control pill), smoking, obesity, and other risk factors.”

    So, no indication that any serious adverse effects are actually down to Gardasil.

    Do you have any more ill-informed foaming at the mouth to do?

    Kind regards,

    Becky

  10. Cindy Says:

    The “speech” that Dr. Harper gave was hardly an anti-vaccine speech. She took the stage for almost a full hour with a full slide program explaining what HPV is, its relationship to cervical cancer, and how it can develop into cervical cancer. She explained that most women who get cervical cancer in the U.S. have not had a Pap test within the past 5 years. She reiterated that there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that this vaccine can prevent cervical cancer because it takes YEARS for cervical cancer to develop, and seeing that the vaccine is only a few years old, there is no way to know if it prevents cancer.

    She also explained that both vaccines work VERY VERY WELL at their intended purpose — prevention of CIN II and III, although Gardasil is beginning to show that it is waning at 5 years. She explained that this was an “excellent” vaccine as an “adjunct” to other cervical cancer prevention methods. But she also said that as far as protection goes for genital warts, the vaccine is showing that it wears off in 2 years. Also the vaccine was tested for genital warts only in men who have sex with men.

    In the face of audience questioning, Dr. Harper would not back down in her support of the vaccine. What is different between what Dr. Harper presented and the hysteria that Merck is spreading is that she was just as concerned about 2 things: 1) that girls will take the vaccine to mean that they no longer have to have Pap tests, thus indirectly leading to an increase in cervical cancer in the Western world; and 2) that the girls will need booster shots because the vaccine will have worn off by the time the girls actually need it.

    She also explained that if you have already had HPV 6, 11, 16 or 18 when you get this vaccine IT DOESN’T WORK. Since it costs too much to test before you get the shot — besides being inappropriate for virgins — getting the shot is a game of roulette in itself because you are assuming that you’re negative when you get the shot.

    And finally, there are many, many studies that show that HPV is NOT just a sexually transmitted disease. Babies have tested positve for it. Children have tested positve for it. Nuns who have never had sex have tested positive for it. Dr. Harper’s “speech” also included the information that HPV is passed on skin-to-skin, and although sex is the most prevalent means of getting it, it definitely is not the only way to get it. In the end, again, Dr. Harper repeated that this is a good vaccine — a far cry from an anti-vaccine speech — BUT it appeared that there may be more adverse reactions in the Western world than there are benefits.

    And by the way, this particular conference had other doctors there who gave “speeches,” including one from Africa, who were very, very much in favor of vaccines. I would think that as a true skeptic you would be totally versed in your topic before you go making accusations. You should have attended the conference. It was quite a learning experience.

    • deteee Says:

      So Dr Harper actually says some reasonable things – She says the vaccine is great, but she also doesn’t want screening to stop, just because there is a great vaccine (sensible).

      She wonders how long the protection of the vaccine will last (a conjecture, but one you gobble up as “evidence” protection is short lived, while concept that the vaccine will prevent cancer is rejected summarily by you, paradoxically if I may say so, indicating how selective you are in what you chose to believe). Last I read, protection is 85% at 8.5 years. So women might need a booster when they are about 30, once the anamnestic response is taken into account (look it up)

      HPV may not just be sexually transmitted, true, but the numbers infected as babies are minute compared to the numbers infected sexually. (Let’s see, maybe you want babies to have annual pap smears next, seeing as how you think this is an issue?)

      And finally, seeing as how “pro-vaccine” this conference was that you attended, isn’t it strange the only sentiments you came away with appear to be antivaccine ones?

  11. Cindy Says:

    Your ridicule of the Pap test flies in the face of the very medical establishment that you defend. It is only BECAUSE of the Pap test that cervical cancer is so low in the U.S. that it’s not even in the top 10 cancers that women get. You really really need to do your homework on this! Now you’ve shown your ignorance, thus destroying any credibility you were trying to establish. LOL. I’ve studied HPV and this vaccine for 7 years. … way before it was a topic of debate, because a local gynecologist who knew I did investigative stories clued me in 2 years before it became a legislative topic, and I started looking it up then. How long have you studied it? I have hundreds of files on my computer and 6 — get that, 6, boxes of paper files that I downloaded from the Internet so that I’d always have the copies.

    • deteee Says:

      I don’t think anyone is decrying the success of the smear programme. However, it clearly fails to prevent cancer (12 thousand cases a year, 4 thousand deaths in the US each year).

      The additions of a successful HPV vaccination programme can perhaps bring these figures down to the hundreds.

      Did car manufacturers do away with seat belts when airbags and ABS systems were introduced? Of course not.

      • Cindy Says:

        You fail to acknowledge that the majority of women who get fatal cervical cancer have either never had a Pap test at all, or haven’t had one within the last 5 years.

      • deetee Says:

        I acknowledge that, but it is a small majority.
        A significant minority have had recent smears.
        Don’t you want everyone to get the best protection, and not rely purely on one strategy that has clear failings?

    • deteee Says:

      Or more relevantly, did car manufacturers look at the new airbags and ABS and say “Nah, we don’t need those, we’ve got seatbelts!”?

  12. Marie Says:

    It is not acceptable that young girls are being left in this state, possibly for decades – there must be much more research done before this vaccine can be declared safe.

  13. Cindy Says:

    I never said I came away from this conference “anti-vaccine.” This conference was about choice, and I came away thinking that choice is a good thing. My children were fully vaccinated and suffered no adverse events. I had all the childhood diseases so I didn’t get any vaccines except the little polio sugar cube I got at age 13. But in the 1980s I suddenly developed a series of allergies. I was encouraged to get flu and pneumonia shots because I was now immune-compromised, which I did.

    Interestingly, I got sick within 24 hours after every flu shot. But I kept on getting them because I kept on believing the old story they give you about you don’t the flu from the shot. I kept on getting the flu shots right into the 1990s and then suddenly I developed an allergy to thimerosal — which made the flu shot something I could no longer get, seeing that it has thimerosal in it. I skipped a couple years and miraculously did NOT get sick. Then my allergy doctor was able to obtain a small percentage of the no-thimerosal doses, so I started getting flu shots again.

    And promptly came down with flu-like symptoms every time I got a flu shot. I say flu-like because of course you can’t get the flu from the vaccine. In 1997 I also was given my 10-year up date of pneumonia and tetanus shots. My arm swelled up like a softball at the point of injection, and I couldn’t move my shoulder for 2 weeks. Within 24 hours I was in bed coughing, wheezing, my nose running, etc., sicker than all get out. But of course I was coming down with something already because of course you can’t the flu from the shot. After I quit coughing and snotting around, I had to go to a rheumatologist, where I was diagnosed with RA. I began treatment for that, and of course was advised to continue getting flu shots since I now had a serious autoimmune disease.

    Thing is, every year I got a flu shot after that, I would get sicker and sicker afterwards. One year I just couldn’t get to the doctor in time for my shot, and he ran out of thimerosal-free shots before I got there. Miraculously, it was the ONLY year I didn’t get sick. The next couple years I got shots again, and each time my arm swelled up bigger and my RA got worse. Then in 2007 it was time for the re-up of my tetanus and pneumonia along with the flu shot, and I had the worst RA flare-up I’d ever had. I literally felt like it’d be easier to die than to continue to endure the pain, that’s how bad it was, beginning with 24 hours of those shots. My allergy doctor finally said he didn’t think I was someone who could take the flu shots and I haven’t had any since,

    As far as the tetanus & pneumonia vaccines, he said I’d enough already to protect me, so don’t worry about it.

    I repeat, I haven’t had a flu shot since 2007 and I haven’t gotten the flu. In fact I haven’t even been sick. I just take 5000 IUs of vitamin D3 a day. That’s it. And I reduced refined sugars and flours in my diet because glucose can cause inflammation, and miraculously, my RA disappeared. I now take NOTHING for the RA. And when I tore my meniscus this summer when I tripped over something, the orthopedic surgeon who treated me, upon hearing this story and getting my health records, said, and I quote: “It is not unusual to get arthralgia and arthritis-like symptoms from vaccines.”

    This may seem off-topic from HPV but the bottom line is I found out the hard way that vaccines can and do cause harm sometimes. Even the great Vaccine Prophet Paul Offit admits that “no vaccine is 100 percent safe.” Why can’t you?

    • deetee Says:

      “Interestingly, I got sick within 24 hours after every flu shot.”

      You realise that immunologically, people who have the greatest side effects from the vaccines are also the people who will react very badly to the genuine influenza?

      Your reactions may be a sign you would do badly when you get the real thing – so think hard before foregoing those shots!

    • deetee Says:

      And I note no-one here said vaccine cannot cause harm. Of course they can.

  14. Hammerdoc Says:

    Nobody has said that vaccines are 100% safe. Nobody “ridiculed” Pap tests either.

    What they have said is the benefits massively outweigh the risks. Are you deliberately misrepresenting what people say or are you incapable of interpreting fairly straightforward comments?

    • Cindy Says:

      I just saw your filth-laden response to jaycueaitch. Yep, you deleted it later, but it was still in my email as a notification. I’m not responding to anything else on this blog because I don’t deal with people who talk like that. That means you can continue this drivel with yourself because I don’t associate with people who have no manners or civility and who rely on sewage language to prove their points.

      • jaycueaitch Says:

        Hammerdoc has not made any “filth-laden” responses to anyone. The only person able to delete comments here is me and I have neither deleted nor amended any post by Hammerdoc.

      • Hammerdoc Says:

        Are you refering to me, Cindy? If so, you might like to go back through the thread and look for a “filth-laden” response.

        When you find it, and realise that it didn’t come from me, I’ll graciously accept your apology.

  15. vertigowooyay Says:

    Conduct, if the filth laden response is in your email, please quote it for clarity.

    Also the NVIC is an avowed anti vaxx organisation, so freedom of choice does not enter into their lexicon.

  16. vertigowooyay Says:

    Bloody iPad. Autocorrect turned ‘Cindy’ into ‘conduct’….

  17. SuzanneL Says:

    Here ya go, Jaiqueaitch. All documented fer ya:
    http://www.naturalnews.com/034205_Gardasil_Merck.html

    My question for you is, have you received your entire course of HPV vaccine? Gaw ‘head! They’re marketing them to men now, too. Will you have your cheeldrun shot up with it, too?

    • headshot Says:

      Sorry, are you seriously suggesting Natural News is a reliable source for detailed medical documentation? All the links they have posted are online news articles, which the blogger here was objecting to in the first place!

      Christ almighty.

    • vertigowooyay Says:

      Yes, I’ll have my children (not entirely sure why you put ‘cheeldrun’ but it comes over as a touch childish) given the Gardisil vaccine. That’s because I’d quite like my daughter protected from cervical cancer. Quite why you’d risk that cancer when the most cursory glance at evidence you’ve posted suggests that risk is by an order of magnitude larger than any vaccine risk is entirely beyond me.

      Also, quoting something off Natural News is actually worse than useless.

  18. colmcq Says:

    “Will you have your cheeldrun shot up with it, too?”

    Gladly

  19. SuzanneL Says:

    There is some problem with online news articles? Would you rather go buy the hard copies? They look legit to me. Maybe you need a better screen.

    Go ahead and shoot up your kids then. But the body count is high enough now that sensible parents say no.

    Sources (for the NaturalNews article):

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/class-action-on-cancer-vaccine/story-fn7x8me2-1226180459908

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/10/feds-contine-ignore-mounting-gardasil-bodycount-0

    http://www.ageofautism.com/2011/10/dr-sin-hang-lee-a-case-study-in-ethics-dont-pay.html

    http://www.kansascity.com/2011/10/18/3215789/hpv-shots-leave-doctor-with-doubts.html

    http://douglassreport.com/2011/10/26/sex-fears-vaccines/

    http://douglassreport.com/2011/10/03/shot-dark/

    http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/10/cdc_recommends_young_boys_rece.html

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/28/us-merck-idUSTRE79R23H20111028

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/034205_Gardasil_Merck.html#ixzz1eT5AXvsN

  20. deetee Says:

    Yes Suzanne, there is a problem.

    First, in order to appraise the validity of scientific evidence, it is appropriate to look at either original peer-reviewed source material, or comment/editorials in relevant and appropriate scientific journals or websites. It is not sufficient to use comment in antivaccine blogs as a source of “evidence”.

    Second, even when you do look at source material, your ability to comprehend it seems to be severely challenged. (is this why you resort to blogs aimed at those with IQs lower than their age, such as NaturalNews?) For example, in a post above you cited the CDC as saying there were “tens of thousands of serious adverse reactions” to HPV vaccine. I pointed out that this was not what they said at all, and that 92% of the 20 thousand reactions documented were actually rated as minor, such as feeling dizzy or getting a sore arm.

    Thirdly, the “body count” as you call it, is around 20,000 dead women from cervical cancer in the USA in the last 5 years, as opposed to 34 highly questionable and likely coincidental deaths following HPV vaccine in about the same period. That’s 20 THOUSAND, in case you missed it (I know your reading skills are somewhat dodgy). If you regard a decision to skip HPV vaccine as “sensible”, I am starting to wonder who is doing your typing, as I doubt you are sensible enough to use a keyboard.

    • SuzanneL Says:

      deetee, The point is that science has been corrupted by money and politics, where even asking the mere question, “What about all these cases whose doctors themselves diagnose them as vaccine-injured?” is ridiculed and bashed. Just like the global warming fraud – once you’ve caught scientists lying, as the self-interested “scientists” employed by vaccine manufacturers have been documented to have done in some cases concerning vaccine “safety”, well then, the trust is broken with the public. You can only tell people so many times not to believe their own eyes. If you get the flu from the flu vaccine 6 years in a row, at some point you stop believing and doing what you’re being told (condescended to like some obedient little child), that the vaccine is not what is actually causing the flu. You simply cannot train the public to stop believing its own eyes forever. At some point there is always somebody who will say, “The Emperor has no clothes!”, and then the whole thing comes down.

      A few scientists bending the rules for their paycheck might seem like a small injury to the vaccine industry at first, like the disclaimer by the CDC, without offering cause or reason, that the VAERS statistics can’t be used to identify cause (oh yeah? Watch me!), but like a pin prick full of MRSA, it’s fatal. The vaccine industry has obsoleted itself, with even a little bit of fraud, and so now the public is moving on in growing numbers.

      We simply WON’T avert our eyes from the documented cases of the horribly HPV vaccine injured, and even if it’s only a 1/20,000 chance your kid will be that kid that is crippled, blinded, or killed, jaycueaitch has admitted he would pull that Russian Roulette trigger on his own child, a demonic response if ever there was one.

      You might enjoy this review of a documentary of the diagnosed HPV vaccine injured, and the mindsets involved in caring about and for them, vs not:
      http://www.thetruthbarrier.com/essays/48-celia-farber/242-documentary-film-review-the-greater-good

      • vertigowooyay Says:

        Suzanne. It is in the interest of pharmaceutical companies to NOT develop vaccines, if we’re implying the profit motive is God.

        Vaccines represent about 2% of pharmceutical profits, becaus they’re mainly a one-dose deal. Preventitive medicine is not in the profit interest of the pharmaceutical industry. Curative medicine is: the antidepressents that patients take on a regular basis for 10+ years, the eye drops I have to take for the rest of my life, the daily insulin injections to stave off diabetes. That’s where they make huge profits, and it’s an industry with a whole host of issues when it comes to published data for studies into curative medication.

        There’s more money to be had in curing measles when it’s caught than there is in preventing it in the first place by one dose, or one dose and a booster. There’s more money to be made from anti-cancer drugs than there is from one Gardisil vaccination.

        This is where your argument utterly falls down. You don’t have the science on your side, and in the end for all your conspiracy theories, you don’t have capitalism on your side either.

        That’s my reasonable bit. Then there’s this:

        “even if it’s only a 1/20,000 chance your kid will be that kid that is crippled, blinded, or killed, jaycueaitch has admitted he would pull that Russian Roulette trigger on his own child, a demonic response if ever there was one.”

        Again, only if the gun has 2000 chambers. And with those odds, the chance of getting cervical cancer and dying from it is far higher, so you seem more fixated on death than any rational person here.

        Finally, the notion of demonic response is reprehensible phrasing. You are an appalling human being if you’s rather believe quack science than actual fact, and your piety as a front for sheer ignorance is astounding. The views of people like you kill other people. It disgusts me.

      • deteee Says:

        Suzanne, I am not sure where vaccine scientists have been caught out lying? Perhaps you could cite specific instances, so we can see how accurate or relevant this is. Can you also give specific examples of where scientists have “bent the rules to aid their paychecks”?

        I suspect you have lost trust in vaccine science because you have listened to the lies of the antivaccine lobby. If you want specific instances of where this has happened, I can provide some but the list is actually very long.

        You cannot get flu from the flu vaccine – what happens is that your body’s immune response to the vaccine simulates a minor infection – special cytokine chemicals are released as part of the process, and these can cause fever and aches. It’s not an infection, though there is a commonly held myth which you obviously subscribe to that this is “flu”.

        Finally, I suggest you have a totally distorted perception of risk. I demonstrated that over 5 years 20 thousand women die from cervical cancer in the States, and even if we assume that the HPV vaccine DID kill the 34 women who are confirmed to have died within a few weeks of HPV vaccination (there have to be coincidental deaths in this number – impossible for there not to have been), even a decerebrate cockroach can see the risks to women from cancer far outweigh those from the vaccine.

        But no, you’d rather your daughter took the 1 in 200 risk of getting cervical cancer than a 1 in 20,000 risk of HPV vaccine damage – that’s completely irrational. I guess you don’t let your daughter drive or ride in a car either (33 thousand deaths each year on US roads for no medical benefit), and logically you wouldn’t let her get antibiotics for bacterial meningitis (9 in 10 risk of death without them) simply because there is a 1 in 100,000 risk of dying from antibiotic allergy.

        I fear you are letting your ideological opposition to vaccines overrule common sense, and are actively seeking (poor) reasons to justify your choice.

  21. vertigowooyay Says:

    Oh, and that film is so rife with lies, misinformation and plain stupid, citing it actually damages your argument.

  22. vertigowooyay Says:

    “At some point there is always somebody who will say, “The Emperor has no clothes!”, and then the whole thing comes down.”

    Point is, you seem to be shouting that at a fully clothed Emperor.

  23. dave Says:

    suzanne

    these guys dont know what they are talkin about. Have you ever been to whale.to.a? if you have not then you should because it contains all the evidence you need to put these pharmashills to shame

    • jaycueaitch Says:

      I invoke Scopie’s Law:

      In any discussion involving science or medicine, citing Whale.to as a credible source loses you the argument immediately …and gets you laughed out of the room.

    • vertigowooyay Says:

      Ah Dave. Hey, tell you what, explain the cunsprucy for us all so we can tear it apart, point and laugh.

      • dave Says:

        you clearly have no idea have you? have you looked at the FACTS? thought not. I choose -like suzanne – to be INFORMED. Can you even spell that?! Where is your evidence of a double blinded vaccine trail to show that there is no harm? Exactly. There is no such study. Why has no one looked at the toxicilogical effects of mercury in the shots they put in our kids? How can you sit there and just let the pHARMalies brainwash you? Shame on you.

  24. Rainbow Says:

    Let’s see you argue with this one from Discover Magazine quoting actual researchers and clinical evidence: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2011/11/23/how-effective-is-the-hpv-vaccine-at-preventing-cancer-a-closer-look/

    • jaycueaitch Says:

      An interesting discussion as to whether the vaccine is as effective as advertised. Could you point out the bit where it supports the scare stories about side-effects? I think I missed it.

  25. vertigowooyay Says:

    Dave:

    Ah, right, Poes law.

    Just in case you’re not a sockpuppet:

    1 – Mercury (or rather Thimerosal, which contained a murcury compound) was removed from vaccines in 2002. If mercury is associated with autism (hint: it isn’t), why haven’t autism rates dropped since then?

    2 – Why are symptoms of mercury poisoning different to symptoms of autism?

    Also, capitalising the ‘harm’ in ‘pharmalies’ (by the way, I don’t think that’s actually a word) is very silly. Just makes you look like a hysterical fool. Which, of course, you are, but that’s by the by.

    • dave Says:

      If you’d have looked at the FACTS then yo would see that there is still mercury in the flu shots and other vaccines. The reason autism rates continue to rise is the amount of vaccines the kids recieve which is going up and up. Now, maybe you’d like to tell me where the unvax/vax study is?

  26. jaycueaitch Says:

    “Dave” is a spoof. You can stop now ‘Dave’.

  27. A Fourth Year of Steam « Letting Off Steam Says:

    [...] health quackeries examined were divine straightening, the Daily Mail’s continued assault on the HPV vaccine and the return of the detox [...]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 162 other followers

%d bloggers like this: