Gardasil: Both Worthless And Dangerous

Gardasil, Merck’s basically useless wonder drug has big news this week. Strangely enough, you won’t hear much about it in the mainstream media.

Gardasil Now Pushed On Boys

First, the FDA has approved Gardasil for vaccinating boys ages 9 to 26. It will help prevent genital warts (which occurs very rarely among men), and will prevent sexually promiscuous 9 and 10 year olds from spreading strains of cervical cancer to their equally promiscuous partners. How unfortunate that this vaccine which is being forced on our young girls will now be forced onto little boys as well!

One author commented that many parents may not see the usefulness of vaccinating their boys “altruistically”—to prevent a possible disease in some woman down the line. With the side effects from this vaccine including a risk of death, I’m pretty sure I’d tell my son to stay away!

HPV Not As Scary As They Make It Seem

Second, the Population Research Institute sent out an interesting Weekly Briefing about Gardasil. A PRI staffer, Joan, attended a presentation on the drug by Dr. Diane Harper, “the leading international developer of the HPV vaccines, [who] gave a sales pitch for Gardasil.”

Here are some excerpts from Joan’s account:

The theory behind the vaccine is that, as HPV may cause cervical cancer, conferring a greater immunity of some strains of HPV might reduce the incidence of this form of cancer. In pursuit of this goal, tens of millions of American girls have been vaccinated to date.

As I sat scribbling down Merck’s claims, I wondered why such mass vaccination campaigns were necessary. After all, as Dr. Harper explained, 70% of HPV infections resolve themselves without treatment in one year. After two years, this rate climbs to 90%. Of the remaining 10% of HPV infections, only half coincide with the development of cervical cancer.

[Moreover,] the incidence of cervical cancer in the U.S. is so low that “if we get the vaccine and continue PAP screening, we will not lower the rate of cervical cancer in the US.”

26 million doses of Gardasil have been distributed in the US already. Many of these went to young girls, where school districts have added the vaccine to a list of mandatory vaccines for school attendance. But, strangely enough, Gardasil has had “no efficacy trials in girls under 15 years.” A small group was vaccinated, but was not followed long enough to conclude the vaccine was effective at producing anti-bodies. And yet we’re still pushing this vaccine onto these girls!

Additionally, Dr. Harper pushed upon doctors present the need to give girls multiple booster shots, since they don’t know how long their immunity will last.

Gardasil Is Deadly

Joan continues:

I left Dr. Harper’s lecture convinced that Gardasil did little to stop cervical cancer, and determined to answer another question that she had largely ducked: Is this vaccine safe?

Here’s what my research turned up. To date, 15,037 girls have officially reported adverse side effects from Gardasil to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). These adverse effects include Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation and many others. The CDC acknowledges that there have been 44 reported deaths. …In the clinical studies alone . . . 1 out of every 912 who received Gardasil in the study died. The cervical cancer death rate is 1 out of every 40,000 women per year.

Why The Big Push, Then?

But the most interesting part of the article is Steve Mosher’s commentary at the end:

I think that they see Gardasil as what one might call a “wedge” drug. For them, the success of this public vaccination campaign has less to do with stopping cervical cancer, than it does with opening the door to other vaccination campaigns for other sexually transmitted diseases, and perhaps even including pregnancy itself. For if they can overcome the objections of parents and religious organizations to vaccinating pre-pubescent—and not sexually active—girls against one form of STD, then it will make it easier for them to embark on similar programs in the future.

After all, the proponents of sexual liberation are determined not to let mere disease—or even death—stand in the way of their pleasures. They believe that there must be technological solutions to the diseases that have arisen from their relentless promotion of promiscuity. After all, the alternative is too horrible to contemplate: They might have to learn to control their appetites. And they might have to teach abstinence.

Share Tweet Email