Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Perry's HPV Vaccine: Would A Real Conservative Forcibly Vacc

    Rick Perry And The HPV Vaccine: Would A Real Conservative Attempt To Forcibly Vaccinate 12 Year Old Girls For A Sexually Transmitted Disease?



    September 14th, 2011
    5 comments

    The debate about Rick Perry and the HPV vaccine is a battle for the very soul of the Republican Party. Right now, Rick Perry is parading around the country talking about how "conservative" he is, but would a real conservative attempt to forcibly vaccinate 12 year old girls for a sexually transmitted disease? If Rick Perry really wants government to be as "inconsequential" in our lives as possible, then why did he issue an executive order that mandated that 12 year old girls in the state of Texas be injected with a highly controversial vaccine? Rick Perry did not even consult the Texas legislature and he spat right in the face of parental rights when he did this. Conservatives in the United States love to talk about how much they love individual liberty and about how much they love parental rights, but they keep supporting candidates that are trampling on our liberties and our freedoms. Forcing young girls to be injected with a highly controversial government-mandated STD vaccine is something that we would expect Barack Obama to do. Rick Perry keeps saying that he wishes he would "have done it differently", but you will notice that he is not saying that he was wrong for trying to do it at all.

    The really sad thing is that you have all kinds of "conservative Republicans", "evangelical Christians" and "Tea Party activists" running around defending Rick Perry on the HPV vaccine issue. All of those people should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

    Why in the world should we be injecting pre-teen girls with highly controversial vaccines that are supposed to "protect" them against the consequences of "unsafe sex" in the first place?

    If Bill Clinton had tried to pull such a stunt, social conservatives would have had a field day.

    But because the conservative media has told them that they are supposed to worship Rick Perry they are giving him a free pass.

    It says a lot about the Republican Party today that "Slick Rick" is currently leading in the polls.

    Look, you can support Rick Perry if you want, but if you do, don't even try to pretend that you are a "conservative" anymore. As I have written about previously, Rick Perry has a long track record of doing things that Tea Party activists should abhor. http://endoftheamericandream.com/archiv ... -president

    Rick Perry has dramatically increased government spending in Texas, the size of the debt in Texas and the size of government in Texas.

    Rick Perry is incredibly soft on illegal immigration and he was leading the charge to develop the Trans-Texas Corridor which would have been part of the planned NAFTA superhighway system.
    http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=43433

    If you cast a single vote for Rick Perry, you might as well tattoo "RINO" on your forehead.

    Rick Perry continues to lie about his financial connections to Merck, and the conservative media is letting him get away with it. Fortunately, some in the liberal media are looking into this issue, but because he is an "establishment" candidate they will also probably let the matter drop soon.

    Merck is the manufacturer of the HPV vaccine Gardasil. In 2005, Merck hired Rick Perry's former chief of staff Mike Toomey as a lobbyist. Toomey went to work on his former boss, and on February 2, 2007 Perry issued his infamous executive order.

    Perry knew that there was no way that this mandate was going to get through the Texas legislature, so he tried to sneak it through the back door. It was slimy and it was underhanded. If it had been successful, Merck would have made millions.

    Fortunately, there was a massive public uproar and the executive order was overturned by the Texas legislature.

    It is being reported that Merck paid Toomey as much as $535,000 to promote Gardasil between 2005 and 2010.

    So what is Toomey doing now?

    Well, now he is the head of a pro-Perry "super PAC". The PAC is called "Make Us Great Again", and it can raise unlimited amounts of money for the Rick Perry campaign.

    So how much money did Merck give to Rick Perry?

    The following is what Rick Perry said about that during the recent Republican debate according to the Washington Post.... http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

    “It was a $5,000 contribution that I had received from them,â€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    579
    I am not a Perry fan but this vaccine thing has been beat to death. There was an "opt out" provision just as with all vaccines REQUIRED OR MANDATED ALREADY. If you want your child to be suseptable to a dangerous diesiese then that is your choice. This vaccine is no more or less dangerous than any other. ALL drugs or vaccines have potential side effects Ever watch the commercials on TV for drugs? The possible side effects most times sound worse than the illness. I would not like Perry for President , but this issue is being misused against Perry and perhaps doing a disservice to the vaccine itself by preventing some from being vaccinated perhaps saving their lives.
    I admit I am not an expert here ,,, just seems over blown for political gain.



    How safe is the MMR vaccine?
    The drug company that makes the MMR vaccine publishes an extensive list of warnings, contraindications, and adverse reactions associated with this triple shot. These may be found in the vaccine package insert available from any doctor giving MMR, and in the Physician's Desk Reference (PDR) at the library.(8,9) The following afflictions affecting nearly every body system -- blood, lymphatic, digestive, cardiovascular, immune, nervous, respiratory, and sensory -- have been reported following receipt of the MMR shot: encephalitis, encephalopathy, neurological disorders, seizure disorders, convulsions, learning disabilities, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE), demyelination of the nerve sheaths, Guillain-Barre' syndrome (paralysis), muscle incoordination, deafness, panniculitis, vasculitis, optic neuritis (including partial or total blindness), retinitis, otitis media, bronchial spasms, fever, headache, joint pain, arthritis (acute and chronic), transverse myelitis, thrombocytopenia (blood clotting disorders and spontaneous bleeding), anaphylaxis (severe allergic reactions), lymphadenopathy, leukocytosis, pneumonitis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, erythema multiforme, urticaria, pancreatitis, parotitis, inflammatory bowel disease, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, meningitis, diabetes, autism, immune system disorders, and death (Figure 49).(10,11)
    http://www.thinktwice.com/mmr.htm




    Science shows HPV vaccine safe, beneficialBy Joseph Bocchini, Special to CNN
    September 14, 2011 -- Updated 2310 GMT (0710 HKT)
    Rep. Michele Bachmann has criticized Texas Gov. Rick Perry for signing an executive order mandating HPV vaccinations for girls.STORY HIGHLIGHTS
    Joseph Bocchini notes issue of HPV vaccine safety coming up in recent GOP debates
    He says CDC, others say vaccine helps prevent HPV, which can lead to cancers
    He says vaccine has been widely tested and is safe with side effects rare
    Bocchini: Parents should listen to reliable information in deciding to vaccinate their kids
    Editor's note: Joseph Bocchini is the chief of pediatric infectious diseases at Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center and chair of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices working group on the HPV vaccine for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    (CNN) -- During the recent Republican presidential debate, the issue of vaccinating girls against human papillomavirus, or HPV, came up several times, and some statements have been made that may concern parents of children scheduled to receive the vaccine.

    The statements questioned the safety of HPV vaccines and the rationale for the recommendations for their use from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians.

    HPV vaccines have the promise of improving the lives of both women and men. The recommendations for use of the vaccine are based on scientific data, including safety studies, which indicate hat the benefits of HPV vaccines far outweigh any of the known risks. The safety record of these vaccines is excellent.

    After five years and more than 35 million doses of HPV vaccines given, all of the available scientific evidence shows that HPV vaccines are safe and effective, and that the current recommendations will result in the best opportunity to prevent HPV infection and its consequences in adolescents and young adults.

    HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection. Studies show that 50% to 70% of women will develop an HPV infection within two to five years of becoming sexually active. Although most infections resolve over six to 24 months, some persist and can lead to cancer. Certain types of HPV are responsible for almost all cases of cervical cancer, other cancers of the anal and genital areas and a significant percentage of oropharyngeal cancers in men and women. Other HPV types cause genital warts.

    In the United States, each year about 10,000 cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed, and nearly 4,000 women die of complications of cervical cancer.

    HPV vaccines are an important scientific breakthrough. They prevent infection with the HPV types most commonly associated with the development of cancer and therefore are expected to reduce significantly the number of cases of HPV-related cancer in women and men.

    Two HPV vaccines are available in the United States. The first, Gardasil, was licensed by the Food and Drug Administration in 2006 for girls 9 through 26 years of age to prevent cervical cancer and genital warts. In 2009, the license was extended to include boys 9 through 26. More recent data show Gardasil also prevents other genital cancers in women and anal cancer in both women and men.

    The second HPV vaccine, Cervarix, licensed in 2009 for women 10 through 25 years of age, targets the prevention of cervical and related genital cancers. Both vaccines were studied extensively before the FDA licensed them. The rationale for the recommendation to immunize at 11 through 12 is that the vaccine will be most effective if given before a person becomes sexually active. Protection is expected to last for many years.

    "Catch-up" vaccinations to age 26 are also important. Even though some persons in this age group already will have been infected with one or more of the HPV types in the vaccine, the vaccine will protect them against the HPV types in the vaccine to which they remain susceptible.

    By the time the FDA licenses a vaccine, common side effects are known; evaluation for adverse health effects is an important requirement of the clinical trials that lead to licensure. No serious safety concerns were detected during the clinical trials of either of the two HPV vaccines.

    After a vaccine is licensed, a number of systems are in place in the United States to monitor vaccine safety. These include the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, a passive reporting system that can detect early-warning signals about possible new vaccine adverse effects, and the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink program, for immunization safety studies of possible adverse effects arising from review of those reporting system reports and medical literature.

    But investigation of reports to VAERS since both HPV vaccines were licensed has suggested that rare serious allergic reactions (including anaphylaxis) and fainting spells, which can occur after any immunization, can also occur after HPV vaccine. Vaccine providers, particularly when vaccinating adolescents, should consider observing patients (with patients seated or lying down) for 15 minutes after vaccination to decrease the risk for injury should they faint.

    A recent study was conducted in CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink among females 9-26 years of age who received HPV vaccine (Gardasil). The study found no statistically significant increased risk for any of outcomes studied after vaccination. Studies on HPV vaccine safety will continue and reports of any rare event occurring after receipt of HPV vaccine will be reviewed.)

    And the Institute of Medicine, part of the United States National Academy of Sciences, recently reviewed reported vaccine-related, adverse events and did not find that data supported a causal relationship of HPV vaccine to any neurologic condition. \

    Parents have a great opportunity today to reduce the risk of HPV-related cancers in their children. Parents who have concerns about HPV vaccine and some of the statements made about safety should ask their children's doctors for information. The CDC has a website that provides accurate, up-to-date information about the safety and effectiveness of HPV vaccines.

    Parents would do well to use trusted and reliable resources when making the important decision to protect their children from HPV infection and HPV-related cancers.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2011/09/14/opini ... v-vaccine/


    I think if I were considering taking a vaccine for any reason , I would take the word of the established medical community over that of home made videos making unsubstantiated medical claims.

  3. #3
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    3 Girls Dead, Others Hospitalized After Gardasil HPV Vaccine

    Anthony Gucciardi
    Tuesday, September 13, 2011

    Following controversy over U.S. state legislatures requiring young girls to take Gardasil, Merck’s vaccine for human papillomavirus (HPV), a number of severe side effects have been observed along with the recent deaths of 3 young girls. Gardasil is now marketed towards men and women up to age 26 as a “preventativeâ€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  4. #4
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    SANE Vax, Inc. Reports Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA Contamination in Gardasil To FDA: Requests Public Safety Investigation

    September 7, 2011
    By Leslie Carol Botha

    TROY, Mont.–(BUSINESS WIRE)–Sep 6, 2011 - SANE Vax Inc. announced today they sent a certified letter to FDA Commissioner, Dr. Margaret Hamburg, to inform the agency 100% of 13 samples of Merck & Companies HPV 4 Quadrivalent vaccine, Gardasil™ have been found to be contaminated with recombinant HPV DNA. The vaccine vials were from different lots currently marketed in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, France and Poland.

    Medical consumers from these countries asked SANE Vax Inc. to help determine if there is residual recombinant HPV DNA in the Gardasilâ„¢ vaccine currently used by their doctors. They are concerned that the recombinant DNA, if present, may have triggered some of the autoimmune-based inflammatory disorders and malignant tumors observed among children/young women after receiving Gardasilâ„¢ vaccinations.

    According to Norma Erickson, president of SANE Vax, “A sexually naïve girl developed acute juvenile rheumatoid arthritis at age 13 within 24 hours after the third Gardasilâ„¢ injection and her blood sample – tested two years later – was found to be positive for HPV DNA by a local clinical laboratory.â€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    579
    Throughout my examination of the Gardasil vaccine, there has been a steady flow of information, disinformation, and new developments. In my opening article, I wrote about the mandatory ruling in July of 2008 by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that would require all female green card applicants and immigrants between the ages of 11-26 to receive the Gardasil vaccine. As of December 14, 2009, that ruling was reversed.

    In the larger conversation, perhaps no one professional has been quoted, and misquoted, more frequently than Dr. Diane Harper. The recipient of a Masters Degree in Public Health, Dr. Harper is a Professor and Vice-Chair of Research at the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Medicine, specializing in Community and Family Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bioinformatics and Personalized Medicine.


    Dr. Diane M. Harper

    I first contacted Dr. Harper in September 2009 to get a primer on the Gardasil vaccine, and to gain insight into the issues that were being raised about the marketing and the safety of the vaccine. In addition to the questions that I raised this month with Dr. Harper, I asked her to contribute a statement that would clearly elucidate her point of view in her own words. She sent me what follows via e-mail.

    Statement:
    "The most important point that I have always said from day one, is that the use of this vaccine must be done with informed consent and complete disclosure of the benefits and harms of Pap screening and HPV vaccines. The decision to be vaccinated must be the woman's (or parent's if it is for a young child), and not the physician's or any board of health, as the vaccination contains personal risk that only the person can value.

    As all of the information in the United States concerned Gardasil, since that was the only vaccine approved in the U.S. from June 2006 until this past October 2009, my comments have been focused on Gardasil.

    My points are as follows:

    The Benefits of Pap Screening:
    • Individual benefit to detect early precancers.
    • Public health benefit: Only when 70% of the population has been screened will the population incidence of cervical cancer drop.
    • Pap tests do not kill or handicap.

    The Harms of Pap Screening:
    • Screening must be repeated throughout a woman's life. One screen is not sufficient to protect her from cervical cancer.
    • False negative rate of cytology screening: Among the women who develop cervical cancer in the U.S., 30% are women who have been routinely screened, and all their Paps have been normal.
    • False positive rate of cytology screening: Women who screen abnormal are psychologically upset, anxious and left doubting the medical process (i.e. Her Pap was abnormal, but her colposcopy and biopsy were normal, with no explanation why her Pap was abnormal).
    • Quality of life harms: Women with abnormal Paps have anxiety as high as women diagnosed with cervical cancer undergoing their surgical treatment. The stress of going to colposcopy and biopsy can be high for many women. The contemplation of a cervical biopsy and a scraping of the endocervical canal can lead to fear of pain.
    • Relationship harms: Once women are told they have an abnormal Pap and that the Pap is abnormal because of a STD called HPV, most relationships are stressed as the partners attempt to understand who brought the infection to the relationship.
    • Excisional treatments for detected precancerous lesions cause preterm deliveries in subsequent pregnancies, with concomitant low birth weight infants (which puts the infant at risk for life). In addition, scarring from the treatments lead to an increased cesarean section delivery method (as the cervix does not dilate normally due to scarring from prior excisions). These reproductive morbidities occur between 70%-300% more often in women with excisions.
    • Recurrence of HPV associated cervical/vaginal/anal cancers at a rate of 3-12 times higher than those women who never had a cervical cancer precursor or cancer. These recurrences happen around ten years after treatment with peak recurrences between ten and twenty years from the initial treatment.

    The Benefits of HPV vaccination:
    • Cervarix protects against five cancer-causing types of HPV, which lead to CIN 2+ (precancers and cancers).
    • Gardasil protects against three cancer-causing types of HPV, which lead to CIN 2+ (precancers and cancers).
    • Cervarix induces antibody titers for HPV 16 and 18 that are at least ten fold higher than natural infection titers; the antibody titers for the other three cancer causing types (HPV 31, 45, 33) are also significantly higher than natural infection titers, and the titers stay high for at least 7.4 years - lasting the longer of either vaccines.
    • Gardasil only maintains antibody titers for HPV 16 (not 18, not 11, not 6) at five years, making the true long lasting (five years) coverage of Gardasil only for one type of cancer causing HPV.
    • If vaccination occurs within one year of the onset of sexual activity, there will be 57/1000 cases of all CIN 2+ types and persistent HPV 16/18 infections prevented, as compared to only 17/1000 cases prevented if virgins are vaccinated.

    The Harms of HPV Vaccination:
    • Duration of efficacy is key to the entire question. If duration is at least fifteen years, then vaccinating 11-year-old girls will protect them until they are 26 and will prevent some precancers, but postpone most cancers. If duration of efficacy is less than fifteen years, then no cancers are prevented, only postponed.
    • Safety: There is at least one verified case of auto-immune initiated motor neuron disease declared triggered by Gardasil [presented by neurologists at the 2009 American Neurological Association meeting in Baltimore, Maryland). There are serious adverse events, including death, associated with Gardasil use.
    • No population benefit in reduction of cervical cancer incidence in the United States with HPV vaccination as long as screening continues.
    • Incidence rate of cervical cancer in the United States based on screening is 7/100,000 women per year.
    • Incidence rate of cervical cancer if women are only vaccinated with Gardasil is 14/100,000 per year (twice the rate of cervical cancer if young women vaccinated with Gardasil do not seek Pap testing at 21 years and the rest of their life).
    • Incidence rate of cervical cancer with Cervarix vaccination is 9/100,000 per year-- better than with Gardasil, but still more than with screening alone.
    • Incidence of cervical cancer without screening and without vaccination is nearly 90/100,000 per year. The combination of HPV vaccine and screening in the U.S. will not decrease the incidence of cervical cancer to any measurable degree at the population level. Those women who do not participate in Pap screening, and who are vaccinated, will have some personal benefit for five years for Gardasil and 7.4 years for Cervarix (maybe longer), but they will not affect the population rates.

    Boosters for Gardasil after antibodies wane makes the cost of vaccination escalate significantly, and cause implementation challenges to reach those women who might want to be revaccinated."


    Questions:

    Can you explain what your role as a "principal investigator (PI) for clinical vaccine trials" for Merck (Gardasil) and GlaxoSmithKline (Cervarix) entailed?

    "Principal investigator means that I was responsible for assembling a research team to recruit participants, deliver the health care during the study, collect biological specimens at the correct time, and retain subjects over the entire time frame of the study. After the data collection is complete, I have a professional/medical/clinical obligation to review the data for interpretation, comment and publication. There are instances when industry will exclude a PI from participating in the data publication process. In total, for Merck and GSK, our team enrolled and followed nearly 3000 women in these studies. We have been participating in these trials as early as1997 when the first protocols were written."

    Some reports state that you received no compensation; others qualify you as a "paid consultant." What was your relationship with these companies?

    "The institutions at which I conducted the clinical trials were reimbursed for the costs of conducting the trials. I received no direct money for conducting the trials. I was a consultant for both GSK and MERCK, for which I was paid."

    The public has identified you as a doctor knowledgeable about HPV and the vaccines, potentially without an agenda. Can you explain what you support about the Gardasil vaccine and what you see as its faults?


    "I am an international expert in HPV science, its vaccines, its clinical disease and treatment. I have personally seen tens of thousands of women with abnormal Pap smears and have a referral clinic/office that includes women coming from all continents of the world to consult for my opinion on their personal care.

    Gardasil offers sexually active women, who do not currently have HPV 6, 11, 16, or 18 infections, protection from genital warts and CIN 2+ disease for five years. If the vaccinated person is not sexually active during the five years of its efficacy, then the vaccine has not protected her from disease (as we do not have evidence that Gardasil offers efficacy any longer than five years). Its faults include tiny antibody titers for all HPV types other than HPV 16; limited protection; limited duration of efficacy; and safety concerns (as outlined in my opening statement)."


    Can you comment on the disconnect between the fact that efficacy was proven only in the 16-26 year old demographic, yet Gardasil is being approved for those in the 9-26 year old demographic.


    "Immunologically, the disconnect is explained by two studies. One study in the 16-26 year old women showed both antibody titers and efficacy. The second study in 9-15 year olds showed similar antibody titers to those induced in 16-26 year olds where efficacy was seen. Hence, the inference is that efficacy must exist in 9-15 year olds. The fault in this logic is that 9-15 year olds may not be exposed to the virus until after the vaccine has waned."

    Do you believe that the Gardasil vaccine, as it currently stands, could present more risks to a young girl or woman than the possibility of cervical cancer?

    "Pap smears have never killed anyone. Pap smears are an effective screening tool to prevent cervical cancer. Pap smears alone prevent more cervical cancers than can the vaccines alone.
    Gardasil is associated with serious adverse events, including death. If Gardasil is given to 11 year olds, and the vaccine does not last at least fifteen years, then there is no benefit - and only risk - for the young girl. Vaccinating will not reduce the population incidence of cervical cancer if the woman continues to get Pap screening throughout her life.

    If a woman is never going to get Pap screening, then a HPV vaccine could offer her a better chance of not developing cervical cancer, and this protection may be valued by the woman as worth the small but real risks of serious adverse events. On the other hand, the woman may not value the protection from Gardasil as being worth the risk knowing that 1) she is at low risk for a persistent HPV infection and 2) most precancers can be detected and treated successfully. It is entirely a personal value judgment."



    Has the original Gardasil marketing campaign of "one less" muddied the waters and misinformed the public, who heretofore believed that a Pap smear was sufficient to protect them from cervical cancer?


    "If women were participating in Pap screening, or if as a parent you educated your daughter to seek Pap screening at the appropriate age (21 years) for her entire life, then she would have been very unlikely to be at risk for being "one" and would not be "one less." She would not have been "one" to begin with!

    Yes, the marketing campaign was designed to incite the greatest fear possible in parents, so that there would be uptake of the vaccine. If parents and girls were told the benefits and harms of Pap screening and HPV vaccines as described above, an informed and valued decision would have been able to be made. Many may have chosen to continue with a lifetime of Pap screening and forgo the vaccines, with the unknowns of duration of efficacy and safety unable to be answered for many more years."


    Are the protocols of the CDC and VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) properly processing reports of adverse reactions and deaths due to the vaccine? What do you see as the weak link in the VAERS system of collecting data?


    "VAERS is biased in both directions, not allowing any veritable conclusions to be drawn about vaccine safety. If an association with an adverse event is detected statistically, there is not enough information collected in VAERS to determine causation, which is a multi-step process. Likewise, if no association with an adverse event is detected statistically, there is not enough information to reassure the public that no serious adverse events occur. With our new health care reform, we need to budget money to collect true registries of vaccinated individuals and what happens to them after vaccination so that appropriate conclusions can be drawn."

    Could you clarify the content and context of the statements that you made at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination in October 2009, which have been so widely read and misquoted? Specifically the reported quote, "The rate of serious adverse effects is greater than the incidence rate of cervical cancer."


    "The rate of serious adverse events reported is 3.4/100,000 doses distributed. The current incidence rate of cervical cancer in the United States is 7/100,000 women. This is what I said."

    Should there be an informed consent/full disclosure statement that doctors are compelled to deliver to parents before advising them about giving the injection to their daughters, stating that there are small but real risks of death surrounding the administration of Gardasil?

    "The informed consent/full disclosure as I described initially must be disclosed to parents and young women. The questions should be raised, 'How do you want to prevent cervical cancer? Pap screening? Vaccination? Both?"

    Do you think that those who have received the HPV vaccine will become lax with getting their Pap smears, ultimately leading to a greater rate of cervical cancer within the United States population?

    "No one wants the incidence of cervical cancer to increase. But, there is a problem with women's' understanding of what Gardasil offered them. Many vaccinated women have returned to me in clinic with more abnormal Pap tests and more HPV disease. They are tremendously disappointed when told that Gardasil does not protect against all types of HPV, and that they are still at risk for cervical cancer.

    In answer to your question, Yes. Finland has shown us that even a lack of screening for five years, resulting in less than 70% of the population being screened, is enough to increase the population incidence rate of cervical cancer. Yes, there is a real risk that cervical cancer will increase in the U.S. if those women getting Gardasil do not realize that:
    • Gardasil will not protect them for life
    • They can get other HPV infections that lead to cancer that are not covered by Gardasil
    • They need to continue to have Pap tests throughout their lifetime"


    Recent reports state that Gardasil may have triggered MS (Multiple Sclerosis) in some girls receiving the vaccine. What are your thoughts on this?

    "Neurologists at the American Neurological Association have indeed concluded that Gardasil is temporally associated with autoimmune attacks on the neurologic system. The range of neurologic disorders is unknown."

    Can you point out specific "misstatements" that Merck has promulgated about the Gardasil vaccine?

    "Less misstatements, than incomplete statements. For instance, the cumulative incidence of HPV infections for women in the U.S. through the age of 50 years old is 80%. That statement is true. That statement infers that nearly every one is infected with HPV at least one point in their life.

    What is left out is that 95% of all HPV infections are cleared spontaneously by the body's immune system. The remaining 5% progress to cancer precursors. Cancer precursors, specifically CIN 3, progresses to invasive cancer in the following proportions: 20% of women with CIN 3 progress to invasive cervical cancer in five years; 40% progress to cervical cancer in thirty years. There is ample time to detect and treat the early precancers and early stage cancers for 100% cure.

    Other examples include inferences that Gardasil will last a lifetime, with no mention of boosters or limited protection possible. Regarding wart protection promotion, there is no mention that the data showed protection against genital warts in men for only a 2.4-year period of time.

    Gardasil is not really a cervical cancer vaccine. The vaccine prevents HPV infection. not the development of cervical cancer."


    Are there any final comments that you would like to make about the Gardasil vaccine?


    "Until Merck funds a multi-ethnic efficacy study lasting at least fifteen years, the vaccine should be used primarily by women within the first six years of their onset of sexual activity, to gain the most protection possible...if they choose to be vaccinated. The women can also choose to continue Pap screening for their lifetime.

    Within the "first six years" comes from the National Cancer Institute data compiled from the Guanacaste study (Rodriguez - first author) that shows that the prevention rate is 32/1000 women, still much higher than the 17/1000 rate when vaccinating virgins who go on to become sexually active, but less than the 57/1000 women if vaccinated within the first year of sexual activity.

    Cervarix is the superior cervical cancer vaccine, in that it prevents five types of cancer causing HPV infections. Gardasil is the superior vaccine in preventing HPV types causing genital warts."
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marcia-g- ... 05472.html

    Straight from Harpers mouth, and published by Huff post. Not my definitive last voice when trying to find the truth. Quite a bit of the fearmongering is using bits, pieces and parts of what Harper has said. It does appear that her stance is that more research needs to be done but nowhere does she indicate this is a dangerous vaccine , that should not be on the market , and carries side effects with incidences any more or less so than many others. As with any drug or vaccine there will be incidences of serious side effects. Rick Perry is not a doctor and has serious weaknesses that will impact the country in far more serious ways than " mandating" a vaccine that is still on the market and many still continue to recieve today. This issue has no meat on the bone besides emotional value for those whipped into a frenzy over Perry's supposed attempt to use government mandate to " poison , injure and debilitate them." It will be seen for what it is in the end , just a momentary lapse in judgement, which he admits, and nothing more. Better to focus on the real reasons Perry should not be elected President. He changed parties but that only means he has painted over his stripes , but they are still there. Perry is no Conservative in the true sense and never will be.

  6. #6
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Rick Perry Further Retreats From HPV Position

    Benjy Sarlin- September 15, 2011, 9:35 AM

    Rick Perry further backed away from his 2007 decision to require schoolgirls to be vaccinated against HPV, saying he should have made the treatment available only when parents requested it.

    “We should have had an opt-in instead of an opt-out,â€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  7. #7
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696


    TEXAS HPV VACCINATION: PARENTS CAN OPT OUT

    By: Devvy
    February 8, 2007

    © 2007 - NewsWithViews.com

    On February 2, 2007, Governor Rick Perry (R-TX) announced his newest edict via executive order: http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisio ... rders/rp65

    "NOW THEREFORE, I, RICK PERRY, Governor of Texas, by virtue of the power and authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the State of Texas as the Chief Executive Officer, do hereby order the following:

    "Vaccine. The Department of State Health Services shall make the HPV vaccine available through the Texas Vaccines for Children program for eligible young females up to age 18, and the Health and Human Services Commission shall make the vaccine available to Medicaid-eligible young females from age 19 to 21."

    This immediately set off a firestorm on the Internet and talk radio. Those of us who live in Texas know Rick Perry for the corporate lackey he is and how he has sold out this state with the Texas-Trans Corridor (1) to foreign interests and is a proponent of the SPP (Security & Prosperity Partnership), although he will deny it, his actions prove otherwise. News outlets, including our local ones, have given some exposure to this insidious edict reminiscent of Joseph Mengele, known as 'The Angel of Death' during Hitler's reign of terror, but predictably, the media has failed to mention one very important fact: parents may opt out of this forced vaccinating of their daughters either for religious or philosophical reasons:

    “Finally, parents need to know that they have the final decision about whether or not their daughter is vaccinated. I am a strong believer in protecting parental rights, which is why this executive order allows them to opt out." Rick Perry's press release, February 5, 2007 http://www.governor.state.tx.us/divisio ... 02-05.4721

    Millions of Americans have become very educated on the dangers of all these vaccines approved by the FDA as safe. As a matter of fact, Perry wants to assure all parents in Texas that the FDA says this vaccine is safe and so, of course, it must be! According to a recent piece by Warren Maas, http://www.jbs.org/node/2574 "Gardasil's manufacturer, Merck & Company pharmaceuticals, has been spending money to lobby for laws and orders similar to Perry's throughout the nation. According to the Associated Press, "One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff." Additionally, AP reported, "The governor also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign."

    Same old buying politicians for corporate profits. If you live in the State of Texas and are against this latest proclamation by Governor Perry, help spread the word through e-mail lists, at church or at work: parents can opt out and refuse to have their daughters used as guinea pigs for the FDA and the big pharma companies. You can do it on line http://www.governor.state.tx.us/contact or request the exemption form via snail mail:

    Mail Code 1946
    Texas Department of State Health Services
    Immunization Branch
    1100 W. 49th Street
    Austin, Texas 78756
    512.458.7544

    Parents in the State of Virginia: You're next. Your state legislature currently has two bills HB 2035; see here http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... sum+HB2035 and SB 1230; see here. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504 ... sum+SB1230 Both bills call for "required vaccination" but, "a parent or guardian may elect for his daughter not to receive this vaccine." Why should every parent refuse to allow their daughter(s) to be shot up with this stuff? How about this amendment that was rejected in HB 2035:

    HB2035 - AMENDMENT(S) REJECTED BY THE HOUSE

    DEL. MARSHALL R.

    1. After line 73, substitute

    insert

    G. The Commonwealth waives immunity from tortuous liability if a female who is inoculated with the HPV vaccine becomes incapable of naturally conceiving a healthy child carried to live birth or experiences impaired fertility as a result of the HPV vaccine.

    What does this tell you? That somewhere down the line your daughter may end up sterile, unable to have children or risks having a child with birth defects because of this wonder vaccine. But, the FDA says it's safe! Sure, just like VIOXX, the Ortho Birth Control Patch and how many other drugs they've pulled off the market after innocent Americans have died or suffered major health disasters? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15526078/ The FDA is never held accountable, but the lawyers are and have been making millions. If the FDA says it's safe, don't take it. Parents in Maryland: be aware this is already being planned for your state; see here. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,248222,00.html Now is the time to contact your state legislator and senator and tell them you will NOT subject your daughter to this vaccination, period. There must be a huge backlash as we're seeing with the National ID.

    Just some 'real life' to relate. I have four brothers and sisters. All of us had only three vaccinations when little: smallpox, diphtheria and polio. I allowed my daughter to only have those three, also. However, one of my nieces whose mother is an air head liberal, had her daughter shot up with more than 15 vaccinations; she works in the medical industry. By age 10, my niece had developed large breasts way ahead of time. Since she had all those vaccinations, this sweet girl has suffered from chronic respiratory problems, allergies, weight problems (not caused from over eating) and she's sick more than any child should be. I warned her mother not to subject her to a dozen of these shots before age 5, but she wouldn't listen and now at age 13, my niece is suffering the consequences I believe are a direct result of all those shots. None of the rest of us nor my daughter have these health issues nor do they run in my family.

    Opt out v opt in

    Why do smarmy politicians like Rick Perry use the 'opt out' instead of 'opt in' option for these controversial laws or executive orders? Simple. The promoters and advocates are counting on not enough of the affected citizens will know their right to opt out and get snared. If Gov. Perry made this executive order an opt in, no doubt larger numbers of parents would never opt in and his scheme would fail. By making it an opt out option and using propaganda to sell this poison, too many unsuspecting parents who don't get the message will be mislead, allow their daughters to receive this vaccination and years down the road when something happens to their beloved daughter as a result, well don't expect any help from Rick Perry. Of course, by then, the big pharma houses will have more costly treatments to cure the problem they created bringing in more $billion$ of dollars. This is such a slimy way to fool the people of this country, but it goes on all the time.

    Once again, we the people have the opportunity to reject dangerous "choices" and I sincerely hope you will help get the truth out to your friends, neighbors, co-workers, people at your church and via talk radio. Massive rejection will send a clear message to governors like Rick Perry and the big pharma houses that we the people refuse to buckle under to your experiments using our bodies or our children. Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

    (1) Trans-Texas Corridor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Perry

    "Perry has been the lead proponent of the Trans-Texas Corridor, a US$ 7+ billion-dollar highway project, to financed, built and operated by private contractors, notably Cintra, a Spanish owned company, and its minority partner, San Antonio-based Zachry Construction Company (one of Texas' largest road construction companies). Some of the more controversial aspects of the project include tolls, private operation of toll collections, extensive use of eminent domain to acquire property. Perry has come under fire for opposing the public release of the actual terms of the 50-year deal with Cintra to the public; Perry's former liaison to the legislature, former State Senator Dan Shelly, returned to his consulting/lobbying work with Cintra after securing the TTC deal while on the state payroll. All of Perry's gubernatorial opponents oppose the corridor project. The 2006 state party platforms of both the Democratic and Republicans parties also oppose the current corridor legislation. ..."

    Very Important related Information:

    1. Why you should avoid taking vaccines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Perry

    2. National Vaccine Information Center - Attempts to educate parents about the risks of immunizing their children. http://www.909shot.com/

    3. FDA: Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts http://www.fda.gov/opacom/7alerts.html

    4. No Law To Mandate Dangerous, Untested HPV Vaccine http://infowars.com/articles/ps/vaccine ... v_drug.htm

    5. The Cancer Research Money Machine http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd219.htm

    © 2007 - NewsWithViews.com - All Rights Reserved

    Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2,000,000 copies. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.

    She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site (www.devvy.com) contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

    Devvy's website: www.devvy.com

    E-mail is: devvyk@earthlink.net

    http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd247.htm
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  8. #8
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Rick Perry and HPV vaccine-maker have deep financial ties



    By Dan Eggen, Published: September 13

    Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose bid for the White House depends heavily on support from religious conservatives, finds himself confronting an issue that is a flash point for that part of his base: his attempt to order schoolgirls to receive a vaccine that would protect them against a sexually transmitted virus.

    The uproar over the Gardasil vaccine — manufactured by Â*Merck, a major Perry campaign donor — knocked the candidate off-stride during a Republican debate Monday night.

    The vaccine is aimed at shielding girls from human papillomavirus (HPV), a common sexual infection that can lead to cervical cancer. Federal health officials say they are confident that the vaccine is safe, noting that more than 35 million doses have been administered in the United States with no pattern of serious side effects.

    Perry bristled Monday night at accusations from his chief rival for tea party voters, Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.), that he had pushed the vaccine in 2007 at the bidding of Merck, which employed a former aide to the governor as a lobbyist.

    [b]“It was a $5,000 contribution that I had received from them,â€
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  9. #9
    Guest
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    9,266
    Rick Perry and HPV vaccine-maker have deep financial ties

    No really????? This good Christian man wants to protect 13 year old's???? Does the word abstinence mean anything to these 13 year old's...or how about parental control...


    Come one come all come get your Gardasil now!!!!!!! Like it or not

    But campaign disclosure records portray a much deeper financial connection with Merck than Perry’s remarks suggest.


    No say it isn't so!!!!!!

    I think the operative word is Payola!!!!!!

  10. #10
    Senior Member magyart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    1,722
    The Case For Fighting Cervical Cancer

    Many find the public health case for HPV vaccination compelling. Cervical cancer strikes about 12,000 US women a year and kills around 4,000. Strong backers of the vaccine include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Practitioners and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    The vaccine requires three shots over six months and costs upwards of $400, which is not always covered by insurers or government agencies.

    Milwaukee pediatrician Rodney Willoughby, a designated spokesman for the American Academy of Pediatrics, says there's a very good reason for the big push to get pre-teen girls vaccinated. The idea is to get it done well before their first sexual encounter.

    "This is being timed just before you start to have those discussions about the birds and the bees," Willoughby says.

    Studies done before widespread HPV vaccination show that by the time they're 15, nearly 10 percent of American girls are infected with HPV. By age 17, that's doubled to nearly 20 percent.

    Some research also indicates that many parents are clueless about when their children start having sex.
    ************************************************** *********

    The reason this should not be mandatory, is the COST. It's much more expensive than measles, smallpox, chicken pox vaccines.

    Please understand this vaccine should be given BEFORE your daughter becomes sexually active. Too many parents mistakenly believe their daughter will refrain from this until marriage. Not in this day and age.

    I'm sure Sarah Palin never dreamed HER daughter would get pregnant or was even practicing.

    I suspect Perry did this for his financial benefit, not our daughters.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •