To say that vaccine policy has been a hotly debated, emotional topic, particularly so over the past several months, is an assured understatement. The debate has raged online, in state legislatures, and on television. The consensus, aggressively defended and promoted among corporate news outlets, regulators, and government officials, has been that vaccines are “safe and effective”, that they have saved the human race from rampant disease and mass death, and that it is crucial that we obediently comply with the command to inject. We’ve heard it repeated constantly throughout our lives, but does it reflect the truth, or is “safe and effective” more marketing slogan than fact? If it were true, why the need for the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, which has paid out over $4 billion over the past 30 years to those who have suffered a vaccine injury? If vaccines are safe, why grant their manufacturers blanket legal immunity from lawsuits? If critics of vaccine safety are so obviously wrong, why the push to censor their voices?
You’ll never receive answers to those questions from the mainstream media or their corporate and regulatory allies, because those questions will never be asked by them. To ask them would be to shine a light on uncomfortable facts that surround current vaccine policy, poking holes in a narrative that they are increasingly desperate to hold together. But the questions deserve to be asked, and answered, and the public deserves to know the full story behind the pharmaceutical products they’re told they must inject into their children. If a pharmaceutical product is causing rampant injury and even death, the public deserves to know, regardless as to whether said product is in a syringe or not.
One such product is the HPV vaccine, ubiquitously promoted as the miracle cervical cancer prevention that women have been waiting for. Except for one small fact that is rarely mentioned in the myriad puff pieces extolling the virtues of the vaccine: it has never been proven to actually prevent cervical cancer. For that, the manufacturers would have needed a clinical trial period of several decades, since cervical cancer develops slowly, over a period of many years, with the median age of death occurring at 58. Merck, the maker of Gardasil, couldn’t wait that long. Suffering under the criminal scandal of their heart attack-inducing drug Vioxx, the pharmaceutical giant needed an all-star product that could pull their financials back from the brink. Gardasil, their HPV vaccine, was seen as that product, and they wanted it on the market as soon as possible. So, of course, they cut corners during the clinical trials in an ethically negligent manner, as Slate’s thorough investigation documented in 2017. Instead of proving to cure cervical cancer, the manufacturers only had to prove a positive effect at preventing specific cervical lesions that are thought to eventually progress into cancer.
The Slate investigation found that the Gardasil clinical trials were flawed from the outset, seemingly designed to downplay injuries stemming from the vaccine: participants were told that safety trials had already been conducted and that the vaccine had been proven safe, which many of the participants later found to have been a lie. Participants were monitored for side effects for a meager 14 days, and investigators were given wide discretion to decide for themselves whether symptoms should be attributed to the vaccine. Any symptom not seen as related to the vaccine was classified as “new medical history”. Many of the trial participants developed severe neurological disorders soon after receiving the vaccine, but were finding that trial investigators did not appear willing to entertain the notion that the vaccine was responsible.
Another fatal flaw in the Gardasil clinical trials was the lack of a true saline placebo in the control group. Half of the participants received the Gardasil vaccine, and the other half, save for a few hundred participants, received an injection containing Merck’s aluminum-containing adjuvant, AAHS. Participants that received the aluminum-laced placebo experienced adverse reactions at almost the same rate as those who received the vaccine, leading some to believe that Merck’s proprietary aluminum adjuvant to be a primary culprit in many of the neurological disorders that began to emerge.
And many have blamed the use of aluminum in vaccines as a culprit in the host of neurological disorders emerging at an alarming rate among children.
Why didn’t Merck use an unadulterated, saline placebo in the control group? Were they afraid the contrasting health outcomes between the two groups would derail another billion-dollar pharmaceutical product? Both the vaccine and the placebo also contained a host of other compounds, including polysorbate 80, sodium borate, and L-histidine.
Once the vaccine was approved, it was widely distributed, with Australia being the first country to launch a nation-wide HPV vaccination campaign, despite the fact that cervical cancer is vanishingly rare there, at 1.8 deaths per 100,000 women. Injuries began appearing almost immediately, with around 4,300 adverse events reported to Australia’s ‘DAEN’ adverse event reporting system between April 2007 and March 2018.
In Denmark, clinics opened that primarily treated victims of injuries related to the HPV vaccine. One such clinic, the Syncope Centre, saw over 400 injured girls by 2017. Since 2015, five new clinics have opened to treat injuries related to the HPV vaccine, which immediately saw 1,300 new cases of injuries flood in. Of the 2,300 HPV vaccine injuries officially reported in Denmark, over 1,000 were severe.
You’ll never hear about the flawed safety trials or the numerous injuries from the corporate media, regulators, the manufacturers, or even your doctor, despite knowledge of it being crucial to adequately make an informed decision regarding the vaccine. Instead, you’ll get a chiding for questioning the “safe and effective” dogma and a good dose of cancer fearmongering, amounting to a minor form of emotional terrorism that shames parents into acquiescing to the jab.
There is also a fairly good chance you’ll never learn that the vaccine may increase the risk of cervical cancer if the recipient already has an HPV infection. In the Gardasil trials, Merck reported a 44.6 percent increased risk of developing CIN2 or CIN3, the precancerous lesions most likely to eventually develop into cervical cancer, if the participant had a current HPV infection along with a prior infection. Trial participants were at a 33.7 percent increased risk if they had a current infection and/or a prior infection. GlaxoSmithKline’s Cervarix trials found similar results.
The HPV vaccine was also never tested for its effects on fertility, yet the Gardasil trial data showed a miscarriage rate of around 25 percent for the participants, much higher than the average of 10 percent among young women. Premature ovarian failure, a condition virtually unheard of among healthy young women, has been studied as one possible adverse reaction to the HPV vaccine. In a paper published in 2014, Dierdre Little looked at three cases of premature ovarian failure in teenage girls following vaccination.
The Pap smear, widely regarded as “the most successful screening technique in the history of medicine” for its role in the dramatic decline in cervical cancer deaths, remains the true miracle cancer prevention, reducing cervical cancer rates around 80 percent in the developed world. Despite this, research shows that the false confidence instilled by having received an HPV vaccine could lead to fewer Pap screenings, which would result in increased cervical cancer rates.
Like most miracles, the HPV vaccine has failed to live up to the hype. But that doesn’t stop the corporate media, regulators, and every other beneficiary from hyping. And they don’t plan on informing you of any of the serious questions raised concerning the safety and effectiveness of the vaccine, questions that would compel many parents to refuse it. Instead, the media and regulators deceptively promote the vaccine as a risk-free cancer cure, recklessly so, thereby condemning the public to a hidden game of Russian Roulette with their children’s health.
Anyone who questions the safety or efficacy gets slapped with the pejorative “anti-vaxxer” in an attempt to bully them into silence, but the name-calling appears to be losing its effectiveness. Facts are stubborn, and always seem to bubble up and break out of any imposed censorship campaign. And the fact-free defense of vaccines does nothing but raise more eyebrows. The public is smarter than the media, regulators, and government give them credit for, and they’re realizing that they need more than mere emotional manipulation and appeals to authority to assuage that skepticism.
Nothing should be exempt from criticism, certainly not a pharmaceutical product manufactured by an industry widely known for its boundless corruption. Vaccines aren’t a pure gift from God, but they’re treated as such. For some strange reason, a product of Pharma becomes sacrosanct in the eyes of the public and Political Class once it’s stuffed into a syringe.
