The HPV vaccine

I’m sure you’ve heard already, here and there, about the vaccine against HPV (I hope you’ve heard more bad news than good news :D). Let’s still have a summary of the facts, because this vaccine can not only be useless, but it can even harm a lot.

The story that reveals the truth starts with the HiFi DNA Tech company that was producing HPV testing devices, based on the analysis of the DNA. They were trying to convince the FDA (The Food and Drug governmental Administration of the USA) to classify this HPV test as a class II (something not necessarily safe, but allowed to be sold on the market), not as a class III (something that is not allowed on the market). The arguments that HiFi DNA Tech used were the following:

- For more than 20 years, FDA named HPV detection tests as “cervical cancer detection tests”
- But since 2003, FDA changed their position and stated that HPV is not linked with the cervical cancer
- HiFi DNA Tech arguments that their test is no longer a cervical cancer detection test, but it merely detects the presence of the Human Papilloma Virus. So the company claims that the test merely finds the presence of a virus, but it does not make a diagnose for a disease (because this last one would have been a harder to achieve standard for a class II testing).

In October 12, 2007, HiFi DNA Tech sues FDA to force the Class II classification for their HPV detecting technology ( http://www.news-medical.net/?id=31180). The same year, in March, HiFi DNA Tech submitted FDA the reclassification request. From this petition anyone can see that FDA knew all along that HPV is not linked to cervical cancer.

So, we have a company that produces HPV testing devices that requests FDA the reclassification for Class II based on the fact that FDA already stated that HPV does not directly cause cervical cancer. This proves that FDA knew this for many years, and still it approved the vaccine against HPV as being something life-saving, and, moreover, they enforced mandatory vaccinations, so everything was just a big hoax that was based on the population’s fear of cancer.

The reclassification petition is still posted on the FDA website ( http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/07p0210/07p-0210-ccp0001-01-vol1.pdf). In this text indeed we can find that FDA sustained in March 2003 that most of the HPV infections are short-term and are not linked to cervical cancer. With other words, since 2003, FDA has not considered HPV infections as being a high-risk infection. Indeed, the statement from 2003 can be found on the FDA website, http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2003/NEW00890.html . We can read in this report that the DNA testing for the detection of HPV is not intended to replace the Paps screening and it was not intended for women under 30 years with normal Paps results. More, it states that even if in this particular group of women, the rate of HPV infections is high, most of the infections are short-term and are not associated with cervical cancer. In the same document we can see that most of the women who are infected with HPV are capable to fight with the virus and their health does not suffer any long term consequences.

In other words, HPV does not cause cervical cancer, and FDA has known this since 2003. HPV infections “cure themselves”, without a vaccine and without drugs. HPV does not cause cervical cancer, but this cancer can be initiated after a persistent illness state, that makes the patient more vulnerable to persistent infections (as you can read in the petition from 2007). More important, we can find in the petition from 2007 that the vaccine raises the risk of precancerous lesions. HiFi DNA Tech claims that now, because of the vaccines, the HPV detecting tests are more necessary than ever, since the vaccine raises the risk of developing precancerous lesions of high-risk with 44.6% in women testing positive for relevant HPV strains, as FDA sustains in the document “Gardasil HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine” from May 18, 2006, that you can find here: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/briefing/2006-4222B3.pdf .

At page 13 in this document we see that if the vaccine is given to a woman that already has an inactive strain of HPV, it “activates” the infection and directly causes precancerous lesions. This means that the only women that could consider this vaccine safe would be the ones that have not started their sex life. And (in the states where it is mandatory) even if the doctors would ask the patients, it’s not sure that the students would be honest, especially if their parents are present. So, not only that this vaccine harms sexually active women, but it also has no effect on virgins. Because it is already proved that HPV is not directly connected to cervical cancer. And then, is this vaccine helping anyone? Well, let’s see:
- If you are a virgin woman and you do not vaccinate yourself – there is no risk of cervical cancer
- If you are a virgin woman and you vaccinate yourself – you do not gain any medical benefit from this vaccine, because it does not guarantee that you will not have cervical cancer
- If you are a sexually active woman and you do not vaccinate yourself – the presence of HPV is limited by your own body and it does not lead to cervical cancer
- If you are a sexually active woman and you vaccinate yourself – you have a 44.6% higher risk of precancerous lesions and you do not benefit of any reduction in the risk of cervical cancer.

We can conclude that this vaccine does not bring benefit to any woman. There are even some groups of women that have to suffer upon it.

It is hilarious that Merck, the manufacturer of the vaccine, publicly suggested that even the boys should receive the vaccine against HPV, because there exists the possibility to have oral sex with girls that carry this virus. I’ll say it again, boys should be vaccinated against a virus that is claimed to be linked with cervical cancer!

Next, let’s have a look at an article published in the “Journal of the American Medical Association” in August 2007, with the title "Effect of Human Papillomavirus 16/18 L1 Viruslike Particle Vaccine Among Young Women With Preexisting Infection” (available here: http://louisville.edu/medschool/med-peds/residents/journal-club/11-07%20Article.pdf ). The research determines the ineffectiveness of HPV vaccinations in women who already have a strain of HPV (meaning all sexually active women, regardless their age). In this document you can see not only that this vaccine does not help in protecting women against HPV, but it even causes the raise of the presence of HPV strains. The final conclusion of the article is that there is no evidence that this vaccine would be useful for someone and that it does not even offer a protection for 12 months against HPV.

These data from behind the HPV vaccine “business”, together with the information worldwide published after the vaccinations began (the deaths of some young women, plus the infertility given by the vaccine and noticed in all vaccinated women who tried to get pregnant) will help you in deciding not to have this vaccine against HPV.

I wish you health and wisdom!

Besides the links above, this article is based on the research of Mike Adams that you can read here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Report_HPV_Vaccine_0.html and that I was glad to bring to the Romanian half of my blog for people who do not speak English to read all the good information.