Did Merck intentionally deceive the FDA, doctors, and parents with its Gardasil vaccine research? In other words, did Merck design rat studies and human clinical studies that would fail to identify vaccine harm, and give a false sense of security to those who would approve or use the vaccine? Based on the evidence I have uncovered, I believe it is possible to conclude that its future marketing plans and the protection of Merck’s profitability for its shareholders were higher priorities than the safety of the HPV vaccine called Gardasil.
By the age of 50, the CDC reports, more than 80% of American women will have been infected with human papillomavirus (HPV) during their lifetimes. And yet, amazingly, over 99,000 out of every 100,000 women will never be diagnosed with cervical cancer. (It is useful to point out that deaths from cervical cancer are an even more miniscule 1.5 cases per 100,000 female population per year.) Those statistics say that the vast majority of girls who don’t go along with the crowd and refuse the vaccine recommendations will never get cervical cancer. The question that should come to everybody’s mind: “Why vaccinate millions of young girls (and boys) when the entirely theoretical chance of any of them ever getting cervical cancer approaches zero? Not only that, but skeptical parents will save a ton of money (an outrageous $140 per shot, plus office call charge) as well avoiding the distinct possibility of seeing their children become chronically ill with one or more autoimmune disorders that are becoming increasingly common among fully vaccinated children.
In September, the following headline appeared in the UK Daily Mail, “Grandmother, 55, died from cervical cancer after her GP dismissed her symptoms as the MENOPAUSE.” This woman knew something was wrong, visited her doctor multiple times, and had her symptoms blamed on age (menopause), instead of being run through normal diagnostic procedures which would have detected her cancer when it was still curable. What would have most likely prevented her untimely death? A reliable HPV detection method that included genotyping and regular Pap smears. However, policy makers at the NCI have not made these options readily available to medical consumers. Policy makers have left women with no choice but to educate themselves, demand the reliable test procedures they need and refuse those options which provide little benefit and substantial risk. Women must stop allowing themselves to be manipulated by the news media and industry-paid consultants, whether they are in the government or the academic world. You have a choice – medical consumer or medical subject?