Merck and UAB Recruiting 16 to 26 Year Old Mothers Who Just Gave Birth to Enroll in Gardasil 9 Vaccine Trials

March 5, 2018

Merck and UAB Recruiting 16 to 26 Year Old Mothers Who Just Gave Birth to Enroll in Gardasil 9 Vaccine Trials

Are postpartum 16 to 26 year old mothers in a position to decide to take part in Gardasil vaccine trials 0-4 days after giving birth?

UPDATE

Since this story was published representatives from SaneVax, Inc., one of the Internet’s leading portals on the dangers of the Gardasil vaccine, notified us that there have been entries into the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database citing instances where breast-fed healthy infants have died after their mothers were vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine. One such case is VAERS ID: 398755

Information has been received from a physician for the pregnancy registry for GARDASIL, concerning a female who on 01-SEP-2010 was vaccinated with the first dose of GARDASIL (lot number not reported) intramuscularly while breastfed her baby was 40 day old (WAES 1009USA00625), it was reported that the mother”s and baby”s health were good (well controlled). On 02-SEP-2010, in the morning, the baby”s condition was still good but in the afternoon the condition suddenly drop. The family immediately took the baby to hospital and it did not help since the baby died shortly after that. The cause of death was not reported, it was also reported as “not recovered from death”.

Could it be that nursing mothers who are vaccinated with Gardasil are passing on the contents of the vaccine to their infants through their breast milk?

by Brian Shilhavy
Editor, Health Impact News

The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) in collaboration with Merck pharmaceutical company is planning to conduct Gardasil 9 vaccine trials on postpartum mothers between the ages of 16 to 26 immediately after giving birth at the UAB hospital.

According to ClinicalTrials.gov, the desired outcome of this study is to have more young women vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine, because they do not believe enough young women are being vaccinated:

Due to low HPV vaccine uptake in the US, innovative approaches to vaccinating vulnerable populations are necessary in order to maximize the cancer prevention potential of this vaccine.

Previous studies on the Gardasil vaccine have shown that young women who are in the hospital due to giving birth are open to receiving the Gardasil vaccine, particularly Hispanic populations:

The puerperium is a time period when women are engaged in the healthcare system and have almost universal access to affordable health care.

Two prior studies have shown that postpartum HPV vaccination is acceptable to patients, and high rates of vaccination were achieved in these primarily Hispanic populations.

Merck and UAB want to test the vaccine on 16 to 26 year old postpartum mothers because “the immune response in young women is less robust than in adolescents,” and because “no studies have examined immunogenicity in postpartum women specifically.”

Therefore, 16 to 26 year old young mothers who have just given birth at the UAB hospital will become test subjects of the Gardasil 9 vaccine.

The study is scheduled to start on June 1, 2018.

The “Responsible Party” who apparently designed the study at UAB is Professor Warner Huh.

The contact person for the clinical vaccine trials is Sarah Dilley, MD 205-934-2749

sd*****@ua***.edu

. (Source.)

Should Young Mothers Who Have Just Given Birth Participate in these Vaccine Trials?

Marching for Justice after HPV vaccinations

Protests over the Gardasil HPV vaccine in the streets of Colombia. Story.

The Gardasil HPV vaccine is probably the most controversial vaccine in the world right now, with many countries withdrawing their approval of the dangerous vaccine.

Outside of the U.S. parents and organizations have taken legal action against Merck for injuries and deaths due to Gardasil, and in France one doctor who previously worked for Merck predicted that Gardasil would become “the greatest medical scandal of all time.”

Negative press regarding the HPV vaccine can be found outside the U.S. in countries like Spain, Japan, Ireland, Denmark, the UK, India, and many others.

As we just reported recently, the documentary film trilogy, Sacrificial Virgins, which recounts the stories of many young women injured by the HPV vaccine, received the prestigious Best of the Festival award, and the Watchdog Spirit Award in recognition of the investigation “in search of truth and justice” at the Watchdog Film Festival, held in Brisbane, Australia. (Story here.)

Thanks to U.S. laws that protect pharmaceutical companies from being sued due to damages and deaths resulting from vaccines, much of the controversy surrounding Gardasil has been censored in the corporate “mainstream” media.

In the alternative media, however, millions of Americans are reading about the controversial vaccine, and it has been the #1 topic on Health Impact News for the past 3 years.

Will these young mothers in Alabama have sufficient information to make the decision to participate in these Gardasil vaccine trials just after giving birth? Will they understand the potential risks for harm, which includes heart disease (POTS), premature menopause (“Primary Ovarian Failure”) and a whole list of autoimmune disorders that have been hidden from the public but revealed by a 2017 study done in Mexico?

Reference

Postpartum HPV Vaccination – ClinicalTrials.gov

Some of the girls injured or killed by the HPV vaccine published at Health Impact News.

Gardasil Killed my 16 Year Old Daughter: She Died the Most Excruciating Painful Death

Girl Commits Suicide After Gardasil Vaccine Destroys Her Life

California Nurse Gives Gardasil Vaccine to Own Daughter who Develops Leukemia and Dies

Infant Accidentally Vaccinated with Gardasil – Mother Blamed for Vaccine Injuries and Baby Medically Kidnapped

Iowa Girl Faces Death: Life Destroyed by Gardasil Vaccine

Gardasil Vaccine Given without Consent and Ruins Life of 14 Year Old Girl

After 3 Years of Suffering 19 Year Old Girl Dies from Gardasil Vaccine Injuries

Gardasil: The Decision We Will Always Regret

The Gardasil Vaccine After-Life: My Daughter is a Shadow of Her Former Self

Gardasil: An Experience no Child Should Have to Go Through

I Want my Daughter’s Life Back the Way it was Before Gardasil

Gardasil Vaccine: Destroyed and Abandoned

15-Year-Old Vaccinated by Force with Gardasil now Suffers from Paralysis and Pain

Recovering from my Gardasil Vaccine Nightmare

Gardasil: We Thought It Was The Right Choice

“HPV Vaccine Has Done This to My Child”

13 Year Old World Championship Karate Student Forced to Quit After Gardasil Vaccine

If I Could Turn Back Time, Korey Would not Have Received any Gardasil Shots

What Doctors Don’t Tell You: Our Gardasil Horror Story

Family Fights U.S. Government over Compensation for Gardasil Vaccine Injuries

Gardasil: When Will our Nightmare End?

HPV Vaccine Injuries: “I Cannot Begin to Describe What it is Like to Watch your Daughter Live in Such Agony”

Gardasil: Don’t Let Your Child Become “One Less”

The Gardasil Vaccine Changed Our Definition of “Normal”

Gardasil: I Should Have Researched First

“They’ve Been Robbed of Their Womanhood” – Local Milwaukee Media Covers Gardasil Vaccine Injuries

Gardasil: The Day Our Daughter’s Life Changed

Gardasil: The Decision I will Always Regret

Gardasil Vaccine: One More Girl Dead

Gardasil: A Parent’s Worst Nightmare

After Gardasil: I Simply Want my Healthy Daughter Back

Gardasil: My Family Suffers with Me

Gardasil Changed my Health, my Life, and Family’s Lives Forever

Gardasil: Ashlie’s Near-Death Experience

Gardasil: My Daughter’s Worst Nightmare

My Personal Battle After the Gardasil Vaccine

Gardasil: The Worst Thing That Ever Happened to Me

A Ruined Life from Gardasil

HPV Vaccines: My Journey Through Gardasil Injuries

The Dark Side of Gardasil – A Nightmare that Became Real

Toddler Wrongly Injected with Gardasil Vaccine Develops Rare Form of Leukaemia

More information about Gardasil

Order Here!

Leaving a lucrative career as a nephrologist (kidney doctor), Dr. Suzanne Humphries is now free to actually help cure people.

In this autobiography she explains why good doctors are constrained within the current corrupt medical system from practicing real, ethical medicine.

One of the sane voices when it comes to examining the science behind modern-day vaccines, no pro-vaccine extremist doctors have ever dared to debate her in public.

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?

One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”

However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.

The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.

Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.

In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.

Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.

These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.

In this article, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.

Read:

Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?

Published on March 5, 2018

Tags: gardasil, Gardasil 9, University of Alabama Birmingham|

7 Comments

Sandy Lunoe March 14, 2018 at 12:37 pm - Reply

On 7th March I sent a message to the contact person of the clinical trial number 03451071, Ms Sarah Dilley asking if there will also be testing of the newborn babies regarding potential side effects due to possible excretion of the vaccine into breastmilk.

I also sent a message on 7th March to the contact person Eugene Shapiro regarding trial number 02994290 which was titled:
Evaluation of the Implementation and Effectiveness of a Pilot Quality Improvement Program to Increase HPV Vaccine Uptake: Inpatient Postpartum HPV Immunization (IPP-HPV) Program.

Quote from the Detailed Description; "… the HPV vaccine, which is safe in breastfeeding women"
My question was "Are there studies which confirm the safety in breastfeeding women?"

It is a week ago since I sent the two messages and I have not yet received answers from either.

Irena March 6, 2018 at 9:13 pm - Reply

So they (Merck and University of Alabama) are willing to risk not only the young women lives, but also orphaning the new-born babies, just to promote that murderous vaccine agenda???

Allie March 6, 2018 at 9:13 pm - Reply

According to section 8.3 of the original quadrivalent Gardasil vaccine package insert, infants of breastfeeding mothers in the prelicensure trials were nearly TWICE as likely to have a serious adverse event if their mother had received Gardasil over the aluminum adjuvant "placebo."
8.3 "It is not known whether GARDASIL is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in
human milk, caution should be exercised when GARDASIL is administered to a nursing woman.
GARDASIL or AAHS control were given to a total of 1133 women (vaccine N = 582, AAHS control N =
551) during the relevant Phase 3 clinical studies.
Overall, 27 and 13 infants of women who received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively
(representing 4.6% and 2.4% of the total number of women who were breast-feeding during the period in
which they received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively), experienced a serious adverse reaction.
In a post-hoc analysis of clinical studies, a higher number of breast-feeding infants (n = 7) whose
mothers received GARDASIL had acute respiratory illnesses within 30 days post vaccination of the mother
as compared to infants (n = 2) whose mothers received AAHS control."

So we already know the answer.

I assume that’s why section 8.3 doesn’t exist in the package insert for Gardasil 9.

Siobhan March 6, 2018 at 4:33 pm - Reply

Admin said:

The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) in collaboration with Merck pharmaceutical company is planning to conduct Gardasil 9 vaccine trials on postpartum mothers between the ages of 16 to 26 immediately after giving birth at the UAB hospital. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, the desired outcome of this study is to have more young women vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine, because they do not believe enough young women are being vaccinated: "Due to low HPV vaccine uptake in the US, innovative approaches to vaccinating vulnerable populations are necessary in order to maximize the cancer prevention potential of this vaccine." Previous studies on the Gardasil vaccine have shown that young women who are in the hospital due to giving birth are open to receiving the Gardasil vaccine, particularly Hispanic populations: "The puerperium is a time period when women are engaged in the healthcare system and have almost universal access to affordable health care. Two prior studies have shown that postpartum HPV vaccination is acceptable to patients, and high rates of vaccination were achieved in these primarily Hispanic populations." Merck and UAB want to test the vaccine on 16 to 26 year old postpartum mothers because "the immune response in young women is less robust than in adolescents," and because "no studies have examined immunogenicity in postpartum women specifically." Therefore, 16 to 26 year old young mothers who have just given birth at the UAB hospital will become test subjects of the Gardasil 9 vaccine. Will these young mothers in Alabama have sufficient information to make the decision to participate in these Gardasil vaccine trials just after giving birth? Will they understand the potential risks for harm, which includes heart disease (POTS), premature menopause (“Primary Ovarian Failure”) and a whole list of autoimmune disorders that have been hidden from the public but revealed by a 2017 study done in Mexico?

I share your questions. I also wonder why they are choosing to give THREE doses of Gardasil 9 instead to the two-dose regimen recommended by the CDC.

I also wonder if they will do any diagnostic testing prior to the study to ascertain previous HPV infection and immune status, and if previously undiagnosed autoimmunity, immune suppression or HPV infection will be included as exclusion criteria. Will they only administer these vaccines if they are absolutely certain that the woman has not already previously received the HPV vaccine? What criteria will determine the accuracy of HPV vaccine status?

When will the women be approached about the study? At the first prenatal visit or at some point in the pregnancy? Will they be given ample opportunity and ample information about the study to make an informed and rational decision as to whether or not they want to participate in the study?

Have any studies been shown that ensure the safety to the infant of being exposed to the Aluminum in TDaP, Rhogam(when indicated) and HPV 9 vaccine? Have the study authors and Merck considered safety issues for the infant?

How important is it to examine immunogenicity in postpartum women specifically?

Is this study a thinly veiled attempt to bolster the marketing efforts for a vaccine which is increasingly being rejected?

Sandy Lunoe March 6, 2018 at 1:25 pm - Reply

Quoted from Gardasil package insert. There is reason to believe that Gardasil 9 will be even more dangerous for the babies:

8.3 Nursing Mothers
Women 16 Through 45 Years of Age
It is not known whether GARDASIL is excreted in human milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when GARDASIL is administered to a nursing woman.

GARDASIL or AAHS control were given to a total of 1133 women (vaccine N = 582, AAHS control N =551) during the relevant Phase 3 clinical studies.

Overall, 27 and 13 infants of women who received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively (representing 4.6% and 2.4% of the total number of women who were breast-feeding during the period in which they received GARDASIL or AAHS control, respectively), experienced a serious adverse reaction.

In a post-hoc analysis of clinical studies, a higher number of breast-feeding infants (n = 7) whose mothers received GARDASIL had acute respiratory illnesses within 30 days post vaccination of the mother as compared to infants (n = 2) whose mothers received AAHS control.

Walter March 6, 2018 at 11:58 am - Reply

Vaccination is medical experimentation.
Gardasil has been known to cause sterility, so what better group to experiment on than women who’ve already had a child.
Read the Gardasil package insert: https://www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccin…

Siobhan Justin March 6, 2018 at 11:43 am - Reply

Admin said:

The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) in collaboration with Merck pharmaceutical company is planning to conduct Gardasil 9 vaccine trials on postpartum mothers between the ages of 16 to 26 immediately after giving birth at the UAB hospital. According to ClinicalTrials.gov, the desired outcome of this study is to have more young women vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine, because they do not believe enough young women are being vaccinated: "Due to low HPV vaccine uptake in the US, innovative approaches to vaccinating vulnerable populations are necessary in order to maximize the cancer prevention potential of this vaccine." Previous studies on the Gardasil vaccine have shown that young women who are in the hospital due to giving birth are open to receiving the Gardasil vaccine, particularly Hispanic populations: "The puerperium is a time period when women are engaged in the healthcare system and have almost universal access to affordable health care. Two prior studies have shown that postpartum HPV vaccination is acceptable to patients, and high rates of vaccination were achieved in these primarily Hispanic populations." Merck and UAB want to test the vaccine on 16 to 26 year old postpartum mothers because "the immune response in young women is less robust than in adolescents," and because "no studies have examined immunogenicity in postpartum women specifically." Therefore, 16 to 26 year old young mothers who have just given birth at the UAB hospital will become test subjects of the Gardasil 9 vaccine. Will these young mothers in Alabama have sufficient information to make the decision to participate in these Gardasil vaccine trials just after giving birth? Will they understand the potential risks for harm, which includes heart disease (POTS), premature menopause (“Primary Ovarian Failure”) and a whole list of autoimmune disorders that have been hidden from the public but revealed by a 2017 study done in Mexico?

I have so many questions regarding this study, and plan to contact Sarah Dilley, MD.

"The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsiblity of the study sponsor and investigators."

What are the consequences to Merck and the University of Alabama at Birmingham if the study proves to be unsafe and/or fails to prove itself scientifically valid?

Is 6 months an adequate duration of follow-up considering the fact that ASIA can occur months or years after the Adjuvant js injected? In this case, large doses of Aluminum adjuvant.

Why 3 doses of Gardasil 9, when the CDC recommends a two-dose regimen of Gardasil?

Are there known implications of a newborn receiving Aluminum in the quantities in this vaccine? How much is transmitted through the breastmilk?

Are there synergistic effects of prenatal Aluminum from TDaP and postnatal Gardasil 9 Aluminum to the infant?

Are any considerations being made for the infant?

Will + HPV status eliminate the woman from the trial?

Will previous HPV vaccination eliminate the woman from the trial?

What is the rate of increase in HPV-related cancers in the U.S.? What data exists to support this?

What sub-types of HPV are associated with these HPV-associated cancers?

Is the incidence of HPV-related cancers increased in those who were HPV + prior to vaccination?

Will the study participants be adequately informed of the potential development of Autoimmune disorders, Cardiac disorders, such as POTS, and Premature Menopause?

How will informed consent be documented? Will the informed consent be given with a witness present? Wil it be videotaped?

Is this study actually a marketing tool by Merck to increase uptake of Gardasil vaccine in light of its decreasing acceptance by women throughout the world?