AdminM said:
In our September 18th debate for Spectrum TV, Kaiser’s Chief of Pediatrics, Dr. Robert Riewerts, parroted Pharma’s popular canard that the Gardasil vaccine has eliminated cervical cancer in Australia—the first country to mandate the jab. 

This is false.

Gardasil actually increases the risk of cervical cancer by a terrifying 44.6% among women who were exposed to HPV infection prior to vaccination.

If anyone ever bullies you to take Gardasil, look up “Gardasil Vaccine Insert” on your cell phone to see all of the adverse events and show them this table.
The question is -did it eliminate cervical Cancer in the age group that Cervical Cancer occurs in?  Cervical Caner is not a disease of young girls or young women.  
–  While there are well-established cancer registries in the United States, it will take decades before the impact of vaccine on cervical cancer is observed. More proximal measures of vaccine impact include outcomes such as prevalence of HPV vaccine types, incidence of cervical pre-cancers and genital warts. Post-licensure monitoring of HPV vaccine in the United States, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,Vaccine.2010 Jul 5;28 (30):4731-7. Epub 2010 Feb 25, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20188681.
The above webpages are not longer on the web.  They have been removed recently.  When the vaccine was first marketed the ACA and other cancer research orgs came out and stated that Cervical Cancer doesn’t occur in young girls.  I found this today:
Cervical cancer will most often affect women in their 30s, 40s, and 50s.
 However, more than 15 percent of cervical cancers are diagnosed in 
women over the age of 65.-https://www.sgo.org/patients-caregivers-survivors/…
Here is an interesting auricle:                                                                                                                                  Cervical cancer screening: Why less is best-https://www.clinicaladvisor.com/home/features/cerv…
There is a high incidence of HPV infection in women by their early 20s, yet these infections are largely transient and rarely lead to lasting cervical cell changes. Invasive cervical cancer in women younger than age 20 is a statistic rarity, with only 0.05 cases per 100,000 women in the United States.7 Even in the presence of advanced cervical dysplasia, women in this age group typically have regression of the abnormal cells, and they rarely develop cervical carcinoma. In one study, 93% of women aged 16 to 23 years with normal Pap smear test results but who were positive for types 16 and 18 HPV—the most likely subtypes to cause cancerous changes—had cleared the virus in 36 months.7 Another study revealed that more than 90% of women with both positive HPV test results and early abnormal cell changes on Pap smears had cleared the HPV infection 2 years later.7  https://www.clinicaladvisor.com/home/features/cerv…
Considering HPV clears up without medical intervention this report is inaccurate.  FDA reported prior qrote a repot that has been removed from their website that that HP is not the cause of cervical cancer:
"Reclassification Petition for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) DNA, Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) Detection" published March 7, 2007.
  
VI. Statement of the basis for disagreement with the present classification status
  
[21 CFR § 860.123(a)(5) ]
    
The basis of this reclassification request is that the present regulatory classification of HPV DNA tests as devices intended for use in identifying and typing HPV infection to stratify women at risk for cervical cancer, thus assigned to class III, requiring submission and approval of PMAs [2], is no longer appropriate because continued designation of low-to-moderate risk HPV DNA test devices as class III devices contradicts the current understanding of HPV infection and its relationship to the development of cervical cancer. Based on new scientific information published in the past 15 years, it is now generally agreed that identifying and typing HPV infection does not bear a direct relationship to stratification of the risk for cervical cancer. Most acute infections caused by HPV are self-limiting [1, 4-7]. It is the persistent HPV infection that may act as a tumor promoter in cancer induction [8-11]. Identifying and typing HPV is an important tool for following patients with persistent HPV infection. Repeated sequential transient HPV infections, even when caused by "high-risk" HPVs, are characteristically not associated with high risk of developing squamous intraepithelial lesions, a precursor of cervical cancer.
    
A woman found to be positive for the same strain (genotype) of HPV on repeated testing is highly likely suffering from a persistent HPV infection and is considered to be at high risk of developing precancerous intraepithelial lesions in the cervix. It is the persistent infection, not the virus, that determines the cancer risk.
    
The FDA has accepted the above interpretation of current medical science, as reflected in its March 31, 2003 announcement on approval of the Digene HC2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test while making the following public statements on record [I] :
    
"The FDA today approved expanded use of a laboratory test to detect the presence in women of human papillomavirus (HPV), one of the most common sexually transmitted infections ."
    
"The HPV DNA test does not test for cancer, but for the HPV viruses that can cause cell changes in the cervix . If left untreated, these changes can eventually lead to cancer in some women."
    
"Most women who become infected with HPV are able to eradicate the virus and suffer no apparent long-term consequences to their health . But a few women develop a persistent infection that can eventually lead to pre-cancerous changes in the cervix."
    
". . .most infections are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer."
I wonder how many of the girls tested were African or Latino because the 2 of the strains in the HPV vaccine are strains that this ethnic group is not infected by:   
HPV Strains Affecting African-American Women Differ from Vaccines: https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-10/du…
This entire bogus vaccine and all the studies associated with it to manipulate the public into getting it is just messed up.