GARDASIL & CERVARIX - Just Money Spinners?

Whenever government spokespeople pronounce, in honeyed soothing tones, that all is safe and well with a proposed new vaccine Cervarix to be unleashed on the public, the warning bells start to ring in my head. One needn't be too long in the tooth to remember previous Big Pharma disasters!

Take Merck's new wonder-drug 'Gardasil', designed to combat HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) which, as well as causing genital warts, they claim leads to cervical cancer. Examine this extract from MediLexicon's link to Gardasil:-

"Merck commits to conduct a short-term safety surveillance study in a U.S. Managed Care Organization (MCO). The study will include approximately 44,000 vaccinated subjects who will be followed for 60 days for assessment of general short-term safety (i.e., emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and deaths). The subjects will also be followed for 6 months subsequent to vaccination for new autoimmune disorders, rheumatologic conditions, or thyroiditis. Also, a sufficient number of children 11-12 years of age will be studied to permit an analysis of safety outcomes. Final Study Protocol Submission: December 31, 2006 Enrollment Completion: December 31, 2008 Study Completion: June 30, 2009 Final Study Report: September 30, 2009"

It seems Merck don't really know what to expect from Gardasil, having always planned for 44,000 guinea pigs to complete their Phase Three stage trials. GSK (GlaxoSmithKlein) with Cervarix propose using 30,000 females in their trials; and we naively believe what our Masters tell us about drug safety!

While the UK's preferred vaccine is GSK's Cervarix, on cost grounds, it is a newer vaccine than Gardasil, and deals with strains 16, 18, 31 & 45 of the HPV virus, though is ineffective against all the other reputed cancer-causing strains of HPV. It is newer and just as untested to Phase Three Trials stage as is Gardasil, which went for strains 6, 11, 16 & 18. Interestingly, the FDA have not approved Cervarix for use in the US and are not expected to do so until maybe late 2009, if there are not too many Adverse Drug Reactions. Meanwhile, Cervarix will be used here before then. How do we know it's safe?

Commenting in response to adverse reactions, even death, following vaccination, The Adverse Event Reporting System in the USA notes that "It is important to note that a report to VAERS does not mean there is a connection between the vaccine and the event. It means the event took place following vaccination.", which sounds a bit like saying 'it wasn't the bullet which killed him - he died of a heart attack a split second before hand'. Can they prove that adverse reaction was NOT due to the vaccine? If not, then their statement is only opinion and not science.

There must also be some concern as to the marketing of the Cervarix vaccine as a cancer vaccine, not a STD vaccine; getting people to accept a jab against cancer is likely to be much more appealing than getting them to examine their sexual conduct. As HPV is sexually transmitted, why are not boys also being vaccinated? Are there some double standards at work here?

The vaccine and placebo used in trials by GSK and Merck, both contained Aluminium Hydroxide, an immune system adjuvant commonly used in vaccines, that stimulates the body's Th2 response i.e. antibody production. This is the reason why Aluminium hydroxide is included in the vaccine. As relatively high aluminium levels are found in brains of Alzheimer's victims, and as the body has no biological use for aluminium, questions must be asked why Alzheimer's is on the increase; can this increase be because of vaccination programmes, or the inclusion of alum in our water supplies? Anyone remember the ensuing panic many years ago when the water supply at Camelford had 20 tons of aluminium sulphate dumped into it? It is also known that fluoride, commonly found in water supplies, transports aluminium across the blood-brain barrier. Canadian researchers found that aluminium hydroxide, when injected into mice, destroyed brain neurons; their report can be found here www.straight.com Although the article says the report is unpublished, it now has been, at www.springerlink.com

An American study comparing the outcomes of 100 premature babies given IV drips containing the medically safe level of aluminium, against 100 babies where the aluminium was filtered out, showed noticeable neurological and renal dysfunctions. Read here:- www.mothering.com/articles

The body, bombarded daily by infectious pathogens, be they viruses, bacteria, protozoa, chemicals, drugs, nicotine, perfumes, alcohol, hidden antibiotics etc. etc., successfully fights off many of these, provided we have a healthy immune systems. As evidenced by the growing numbers of frankly bloated people around, it seems to me we would be better spending our money on improving the Nation's diet and health knowledge, rather than drug company bank balances. Does anyone know whether any government minister, advisor or Whitehall Mandarin holds shares, proxy or directly, in GSK or Merck? Is this vaccination plan being driven by Big Pharma or by government medical advisors? Is the tail wagging the dog again? Is it getting too near election time again?

I'm sure many people feel they are not really being given enough information to make up their own minds on this important issue, as the 'media' generally toes the party line, until the cat manages to escape out of the bag, quickly followed by the 'Shock Horror' stories and the usual self-righteous scramble to be the first rag to say 'I told you so'. Government secrecy is legendary and, despite being 'public servants', information has to be squeezed or embarrassed out of them at every step of the way. Why do we get the uneasy feeling that we are somehow in their way, an inconvenience to be swatted, legislated against, or patronised with a few bauble-like concessions to distract our attention e.g. elections, or the Freedom Of Information Act (as long as it doesn't cause any red faces and there's enough censoring ink to go round, and the guilty have long shuffled off this mortal coil or are at least gaga),while they bury bad news?

Lord Acton (1834-1902) puts it eloquently "Everything secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity."

This government should put ALL its cards on the table, rationally discuss the pros and cons of any large public health injections of chemicals into our bodies, allow dissent and alternative evidence, and then allow the people to make up their own minds. Then we might not have that cynical feeling that it's all a foregone conclusion anyway.

'There is something rotten in the state of Denmark that needs lancing'. (Apologies the The Bard!)

The text above was emailed to the Eastern Daily Press letters page, for their attention. I will notify readers whether they respond.

Homepage Mesothelioma Lawyers

Write to Your MP

Privacy Page

Disclaimer Page