Personalised cancer vaccine – hoax

General healthcare discussion, and Obamacare news.
Please note that specific help and support for Gregory Allan's book "How to Survive Hospital Costs Without Insurance" must be directed to the private Forum used for that purpose.
Post Reply
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Personalised cancer vaccine – hoax

Post by Firestarter » Sat Jul 08, 2017 4:52 pm

I already knew that “virus hunters” have been trying to prove “scientifically” that cancer is caused by a virus, but this is still not the official story on cancer.
I think I should add some arguments that the idea that vaccines can be used to fight cancer is ridiculous. But before I can, I have to figure out how anybody could believe such a thing in the first place.
I can find lots of alternative ideas on health care. I haven’t found anything to show that treatment of cancer victims with vaccines is ridiculous.

Furthermore the fact that this is customised (personalised) “treatment” means that it would be impossible to “scientifically” prove the efficacy.
It is not intended to become a mono-therapy but only in combination with the surgical removal of cancer, radiation and/or chemotherapy. I can imagine that the cancer vaccines have less adverse (“side”) effects than radiation and chemotherapy.

There have been earlier investigations into the possibility of cancer vaccines.
Earlier, unsuccessful cancer vaccines usually targeted a single distinctive cancer protein shared among patients, but these new ones are specific to an individual patient’s tumour.

For the last couple of months some articles have appeared about the revolutionary approach by the company BioNTech. This was based on a phase I trial of a total of 19 skin cancer victims of which 12 remained cancer free up to 32 months.
If I understand correctly, the theory is that by injecting the body with similar “neoantigens” that can be found in a tumour, which look foreign to the immune system, the immune system (T-cells) learns to attack the cancer cells. These “neoantigens” are specific to an individual patient’s tumour.

Similar results come from an international trial using a vaccine developed by Ugur Sahin of University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany.
They injected RNA coding for tumour “neoantigens” into the lymph nodes of 13 advanced melanoma patients whose tumours had been removed. Eleven remain cancer-free up to 26 months later, including two whose tumours reappeared, then shrank or were surgically removed: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/04/ ... ncer-check

Here’s another recent article.
The small Phase I trials need to be followed by larger studies, but the impressive results suggest the new approach work far better than earlier cancer vaccines.
These new cancer vaccines appears to have prevented early relapses in 12 people with skin cancer: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/0 ... WEhnRXyi9I

To make this treatment more convincing nice photos like the following are shown. This supposedly shows a T-cell attacking a cell "infected" with cancer.
Image
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: Personalised cancer vaccine – hoax

Post by Firestarter » Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:52 pm

I’ve heard some bizarre stories on the Zika virus, that since it was discovered by the Rockefeller foundation in 1947, then in 2015 suddenly started to misform babies’ heads (microcephaly)…
I’ve also heard strange stories about cancer treatment, not in the least that cancer can be fought with vaccines.

New research shows that the Zika virus kills brain cancer stem cells, the kind of cells most resistant to standard treatments. Fortunately the Zika infection and chemotherapy-radiation treatment are complementary in treating glioblastoma, the most common form of brain cancer.
We wouldn’t want to stop the regular treatment that is lethal in itself: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 093623.htm

This is one of the worst written “scientific” reports I’ve ever read, it doesn’t even have a separate “conclusion” and “discussion”. Here it is for anybody that wants to read it – Zhe Zhu et al “Zika virus has oncolytic activity against glioblastoma stem cells”: http://jem.rupress.org/content/early/20 ... m.20171093
To test the effects of ZIKV on normal adult human neural cells, we inoculated nonmalignant neural tissues from adult epilepsy specimens (Fig. 3, T–V). ZIKV did not infect normal adult human brain tissues, including NeuN+ neurons (Fig. 3, W and Y) and GFAP+ glial cells (Fig. 3, X and Z), as limited viral replication was detected compared with glioblastomas (Fig. S2, N and O). In addition, compared with GSCs and DGCs, the human brain neural cell cultures that were derived from epilepsy patients (NM55 and NM177) or from differentiated human neural stem cells (Hu-DNCs) demonstrated limited ZIKV infection (Fig. S2, P–U).
(…)
We recapitulated relevant conditions for human brain tumor therapy using mice. As mice are not natural hosts for ZIKV, pathogenesis studies have used animals with acquired or genetic deficiencies of type I IFN signaling (Lazear et al., 2016). To overcome this limitation, we used a mouse-adapted ZIKV-Dakar that had gained virulence through passage in a Rag1−/− host (Govero et al., 2016; Sapparapu et al., 2016).
(…)
To. assess the oncolytic effects of ZIKV in vivo, we generated mouse gliomas from two different mouse cell lines (GL261 and CT-2A) grown in syngeneic hosts. Glioma cells were transduced with a luciferase reporter and permitted to form tumors, which were validated by bioluminescence imaging and histopathology (Fig. 4, C–E). Mice with tumors were randomized into two groups and treated 2 wk after implantation with either PBS control or mouse-adapted ZIKV-Dakar (103 focus-forming units [FFU]). Histological examination at 1 wk after tumor treatment demonstrated that the ZIKV-treated tumors were smaller in size compared with PBS-treated tumors (Fig. 4, F–I).

Notably, ZIKV infection extended the life spans of tumor-bearing mice (Fig. 4 J). To test whether tumor-bearing mice could benefit from a higher dose of virus, we inoculated 105 FFU of the mouse-adapted ZIKV-Dakar at 1 wk after implantation with the GL261 model. The survival time of tumor-bearing mice was greater compared with that of the control or the 103-FFU dose (Fig. 4 K). To determine the specificity of cell targeting, we stained for ZIKV antigen and markers of stem cell proliferation and differentiation (Fig. 4, L–T). ZIKV infected ∼6% of glioma cells at the endpoint (Fig. 4 T), with the majority of these cells expressing the precursor marker SOX2 (Fig. 4, L, M, and T). In contrast, GFAP+ tumor cells were less infected (Fig. 4, N and O). Effects on proliferating cell populations were measured by Ki-67 staining and BrdU treatment and staining.
The following pictures reportedly shows cancer cells on the left, and on the right after treatment with Zika, the cancer has disappeared.
Image
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: Personalised cancer vaccine – hoax

Post by Firestarter » Thu Sep 21, 2017 4:08 pm

According to the state media, there really isn’t any agenda to push for vaccines.

Everybody knows that cavities in your teeth aren’t caused by vaccines, but an “amazing” vaccine is being developed to prevent tooth decay nonetheless: http://www.sciencealert.com/scientists- ... ooth-decay
Regular visits to the dentist are an important part of keeping your teeth healthy. But what if you could give your oral health a boost by receiving a vaccine on top of your regular dental care routine?

Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIOV) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences are working on such a vaccine, and their study has just been published in Scientific Reports.
(…)
When mice without caries received this vaccine, it conferred a 64.2 percent prophylactic efficacy, and in those mice that had already developed caries, the vaccine produced a 53.9 percent therapeutic effect.
The full study shows that there are some “side effects”, but don’t worry about those...
Jingyi Yang et al – Second-generation Flagellin-rPAc Fusion Protein, KFD2-rPAc, Shows High Protective Efficacy against Dental Caries with Low Potential Side Effects (2017): https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-10247-8
Several studies have shown that flagellin triggers a prototypical systemic inflammatory response in mice, including the induction of proinflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress24,25,26. The flagellin–TLR5 axis might also trigger cardiac innate immune responses and result in cardiovascular dysfunction27.
(…)
The flagellin/TLR5 axis-induced response is a double-edged sword for its adjuvanticity and side effects. On one hand, flagellin exerts its adjuvanticity by activating a range of innate immune cells secreting certain cytokines and chemokines, which trigger an adaptive immune response. On the other hand, flagellin triggers a prototypical systemic inflammatory response, including the induction and secretion of proinflammatory cytokines in the lungs, small intestine, liver, cardiovascular system, and kidneys27, 44
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

HPV cancer

Post by Firestarter » Wed Oct 11, 2017 4:50 pm

When I started this thread, I couldn’t find the right words to explain that the idea of fighting cancer with “personalised vaccines” is ridiculous, but I’ll give it a try now.

It seems plausible that injecting the body with similar “neoantigens” that can be found in a cancer tumour, would cause cancer (or at the very least would cause harm) instead of fighting cancer.
If these “neoantigens” don’t cause damage to the body, however, it seems implausible that cancer tumours would cause harm at all.

Further reasoning leads to the conclusion that personalised cancer vaccines could only work, if our immune system fights cancer tumours, which could mean that cancer is caused by a deficiency of the immune system...
If that hypothesis is correct, the best way to fight cancer is to give your immune system a boost, which can be done by a healthy and varied diet.

When I started this thread, I didn’t even realise that the controversial HPV vaccines (HPV: Human PapillomaVirus) have been marketed as cervical cancer prevention. These HPV vaccines supposedly prevent infections with viruses that in turn cause cancer.
The idea that a viral infection could cause cancer isn’t nearly as ridiculous as that the Zika virus can fight brain cancer.

I will try to explain how easily statistics can be manipulated in relation with the HPV vaccines.
The theory that having sex and becoming infected with certain viruses causes cancer could be “scientifically” proven in the following hypothetical way...
If for example a large percentage of women in a trial are prostitutes, this could have the following consequences.
Prostitutes are known to have many sexual encounters. It is also known that prostitutes have a high risk of certain diseases. Furthermore a relatively large percentage of prostitutes are drug addicts.
If for example using hard drugs increases the risk of cancer, and combining this with certain diseases that often happen for prostitutes, this could already be used to create evidence...

After writing the previous as sort of a writing exercise, I found the following information on the internet.

Here’s the literature review M. Soohoo et al “Cervical HPV Infection in Female Sex Workers: A Global Perspective” (2013): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3915319/
In this article the conclusion is drawn that “In female sex workers (FSWs), the risk of HPV infection and cervical cancer is especially high”.
The question is by what this is caused. My theory is that this is (or could be) caused by “recreational” drug abuse, but according to the state media this is caused by many sexual contacts.
To make the manipulation of statistics more obvious, we can see the bizarre conclusion that “One study saw that HPV prevalence was higher in 20-year-old or younger women compared to women over 20 years old”. If younger FSWs (prostitutes) have been infected more with HPV than older FSWs, this contradicts the theory that sex causes HPV infection. Obviously this was written to convince women that especially sex at a young age causes cancer…

It is also mentioned that many FSWs are HIV-positive, so if you follow the theory that HIV causes immune deficiency (AIDS), you could also reach the conclusion that cervical cancer is caused by immune deficiency.
According to this literature review the median overall prevalence of HPV among HIV positive FSW is 73.3% (ranging from 32-87%). To manipulate the results, prostitutes with HIV infection were removed from the main analysis. This is especially doubtful, when you realise that there is no reliable HIV-test, which means that HIV-positive can’t be used for a scientific conclusion.


Then I looked for a paper on the relation between drug abuse and cervical cancer. Strangely I couldn’t find much…
The following paper focuses on cocaine in relation with HPV - H. Minkoff et al “The Relationship between Cocaine Use and Human Papillomavirus Infections in HIV-Seropositive and HIV-Seronegative Women”: https://www.hindawi.com/journals/idog/2008/587082/
Look at the formulation of this conclusion:
Cocaine use is associated with an increased risk of detection of both prevalent and incident oncogenic HPV infection, as well as an increased risk of HPV-positive SIL over time.
Image

Another well-known risk factor in getting cancer is smoking; the cocaine users were often also heavy smokers:
Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the study population at baseline. Women acknowledging crack/cocaine use were older, more likely to be African Americans, less likely to be Hispanic, had more sex partners in the last six months, and were more likely to report heavy cigarette use.
Also interesting is that studies are referenced, which show that cocaine abuse causes immune deficiency:
In one study of lymphocytes from individuals with cocaine in their urine, it was found that “Memory" CD8+ T cell subpopulations (i.e., CD45RO+) were reduced in the cocaine-positive patients leading the authors to conclude that this might “represent a disruption of particular immunologic cell networks which could ultimately influence host resistance to infection".
(…)
Shen and colleagues, evaluating a mouse model in which cocaine was injected intraperitoneally found that all immune parameters, other than lymphocyte transformation of the splenic or the peripheral blood lymphocytes, were suppressed [11].
Other investigators have shown that withdrawal from cocaine can also induce deleterious immune alterations. Using a rat model, Avila demonstrated that repeated exposure to cocaine followed by withdrawal led to activation of the neuroendocrine stress response, which alters cellular immunity and possibly contributes to an increased susceptibility to infection [13].
(…)
Perhaps most germane to our findings is the work of Lopez [33] and colleagues, who found that daily cocaine administration induced a significant decrease in the number of IgA+ cells with a concomitant increase in the number of CD8+ cells per villi in the intestinal lamina propria (ILP).

I have also found a more recent story about the teenager Jasmin Soriat from Vienna, who died after being poisoned with the HPV vaccine, Gardasil, with interesting background information.
Johan Missliwetz was ordered by the court to perform a second autopsy on Soriat’s body, and concluded that the HPV vaccine could have been the cause of death. After Missliwetz reported his results to the drug regulation authorities, he received many calls from “senior members of the medical establishment”. They attempted to “intervene” and many professors asked him to stop talking about vaccination tests. Missliwetz has subsequently taken an “early retirement”.

The Independent published an article about 131 young women who suffered HPV vaccine injuries. Another 18 young women came forward only a week later.

According to Bernard Dalbergue, who worked directly with Gardasil’s manufacturer, Merck:
The full extent of the Gardasil scandal needs to be assessed: everyone knew when this vaccine was released on the American market that it would prove to be worthless. Diane Harper, a major opinion leader in the United States, was one of the first to blow the whistle, pointing out the fraud and scam of it all.
I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all time because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine, technical and scientific feat that it may be, has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers. Gardasil is useless and costs a fortune!
In addition, decision-makers at all levels are aware of it! Cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS and vaccine-induced encephalitis can be found, whatever the vaccine.
Dianne Harper is one of the very few specialists on HPV in the world; she explained:
the benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers, they are just postponed, unless the protection lasts for at least 15 years, and over 70% of all sexually active females of all ages are vaccinated.
According to Christian Fiala:
No-one has shown that the HPV vaccine actually reduces the rate of cervical cancer.
As long as we have no proof that cervical cancer is caused by HPV, it is fundamentally useless to vaccinate against HPV because the chances are the cancer will occur whether there is HPV or not.
Peter Duesberg, who was once a highly respected biochemist, before he became ridiculed for his views on HIV/AIDS, takes this a step further:
The [HPV] vaccine should be stopped until it’s proved that it protects against cancer… It has the highest number of side-effects ever of any vaccine.
In the US, it has more side-effects reported than all other vaccines combined. Since there is no scientific evidence that it will do anything else than occasionally cause warts, which will be eliminated by the immune system, there is no need for vaccination against this virus.
http://www.collective-evolution.com/201 ... or-itself/
(archived here: http://archive.fo/7a5zB)
Last edited by Firestarter on Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

HPV vaccines

Post by Firestarter » Sun Mar 11, 2018 3:50 pm

Is it terrible that the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) can only be used to scare females into being taking HPV vaccines?
To advance vaccination rates there is a whole new amazing “discovery”...

For some reason, big pharma hasn’t claimed that men can also get cervical cancers, but invented that oral sex leads to HPV infection, which can cause throat cancer in men instead.
This “explains” that men are 4 times more likely than women to be diagnosed with oral cancer. About 13,200 oral cancers are diagnosed in US men each year, compared with (only) 3,200 in women. It’s even called - HPV oral cancer.
HPV virus is now found in 70% of all new oral cancers.

A bizarre explanation is invented that lesbian women don’t have a higher risk on throat cancer…
HPV is usually wiped out without any symptoms in women, because an HPV infection usually sets off their immune system (why would they need a vaccine then?).
But supposedly in men the immune system doesn’t protect against HPV - among 384 men, only 8% produced antibodies. For some reason the article doesn’t present the rate among women for comparison...

Because no early screening test exists for oral cancer, you’d never guess which solution is presented...
Poison all pubescent children – not only girls, but also boys – with HPV-vaccines (the most common is Gardasil).

I haven’t seen a good explanation for why HPV-related tumours have more than quadrupled over the last 20 years: http://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world ... 18554.html

I guess it would be very “unscientific” if we demand that the pharmaceutical industry actually presents evidence for their claims that vaccines prevent disease...
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Swedish rising cancer rates

Post by Firestarter » Sun May 20, 2018 3:31 pm

When the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine was introduced in 2006, cervical cancer rates had been steadily declining for several decades.

Sweden had relatively low levels of cervical cancer.
Since Sweden approved the Gardasil vaccine in 2006, Sweden’s cervical cancer rates stopped declining. In 2017, Sweden’s Center for Cervical Cancer Prevention reported that the incidence of cervical cancer is climbing in nearly all counties.
In the two-year period from 2013 to 2015, the cervical cancer rates in Sweden increased with 20%.

An (anonymous) Swedish researcher found that while the cervical cancer rates in younger women (ages 20-49) increased considerably, the cancer rates for older women (over age 50) didn’t increase.
Image

Sweden approved Gardasil in 2006.
By 2015, the oldest girls in the “catch-up” group (ages 15-18) that were vaccinated in Sweden had reached their early twenties and were within the 20-29-year range that displayed the greatest increase in cervical cancer incidence.
Image

If Gardasil causes cervical cancer - this is what you would expect…

While the dying rate from cervical cancer is only .23 per 10,000, the serious adverse event rate of Gardasil is 1 in 15 (7%) and a death rate among the vaccinated is 14 per 10,000: https://worldmercuryproject.org/news/hp ... al-cancer/
(archived here: http://archive.is/PI4OX)
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Re: Swedish rising cancer rates

Post by Firestarter » Tue May 29, 2018 1:53 pm

The report that was an important source to the Mercury project article I posted on 20 May, was retracted on 26 May...
On verification of his identity, the editor confirmed that (a) the author had the necessary qualifications, expertise and research experience on the subject of the article; and (b) the author did face a credible threat of harm, making it necessary not to be named publicly.
Further we reconfirmed the reviewers’ conclusions: that the article used publicly available data with a simple statistical method; made a fair attempt to report a possible association of the increased incidence of carcinoma cervix with HPV vaccination; and suggested more research. We felt that the data and analysis could be scientifically appreciated and critiqued without reference to the author.
(…)
While our assessment of the science of the article may be correct, we have concluded that tolerating the author’s deception and retaining the article was an error of judgment.
ijme.in/articles/increased-incidence-of ... alley=html

Here’s the archived version of the (anonymous, by now retracted) report: http://archive.is/C9tfJ
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

HPV vaccines cause cancer; fat vaccines

Post by Firestarter » Wed Aug 08, 2018 2:14 pm

It looks like French doctor Gerard Delepine was inspired by the report on the rising Swedish cervical cancer rates to do a similar study. On 23 July, his analysis was published as an “Open letter to parliamentarians, and all citizens”.
Delépine explains that HPV vaccines increase cervical cancer rates or stop the decline: http://healthimpactnews.com/2018/french ... ion-rates/

Unfortunately the letter is in French (see some of the presented graphs below): https://www.agoravox.fr/tribune-libre/a ... t-d-206314
(archived here: http://archive.is/pAkVv)

See rising cervical cancer rates since HPV vaccines were introduced in Norway.
Image

See rising cervical cancer rates since HPV vaccines were introduced in Great Britain.
Image


Even though there is no evidence that the human papillomavirus (HPV) causes any form of cancer, the government of Britain (a day after the French “open letter”) has recommended poisoning all British boys (age 12 and 13) with HPV vaccines too: https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... er-england


If you still believe in cancer vaccines, maybe you reconsider when you learn that big pharma is not only working on tooth vaccines but also fat vaccines (unfortunately I’m not kidding)...

According to the Daily Fail, Adenovirus-36 is found 4 times more often among the obese than in patients of a healthy weight. This misguided conclusion was based on a single study on 80 women with breast cancer, 4 out of 5 who were overweight had the virus – against just 1 in 5 of a “normal” weight.
There are of course many other explanations possible that could have to do with the cause of cancer. In other “studies”, at least 30% of obese people were infected compared to only 11% of those with a “healthy” weight.
Earlier research suggested that monkeys injected with the Adenovirus gained weight.

The following amazing discovery has been invented to explain that the Adenovirus:
- irritates fat cells and causes them to become inflamed;
- prevents them dying and being flushed away by the body;
- makes the fat cells accumulate.

A large number of specialists have ridiculed this idea, pointing out that viruses tend to cause weight loss rather than gain.
Nick Finer said that the link between the Adenovirus and weight gain has not been proven yet.

The US Army has already poisoned their recruits with a vaccine for adenoviruses that cause respiratory problems.
Dr Richard Atkinson has already patented a vaccine for the Adenovirus but has not gotten enough funding to make it commercially.

Vaccinating children would be the obvious initial step, since…
The vaccine could be given to young people to protect them from getting babies and stop humans accumulating. With billions of people around the world, a vaccine could prevent the birth of millions of babies...

The finding comes as warnings of overweight have spiralled out of control; a reported record breaking 27% of the British population are obese, with a further 36% overweight – making Britain the “fattest nation” in Western Europe: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... -gain.html
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

Alzheimer’s vaccines

Post by Firestarter » Mon Nov 26, 2018 4:54 pm

I had earlier found out that big pharma is developing tooth vaccines and (personalised) cancer vaccines...

There is evidence that aluminium causes Alzheimer’s disease: viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1346&start=10

If you’ve been paying attention, you’re probably not even surprised that to prevent Alzheimer’s, aluminium won’t be removed from vaccines, but instead big pharma is working on vaccines for Alzheimer’s disease...

A DNA vaccine, with antibodies, was tested in mice. This reduces accumulation of both types of toxic proteins, tau and beta-amyloid, associated with Alzheimer’s disease.
That the vaccine actually reduces dementia wasn’t evaluated during this trial.

They are now aiming for human trials: https://www.utsouthwestern.edu/newsroom ... imers.html

Here’s the link to the “scientific” report: https://alzres.biomedcentral.com/articl ... 018-0441-4
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 1137
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 3:02 pm

HPV vaccine – death and abortions

Post by Firestarter » Sat May 18, 2019 4:39 pm

I don´t like watching videos of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (certainly not 50 minutes), but have enjoyed the following transcript of his video on the controversial HPV vaccine, Gardasil.

According to Merck, it has never been evaluated if Gardasil prevents or causes cervical cancer. Gardasil contains possible carcinogens (like human DNA).
According to Merck’s own trial, Gardasil has a negative efficacy of 44.6% for women who already were infected with HPV. This means that by being poisoned with Gardasil, their risk of getting precancerous lesions increases with 44.6%.

The risk of dying from cervical cancer is 1 in 43.5 thousand. The death rate in the Gardasil group was 8.5 per 10 thousand.
According to Merck’s own studies, the risk of dying from Gardasil is 37 times higher than from cervical cancer.

An astonishing 10.9% of women reported reproductive disorders within 7 months of being poisoned with Gardasil (compared to 1.2% in the placebo group).

There are recent scientific studies that suggest “type replacement” by the the HPV vaccine — replacing 9 of the 200 different strands of HPV - some of these could be more cancerous.
In heavily vaccinated populations - in the UK, Sweden and Australia — the rate of cervical cancer has risen considerably (instead of going down, like Merck promised ).

In 2015, the Australian Department of Health reported that the adverse rates of Gardasil in girls is 17 times the cervical cancer rate. They only looked at a small part of adverse effects, so the actual number is even higher.

Japanese researchers found that the adverse event rate for Gardasil is 9% and that pregnant women injected with the vaccine aborted or miscarried in a whopping 30% of cases.

In Colombia in 2014, 800 girls in Carmen de Bolivar were injured by Gardasil. Protests erupted that forced the Supreme Court of Columbia to rule against mandatory HPV vaccination.

Corruption is systemic at the FDA, because 45% of their budget comes from big pharma. Pharmaceutical companies pay billions of dollars per year to FDA to fast track drugs.
In 2000-2010, pharmaceutical companies paid $3.4 billion dollars to FDA to get drugs approved: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/vide ... -gardasil/
Post Reply