Thanks for the continued coverage on Gardisil. This vaccine remains strongly promoted in elite academic medicine. It is medical heresy not to promote its use. I am attempting to provide informed consent to patients requesting this vaccine and this information is helpful. The studies promoting efficacy are typically manipulated in multiple ways - study design, statistical massaging of the raw data and of course the “healthy user bias” always lurking in the background. I am having much success at simply citing the 6 month risk for new autoimmune disease (around 2.6%) following vaccine or placebo. (And the simple fact that we do not have long term hard RCT data looking at outcome for cervical cancer).
This is medical reporting at its finest ! Facts, stats and total truth. Doc MaDem does it again. Asking the real questions, telling the real stories. Why would anyone listen to the shill media ? I recall certain high profile "health specialist reporters" (despite not having any sort of qualifications in anything remotely health science related) promoting this 'Gardasil Gunk' as "God's gift to girls". One wonders what sort of gift these grifters received to peddle such piffling propaganda!
As an Australian/UQ vaccine, it was all over the news here. It’s close to home for me, decisions had to be made for our young daughters. I recall reading Mercola’s articles at the time, how it was critical to have all three shots, that it wasn’t effective against all strains and the risk of serious side-effects. That combined with the lifestyle nature of disease, tipped me over to a NO. But it wasn’t an easy decision, nor is it 15 years later with hindsight! So thank you for your article Maryanne.
Questions I still have…If strains 16 & 18 are diminishing, while possibly causing type replacing, doesn’t this indicate the vaccine is effective? Also, with the healthy use effect, has there been any research on the prevalence of sexual partners between those vaccinated and unvaccinated?
Are the successes of screening being attributed to the vaccine? I sometimes follow the comments on relevant articles and people will often trumpet the success of the vaccine by claiming cervical cancer in being eliminated in countries like Sweden. Is it too early to make that claim? Maybe it’ll take 40 years for a definitive answer. Oh well, hopefully in time for the granddaughters.
Thanks James, I certainly have seen the lower rates of cervical cancer deaths being attributed to the vaccine, but as Dr Lee points out, it's not based in robust evidence. If there is type replacement, that would suggest the vaccine reduces those targeted strains, but what matters are the clinical outcomes - are we saving lives by vaccinating? That should be the endpoint we're most interested in. And how many do we harm in the process? As Dr Lee says in his report, the long term effectiveness of Gardasil is uncertain, but the harms are unpredictable, difficult to treat and often irreversible.
Pharma has unscrupulous ways of twisting data to support their bottom line. I keep sending your substacks on this subject to my son hoping it will make him question. But, his wife and family are all in with pharma and they think I have a problem. I know in that past my daughter was told that her mother is irresponsible for refusing the shot back in the day. How nice of them. Pharma has indoctrinated the supposed benefits to millions of minds, it’s tough having independent thinking.
If only we had most "journalists" actually reporting, which is what you do, instead of selectively culling stories that do not fit their (Leftist) world view and making things up... If that occurred Pharma would seriously struggle with many of their products...
Did a pharmaceutical company mislead the public?
Does rain fall from clouds?
My cynicism is well placed having worked in the pharmaceutical industry for 30+ years.
And, sadly, it is not cynicism.
It is reality.
Wake up everyone.
Thanks for the continued coverage on Gardisil. This vaccine remains strongly promoted in elite academic medicine. It is medical heresy not to promote its use. I am attempting to provide informed consent to patients requesting this vaccine and this information is helpful. The studies promoting efficacy are typically manipulated in multiple ways - study design, statistical massaging of the raw data and of course the “healthy user bias” always lurking in the background. I am having much success at simply citing the 6 month risk for new autoimmune disease (around 2.6%) following vaccine or placebo. (And the simple fact that we do not have long term hard RCT data looking at outcome for cervical cancer).
Thanks Julia
This is medical reporting at its finest ! Facts, stats and total truth. Doc MaDem does it again. Asking the real questions, telling the real stories. Why would anyone listen to the shill media ? I recall certain high profile "health specialist reporters" (despite not having any sort of qualifications in anything remotely health science related) promoting this 'Gardasil Gunk' as "God's gift to girls". One wonders what sort of gift these grifters received to peddle such piffling propaganda!
They did actually refer to co-inventor Prof Ian Frazer as “Gods gift to women”. 👀
🤦 good grief
Once a century ago thought by men to be a compliment in the days of wolf whistles
Sorry, just taking a moment to retch.
As an Australian/UQ vaccine, it was all over the news here. It’s close to home for me, decisions had to be made for our young daughters. I recall reading Mercola’s articles at the time, how it was critical to have all three shots, that it wasn’t effective against all strains and the risk of serious side-effects. That combined with the lifestyle nature of disease, tipped me over to a NO. But it wasn’t an easy decision, nor is it 15 years later with hindsight! So thank you for your article Maryanne.
Questions I still have…If strains 16 & 18 are diminishing, while possibly causing type replacing, doesn’t this indicate the vaccine is effective? Also, with the healthy use effect, has there been any research on the prevalence of sexual partners between those vaccinated and unvaccinated?
Are the successes of screening being attributed to the vaccine? I sometimes follow the comments on relevant articles and people will often trumpet the success of the vaccine by claiming cervical cancer in being eliminated in countries like Sweden. Is it too early to make that claim? Maybe it’ll take 40 years for a definitive answer. Oh well, hopefully in time for the granddaughters.
Thanks James, I certainly have seen the lower rates of cervical cancer deaths being attributed to the vaccine, but as Dr Lee points out, it's not based in robust evidence. If there is type replacement, that would suggest the vaccine reduces those targeted strains, but what matters are the clinical outcomes - are we saving lives by vaccinating? That should be the endpoint we're most interested in. And how many do we harm in the process? As Dr Lee says in his report, the long term effectiveness of Gardasil is uncertain, but the harms are unpredictable, difficult to treat and often irreversible.
Pharma has unscrupulous ways of twisting data to support their bottom line. I keep sending your substacks on this subject to my son hoping it will make him question. But, his wife and family are all in with pharma and they think I have a problem. I know in that past my daughter was told that her mother is irresponsible for refusing the shot back in the day. How nice of them. Pharma has indoctrinated the supposed benefits to millions of minds, it’s tough having independent thinking.
Thanks again Maryanne.
If only we had most "journalists" actually reporting, which is what you do, instead of selectively culling stories that do not fit their (Leftist) world view and making things up... If that occurred Pharma would seriously struggle with many of their products...
Well, what a surprise - not.