# Lifestyles & Discussion > Personal Health & Well-Being >  Suck it, anti-vaxxers:  HPV Vaccine Leads To 90% Drop In Pre-Cancerous Cells

## angelatc

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-47803975





> Human papilomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted infection and some types are linked to cervical cancer.
> 
> Researchers said the vaccine has nearly wiped out cases of cervical pre-cancer in young women since an immunisation programme was introduced 10 years ago.
> 
> They found the vaccine had led to a 90% cut in pre-cancerous cells.
> 
> And they said the effects of the programme had "exceeded expectations".
> 
> Over the last decade, schoolgirls across the UK have routinely received the HPV vaccine when they are 12 or 13.
> ...

----------


## euphemia

Be a virgin, marry a virgin.  No risk at all. HPV is spread through repeated contact with infected people.

----------


## heavenlyboy34

> Be a virgin, marry a virgin.  No risk at all. HPV is spread through repeated contact with infected people.


Pretty much this^^ the article talks about young girls in particular, who *ought* to not be engaging in such risky behavior while under their parents' supervision anyway. Unlike practical vaccinations, this one fails the Reasonable Man standard (per English Common Law).

----------


## Stratovarious

This was a pier reviewed, double blind study that proves beyond the shadow of any doubt that 
the Vaxers were responsible for the 90% drop,,,,,,,,,

Oh wait, no it wasn't.

----------


## Stratovarious

The government should be the sole arbiter of Medication and Vaccines, they should always
be in charge of every aspect of our lives.

----------


## RonZeplin

*Q: What are the possible side effects of HPV vaccination?*

 A: Vaccines, like any medicine,  can have side effects. Many people who get HPV vaccine have no side  effects at all. Some people report having very mild side effects, like a  sore arm. The most common side effects are usually mild. Common side  effects of HPV vaccine include:

Pain, redness, or swelling in the arm where the shot was givenFeverHeadache or feeling tiredNauseaMuscle or joint pain 
 Brief fainting  spells and related symptoms (such as jerking movements) can happen  after any medical procedure, including vaccination. Sitting or lying  down while getting a shot and then staying that way for about 15 minutes  can help prevent fainting and injuries caused by falls that could occur  from fainting.

 On very rare occasions, severe (anaphylactic) allergic reactions may occur after vaccination. People with severe allergies to any component of a vaccine should not receive that vaccine.

https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/ques...l#side-effects




> *The Troubling Truth Behind HPV Vaccines : Prepare to be Outraged*
> 
> During the first year that Gardasil was on the market, Merck spent  one hundred million dollars advertising their HPV vaccine to girls like  Gaby. Unfortunately, what Gaby and her mother saw as a health benefit  rapidly became a health nightmare after Gaby followed the Centers for  Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendation to get three doses  of Gardasil. Once a varsity cheerleader and straight-A student, Gaby was  no longer able to attend school, hang out with friends or walk long  distances. She suffered two strokes, partial paralysis on the right side  of her face and partial vision loss. She also experienced multiple  daily seizures. Gaby would later be diagnosed with postural orthostatic  tachycardia syndrome (POTS), a disease that causes dysfunction of the  autonomic nervous system; central nervous system (CNS) lupus, a disease  in which the immune system attacks the bodys own cells and tissues;  cerebral vasculitis, a disease that causes inflammation of blood vessels  that can restrict blood flow, resulting in organ and tissue damage; and  fibromyalgia disorder, characterized by widespread musculoskeletal pain  accompanied by fatigue, sleep, memory and mood issues.
> *
> ADVERSE REACTIONS UNDERREPORTED*
> 
> The first two HPV vaccines to go to market were Mercks Gardasil vaccine  in 2006 and GlaxoSmithKlines (GSKs) Cervarix in 2009. (Both are still  marketed in other countries but are no longer in use in the U.S.,   having been replaced by Mercks Gardasil-9 vaccine in 2017.) HPV  vaccines were problematic since their introduction, despite the  statement on the CDCs website that HPV vaccination gives your child  safe, effective, and long-lasting protection against HPV cancers.2 Moreover, statistics show that Gaby is far from an anomaly: to date, over _fifty-eight thousand_ adverse reactionsincluding _four hundred twenty-seven deaths_have been reported after HPV vaccine injections in the U.S. alone.3  What makes these numbers even more shocking is the U.S. Food and Drug  Administrations (FDAs) estimate that less than 1 percent of all  vaccine-related adverse reactions are ever reported.4
> 
> Part of the problem is that many doctors dont even know that there  is a government system for reporting adverse events, called the Vaccine  Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).5 For those who do, the system is complicated and time-consuming to use.6  Another barrier to reporting adverse reactions is what doctors are  taught in medical schoolthat vaccines are so safe, they may never  encounter a vaccine reaction during their entire career. Therefore,  doctors often do not realize that medical conditions arising after  vaccination could be vaccine-related injuries.
> ...

----------


## Stratovarious

> *Q: What are the possible side effects of HPV vaccination?*
> 
>  A: Vaccines, like any medicine,  can have side effects. Many people who get HPV vaccine have no side  effects at all. Some people report having very mild side effects, like a  sore arm. The most common side effects are usually mild. Common side  effects of HPV vaccine include:
> 
> Pain, redness, or swelling in the arm where the shot was givenFeverHeadache or feeling tiredNauseaMuscle or joint pain
>  Brief fainting  spells and related symptoms (such as jerking movements) can happen  after any medical procedure, including vaccination. Sitting or lying  down while getting a shot and then staying that way for about 15 minutes  can help prevent fainting and injuries caused by falls that could occur  from fainting.
> 
>  On very rare occasions, severe (anaphylactic) allergic reactions may occur after vaccination. People with severe allergies to any component of a vaccine should not receive that vaccine.
> 
> https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/ques...l#side-effects



Steppenwolf was prophetic .

----------


## donnay

> *$100 Million, a Dead Woman, and a Statewide Cover Up
> Flint, Michigan comes to Maryland’s Department of Health*
> 
> By Josh Mazer - April 10, 2019
> 
> In a completely predictable turn of events, Merck has been formally accused of fraud and a host of other serious charges relating to the approval and marketing of the troubled, liability-free human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine, which they named Gardasil. This is the same vaccine for which our Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOH) has accepted over $100 million since 2011 to stealth market and hard-sell throughout the state.  The marketing also specifically includes targeting our 11 and 12 year olds sitting at their school desks.
> 
> The claims of the plaintiffs are being heard by Judge Maren Nelson in California Superior Court in the matter of Robi V Merck CA BC628589. A dream team of plaintiff pharma attorneys includes renowned names:  Ajalat & Ajalat; Weitz & Luxenberg; Morgan & Morgan; and Baum Hedlund, all of whom have teamed up to take on what they call “the most dangerous vaccine ever.” The list of formal claims against Merck include: 1) Fraud and deceit; 2) Negligent misrepresentation; 3) Defective product- inadequate warnings and information; and 4) medical malpractice and medical battery. On January 9, 2019, Judge Maren heard hours of testimony about the science of the case from both sides. She then denied Merck’s motion to dismiss and set discovery. The case will go on. The full case file is attached above.
> 
> ...


https://www.arundelpatriot.org/2019/...wide-cover-up/

----------


## TheCount

We'll, yeah, but if you give them the hpv vaccine then it'll be nonstnon orgies in middle schools all over the country.

What's that, the rate at which teens are having sex has gone down since introduction of the vaccine?  Uh, nevermind.

----------


## donnay

> *The Truth is Out: Gardasil Vaccine Coverup Exposed*
> 
> By Kelly Brogan, MD
> 
> Grassroots Awareness
> At lunch with publishing wheeler-dealers discussing the state of affairs in women’s mental health, a soft-spoken pregnant woman seated to my left turned to me and said: “I know this is off-topic, but what do you think of the Gardasil vaccine? I know a 25 year old who got it and hasn’t been able to leave the house in months? It seems more and more people are seeing it’s a bad idea?”
> 
> This question and its implications moved me.
> 
> ...


https://kellybroganmd.com/truth-out-...ments-exposed/

----------


## Firestarter

Big pharma doesn´t even claim that there is a single scientific study on the correlation between cancer and those magical HPV vaccines!

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.




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.




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...rvical-cancer/

----------


## Chester Copperpot

all im going to say is if i could do it over again id take the hpv vaccine... way better than getting cancer imo.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Big pharma doesn´t even claim that there is a single scientific study on the correlation between cancer and those magical HPV vaccines!


Your source for saying that "big pharma" doesn't claim that?

----------


## Working Poor

Oh Angela I can't believe you really believe that NWO BS. Come on now girl.

----------


## donnay

> all im going to say is if i could do it over again id take the hpv vaccine... way better than getting cancer imo.


A dear friend of mine got the HPV vaccine a little over three years ago...she was currently diagnosed with ovarian cancer and is undergoing chemo.

----------


## Chester Copperpot

> A dear friend of mine got the HPV vaccine a little over three years ago...she was currently diagnosed with ovarian cancer and is undergoing chemo.


Yeah Im not sure its going to prevent other types of cancers... As a man supposedly we are more susceptible to HPV related oral cancers.. Dont know.. If a doctor advised me to get the vaccine as a preventative Id get it... Sometimes it seems youre damned if you do and damned if you dont.

----------


## Firestarter

> Originally Posted by Firestarter
> 
> Big pharma doesn´t even claim that there is a single scientific study on the correlation between cancer and those magical HPV vaccines!
> 
> 
> Your source for saying that "big pharma" doesn't claim that?


 Do you even “think” before you post?




> Because there have been no trials at all with cervical cancer as an end point, because sample size and trial duration would be impractical – there is no evidence that any vaccine prevents cervical cancer.
> The trial size and duration would be impractical… because cervical cancer is a very rare outcome of HPV infection! If cancer is such a rare outcome of HPV; a “surrogate endpoint” like HPV infection isn’t very relevant.
> 
> The longest available follow-up data from phase II trials for Gardasil and Cervarix are 5 and 8.4 years, respectively.
> If we suppose that immunity becomes less within 20 years after vaccination, it seems unlikely that HPV-vaccines could prevent cancer.
> Data suggest “immunity” for up to 5-8 years after vaccination. Even if this is true this doesn’t show that cervical cancer could be prevented 2 to 3 decades after vaccination.
> 
> In “developed” countries on the other hand, with cervical cancer screening, vaccination programs would only be cost-effective if the vaccine provides complete and life-long efficacy and there is at least 75% coverage of the pre-adolescent population.
> This makes the cost-effectiveness of these vaccines in “developed” countries also very doubtful.
> ...


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post6650468

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Do you even “think” before you post?


Yes. And in the post you're replying to here I asked you a simple question. Is there a reason you didn't address what I asked?

----------


## euphemia

The vaccine does not prevent all strains of HPV, just so you know, and there is no test for men.  The best statistics are only guesses.  

So called safe sex will not prevent transmission of HPV because the virus is transmitted through direct genital contact with skin where the infection is active.

HPV-related cancers in men have always been extremely rare.  The vaccine is recommended for boys so they dont contract cancer-causing strains of HPV and pass them along to their various partners.

Cervical cancer in women is not always caused by HPV.

----------


## brushfire

So use the data to promote your view...   Regardless of its efficacy, I'm 100% against government mandated vaccinations - that's really what's causing all of this "Anti-Vaxxer" stuff.   The slimy fking government, and their big pharma friends...   The actions on both sides of the issue speaks volumes.

----------


## Created4

Where is the research? This is just a commentary published in the news, which says:

_



			
				new research suggests.
			
		

_

So where is the study? I read the entire article and found no link to the study. 

The BMJ pretty much publishes anything these days, even editorial commentaries....

----------


## Created4

I found the study:

https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1161

Basically, they looked at 12 and 13 year old girls and then examined them at age 20 to see if they had cervical cancer.

Question: what age are females most like to develop cervical cancer?

From the study:




> This study has limitations. The analysis was confined to women attending for cervical screening at age 20. Uptake of screening in fully vaccinated women aged 20 or 21 is 51%, and only 23% in unvaccinated women. It is possible therefore that vaccine effectiveness was over-estimated.


And then I always look to see who funded the study. There is this:




> Competing interests: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf and declare: KP has received travel monies from both Merck and GSK to attend conferences. KC’s institution has received monies to deliver research, or associated consumables to support research, from: Qiagen, Hologic, Selfscreen, GeneFirst, Euroimmun, Cepheid, Genomica, and LifeRiver.


So the authors of the study were on the payroll of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture the HPV vaccine.

----------


## Firestarter

It was once found out that there is a correlation between a previous infection with the magical Human papilloma virus (HPV) and cervical cancer.
Even though “correlation” isn’t “causation” they invented out of thin air that HPV causes cervical cancer.

Then they looked for vaccines that supposedly prevent infections with HPV.
Even if you assume that an infection with HPV increases your risk of cancer, it could very well be that poisoning somebody with an HPV vaccine increases the cancer rates (statistical information proves this).





> I found the study:
> 
> https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1161


As for this “study”...
The “scientists” forgot to report that they don’t have a placebo control group. There is no reason to believe that the unvaccinated young women and vaccinated women are similar. If hypothecically speaking, women with a compromised immune system or other health problems weren’t vaccinated, it would appear logical that these would have higher rates of illness (including cancer).
That only 23% of the unvaccinated women were screened, compared to 51% in fully vaccinated women, shows that these 2 groups aren’t similar. The “scientists” forgot to figure out why this huge difference appears.

They even claim that the non-vaccinated women were protected not by vaccines but by “herd immunity”.



> Herd protection was observed for the unvaccinated women in the 1995-96 cohort, with a 63% reduction in the odds of CIN grade1 (11% to 85%), 67% reduction for CIN grade 2 (19% to 86%), and 100% (69% to 100%) reduction for CIN grade 3, compared with unvaccinated women in 1988-90.


So basically they assume that the unvaccinated young women were more protected. This suggests that these “scientists” have been manipulating the data to make the conclusions that big pharma wants. How could they assume that the “protection” of the unvaccinated was the result of the other girls being poisoned with HPV vaccines?



> So the authors of the study were on the payroll of the pharmaceutical companies who manufacture the HPV vaccine.


They compared the “early” to the “later” unvaccinated group. Of course these groups aren’t the same, but never mind that! If hypothetically speaking in around 1994 guidelines were changed for contraindications for HPV vaccines, this could account for this...



> Girls in the catch-up group (1991-94) are more likely to have been exposed to HPV before immunisation, whereas the routinely immunised group (1995-96) are considered more likely to be HPV naïve. We investigated herd protection by comparing the disease rates among unvaccinated women in the 1991-92, 1993-4, and 1995-96 cohorts with unvaccinated women in the 1989-90 cohort.






> Basically, they looked at 12 and 13 year old girls and then examined them at age 20 to see if they had cervical cancer.


And to top it all, they didn’t even study any reduction in cancer rates, but a reduction in rate of Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia (CIN). CIN is NOT cancer and usually curable: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cervic...lial_neoplasia

As it is reported that “only a small percentage” of CIN cases supposedly progress to cervical cancer it is doubtful how anybody could even prove this...
Whether this reported reduction in CIN is associated with a reduction of cervical cancer rates, or an increase, only time can tell.

----------


## euphemia

I this case, I don’t see that the safety and efficacy of Gardasil is the issue.  The issue is whether there is a safer alternative that can prevent HPV 100%.  There is, and not giving that argument is medical malpractice.

----------


## euphemia

One more point:  So-called studies do not use unvaccinated virgins til marriage as any kind of demographic.  There is no way to determine anything in that cas, because it would be based on the word of the participant.

----------


## euphemia

There is not a single vaccine that ever provides instant immunity.  If there is exposure to disease at any point before full immunity develops, the patient will get sick.  Any woman can be vaccinated, but if she has sexual contact with an infected person at any point before she has developed the antibodies to prevent disease, she will get the disease.  That’s a months-long process.

----------


## Danke

Wonder witch  which of the three brands angelatc has taken.

----------


## oyarde

i'm not overly concerned about hpv or  covid . you guys need to come up with some better diseases.

----------


## Danke

> i'm not overly concerned about hpv or  covid . you guys need to come up with some better diseases.


I have some blankets to trade with you.

----------


## oyarde

> I have some blankets to trade with you.


I got the smallpox vax in the 60's I think , they started the big campaign in '58 if I recall. The Hong Kong flu (in the 60's if I recall )was worse than this Wuhan. I only ever got one flu shot in the 70's and it made me deathly ill so I never got another. Only Vax I got since the smallpox was a shingles and I just did that recently. The Mrs got deathly ill from her last flu shot and then gave them up after .I was never really anti vax or really had much of an opinion on it but I'm not getting any wuhan BS vax.

----------


## Danke

> I got the smallpox vax in the 60's I think , they started the big campaign in '58 if I recall. The Hong Kong flu (in the 60's if I recall )was worse than this Wuhan. I only ever got one flu shot in the 70's and it made me deathly ill so I never got another. Only Vax I got since the smallpox was a shingles and I just did that recently. The Mrs got deathly ill from her last flu shot and then gave them up after .I was never really anti vax or really had much of an opinion on it but I'm not getting any wuhan BS vax.


With all the incentives?  Free Starbucks, Ice Cream, etc. I’ll petition the government to supply lifetime of beads if you get your tribe  to accept the jab.

----------


## Danke

Side note, you’ll have to turn in your Tomahawks for this benefit, small price to pay, IMHO.

----------


## donnay

You have to follow the science-fiction.  They sell all these vaccines with FEAR as the main ingredient.  However, when you look up the real ingredients, you should think twice about putting some toxic sludge into your body.

Oh, and by the way, the friend in my above comment died a year ago.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> You have to follow the science-fiction.  They sell all these vaccines with FEAR as the main ingredient.  However, when you look up the real ingredients, you should think twice about putting some toxic sludge into your body.
> 
> Oh, and by the way, the friend in my above comment died a year ago.


RIP

----------


## oyarde

> Side note, you’ll have to turn in your Tomahawks for this benefit, small price to pay, IMHO.


Never

----------


## acptulsa

> The government should be the sole arbiter of Medication and Vaccines


Medication and Vaccines but not Government?  Surely you consider it worth that big G.

Let's see.  We have Medication and Vaccines, but only have government.  I presume you're pfishing for Pfizer.

----------


## Invisible Man

> The government should be the sole arbiter of Medication and Vaccines


Sarcasm?

----------


## acptulsa

> Sarcasm?


IM, meet aannaa and annyanna, an AI bot with good cop/bad cop subroutines, and a remarkably faulty humor detector.

----------

