Gardisil: Fact vs. Fiction
I have already replied to this blog page once, and that entry is right here. On this page I will respond seperately to each comment made.
As you get to know Mr. Hubbs you realize his medical and vaccine conspiracy theories are not only limited to autism or mercury or thimerosal, but rather to pretty much any vaccine ever developed. This includes the MMR vaccine, the polio vaccine (I'm working on a post related to his "sugar causes polio" nonsense), and of course the Gardisil vaccine.
Heres a little information that should correct some of your selective stupidity.
In fact, for quite some time you could even say Gardisil was Mr. Hubbs' favorite topic, and he considers himself one of the world's foremost researchers on the subject. Granted 100% of what he knows has been obtained via Google searches and he has never set foot in an actual scientific research lab and has never taken a single college course on biochemistry (or any other college course for that matter) nor has he ever bothered to read the numerous medical studies which were performed on the vaccine prior to the FDA approval, but lets try to avoid those issues for now.
Maybe some of this information will clear up some your delusional thought processes as to their being no studies. It is pretty hard to refute when that information comes right from the FDA, and the VRBPAC preapproval meeting documents. Listen up!I could easily outline for you what is on that video and have before; however you can easily follow what is stated. Apparently you dont even know what is in those FDA statements and douments. Looks like the only one avoiding the issues, is you?
Gardasil HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed
The Great HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed
A Judicial Watch Special Report: Examining the FDA’s HPV Vaccine Records.(This additionally will address what you hear in the Mike Adams Gardasil truth video)!
FDA Background Document (May 18, 2006) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee: Gardasil HPV Quadrivalent Vaccine.
So although it doesn't surprise me that Mr. Hubbs would write about Gardisil, what does surprise me is that he makes claims which he himself has never been able to substantiate with science. Case in point is the following comment left on a Gardisil discussion by our very own Mr. Hubbs:
What is quite unbelievable for a person like you that claims to have knowledge of all that claimed to science as to vaccines and as well as to Gardasil, that you can never refer to any, nor post any of that?
How many vaccines can you answer these questions for? I know on the Argus you were asked that before and couldn't come up with much of anything.
I am sure you can and would have the ability to fill this implied consent [having informed the parent or patient of all the risks] form out for each and every vaccine as well?
Here he finds a 2 year old posted article reply by me, somewhere on the internet.
"The fact is 90% of HPV infections clear on their own. This vaccination is unproven to how long immunity lasts, may be no more than 5 yrs at best. HPV is not proven to cause cervical cancer, only that HPV sometimes resides in precancerous cervical lesions. The theory that any virus causes cancer is also unproven and questioned by several medical reseachers. [sic]" ~
And goes on to respond:
So here we have Mr. Hubbs giving us facts about HPV as if he has first hand knowledge. Don't bother asking for a source to validate his statements however as Mr. Hubbs is likely to refer you to his own blog as evidence. The simple truth is HPV may clear on its own, but so can the mumps or measles or any number of other viruses. Meningitis could also clear on its own if you really want to get technical, but does that mean nobody should get vaccinated because the virus MIGHT clear on its own with no side effects?
How is mumps and measles even related to HPV? Measles and Mumps cause illness, and HPV is basically and essentially silent as well as mostly unknown for most women that have it. What kind of a refuse to comprehend anything and twisted rationalization is that? Why would you want to inject 225 mcg. of aluminum (amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate) totaling 675 mcg. in the three shots, as well as, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate 80, sodium borate, (roach killer), and water for injection.
However, if you can not understand how all those vaccine toxins can actually dysregulate and suppress immune function, then I can see you have absolutely no comprehension of physiological functions of the body, to begin with? Being that Gardasil is only known to produce titers for 2.5 to 5 years; a 9 year old girl may need up to 4 sets of 3 shots or 3 additional boosters by the time she is 25! If doing the series, (no-one knows), that is 12 Gardasil shots at 225 mcg. aluminum content each. That would end up being 2700 mcg. of aluminum - shot in the arm of a young woman! Then let's add all the other vaccines, and ingredients... they get? Few to no studies have been done combining vaccine ingredients, nor on the synergistic effect it may have.
Vaccine Ingredients. [Insanity]
Information on vaccines and the adverse effect on the immune system
Vaccines and Immune Suppression.
Immune System Dysfunction, Margaret J. McFall-Ngai, Ph.D.
Margaret J. McFall-Ngai, Ph.D.
Professor, Medical Microbiology and Immunology
Why Vaccine Don't Work As Advertised.
Do Vaccines Disable The Immune System. (Good article).
Vaccines are destroying our immune systems. Amazingly, the medical profession ignores the incriminating evidence against vaccines, and continues to inflict more unnecessary and harmful vaccines on our nation's infants
How Vaccines Dysregulate The Immune System.
This is well known even in the veterinary field as well.
Vax Immune Suppression
It probably doesn't matter to Mr. Hubbs that those with HPV could spread it to others just as those with measles or mumps could spread it to others. Mr. Hubbs doesn't seem to care about those who might contract a virus from another person however, he just wants to prevent anyone from ever being vaccinated. The fact that a virus could be passed from person to person and could eventually lead to one or more people being diagnosed with cancer, or in some cases that people could actually die as as direct result from a simple preventable virus just isn't that important to Mr. Hubbs.
I again refer you to the video by Mike Adams and also the information above, showing that real fact information about HPV and Gardasil. You have no proof that Gardasil will prevent anything. How can anyone trust an FDA that ignored the fact that Gardasil had a negetive, thats - 44.6% effect in reduction of precanerous indicators in those in the clinical trials vaccinated with Gardasil? The outcome of that should have been testing for existing HPV strains prior to use of the vaccine. Have they done that, the answer is no; even though one of the companies that makes that test equipment, clearly made issue with that to the FDA in 2006, while making application for specific approval of their equipment for that purpose. All of it went ignored.
How can you trust an FDA that ignored the fact that they seen in the trials an increase in Virulence of non targeted strains of HPV, due to use of Gardasil. Thats nature, always trying to beat what is attempting to beat it; and no differant with bacteria and antibiotics.
Of course his care for others doesn't stop there, and his comments continue:
Then he goes on to find another posted on by me article on the internet
"some Gardasil ingredients,[sic] polysorbate 80, (said to disperse the ingredients [sic] in the vaccine more uninformly [sic]), causes infertility [sic] in mice, and no research on that by Merck was done. The vaccine also contains L- histidine, also known to cause severe allergic reacions [sic], additionally the vaccine contains sodium borate, similar to Borax and has been used as roach killer, tell me why [sic] that is in the vaccine? Do the homework, stop first, research this on the net extensively like I have for weeks. The benefits [sic] do not outweigh the risks."
Do you think you have enough [sic's] in there ...bogus character name, no identity...Costner?
So, you went and googled my name and looked for anywhere I posted. Then you expected me in that post to also fill a full page with all the references OF proof. Do you mean, just like YOU, for the most part have failed to do, here? Ya, thats what I thought.
So according to Mr. Hubbs, the benefit of preventing a young girl or woman from contracting cervical cancer doesn't outweigh the risks of getting the vaccine. Granted he doesn't provide any facts or figures to show us why these risks are so significant, and he doesn't compare the number of doses given of the vaccine with no side effects versus the few claims of vaccine injury.
The figures of how many recieved the vaccine verses the number of significant adverse reactions, unrecovered from outcomes and death, have nothing to do with anything, when you are simply putting forth the potential risks in reference to those who have been harmed. To ignore that, is to essentialy claim that the collateral damage is at an acceptable level to ignore, and that is simply and clearly not the case. That is never an acceptable view, in regard to any vaccine nor pharmacuetical drug. You simply ignore the real risks and minimize it all based on falsified CDC and FDA claimed findings. To claim that there is no pattern found, and no connection is what they perpetually attempt to claim - for any vaccine or drug out there. The damage and death rates for pharmaceutical drugs sometimes have need to be in the 6 digit numbers before they will even consider doing anything. Vioxx for example. And as usual with the FDA, that has to be prompted by outside sources.
Does this look to you like there are no serious problems with Gardasil? Endless.
Be sure to review my response page 1 to that blog, as well.
In review, it is really worth all that... isn't it; when there is no proof that Gardasil even works! The CDc has touted high levels of near 100% protection, based on what; antibody titers? Antibody titers mean nothing, loosk at all the herd immunity and vaccine failures the CDc has failed to address when the largest problem was in the vaccinated. Fear mongering the parents that it was the unvaccinated that caused it. We all know most schools that had outbreaks actually had the numbers vaccinated to call it herd immunity; something as well that the term in itself has absolutely no basis in any actual vaccine science.
Head Gardasil Researcher Says It’s Ineffective and “a Public Health Experiment”
Merck Researcher Admits: Gardasil Guards Against Almost Nothing
And when Merck attempted to mandate the vaccine for as young as all nine year old girls in every state, I bet there was allot of science backing that too? Working through women in gov't groups and falsely being told what a good deal it was, that was all false hooeey as well.
How as well can you do an honest clinical trial using as a placebo, one placebo containing the full amount of aluminum, and the other placebo contained the carrier solution?
New Gardasil Findings about Clinical Trials.
Read all the articles on Gardasil; this woman has done more research on Gardasil than anyone else I know.
[PDF] Vaccines and Autoimmune Diseases of the Adult - 1 Prepared Feb 4, 2010 ... Prepared by Cynthia Janak aluminum salts.
Aluminum in Vaccines, a Neurological Gamble
Aluminum In Vaccines.
Merck employees had "hit list" of doctors they sought to "neutralize", court documents reveal
Merck News and Articles
Oh course Merck needed to recoup their Vioxx loses, so they had to fast track a vaccine and create a new bankroll.
Canadians Follow GARDASIL Money Trail
Revenue predictions for Merck are that GARDASIL profits will climb from $300 million to $4 billion over the next year.
Ok, lets get started. As to the below comments, here are those said CDC documents.
I myself would go for a little more unbiased data than what the CDC has, like this right here.
Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine Safety. Analysis of Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System Reports:
Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine Safety. Analysis of Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System Reports:
Human Papilloma Virus Vaccine Safety. Analysis of Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System Reports: Adverse Reactions, Concerns and Implications
So let's go ahead and do that for Mr. Hubbs since he seems incapable of doing so for himself. According to the CDC as of September 30, 2010, approximately 32 million doses of Gardasil have been distributed in the US. That is 32,000,000 doses and according to Mr. Hubbs, 32,000,000 chances that a risk would outweigh a benefit.
Incorrect: 32 million doses distributed does NOT mean there have been 32 million doses actually used by the public, that figure is seemingly quite unknown as to exact number, or as to even a guess. The actual doses used could be a fraction of that number, so really without the actual figure calculations are not going to be entirely accurate. As well we need to figure in the fact that VAERS is well known to have only a 1 to 10% reporting, due to doctos and other medical workers reluctance to ever report a suspected vaccine reaction, no matter how severe it is wrote off as another coincidence. Obviously your math here has as well entirely ignored that fact, and not figured that factor in!
So of these 32,000,000 doses, how many resulted in negative side effects or "risks"? Well, again according to the CDC as of September 30, 2010, there were 17,160 Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) reports of adverse events following Gardasil vaccination in the US. Of these reports, 92% were reports of events considered to be non-serious, and 8% were reports of events considered serious.
And if you believe any bullshit like that- claiming that only 8% of the total of adverse events were serious in nature, you clearly have not done enough research into the real life reality of Gardasil! It (that) is a complete whitewash of the truth, as always. Do you actually believe they would admit to anything, with any honesty? And as well if they were so in denial as to any common link to the death, they certainly would not be honest about the nature of the adverse events either.
There is as well a differant way of looking at it. Under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, over $2 billion has been awarded to children and adults for whom the risks of vaccine injury were 100%. We know as well that the NVCA is not a catch all and only a small percentage of total claims ever actually get settled. Actually, it an unfair system as to its limitations, just as well as it has an outright corrupt system of review.
As well, lets look at that 32 million figure again! The one you equate to doses actually used.
The United States 2000 Enumerated Census showed only 36,695,524 females in the age range of 10 to 29. It was offically reported as of Nov. 2008, that 10 to 20% have received at least one dose of Gardasil; averaging 15%. That number is 5,804,329, which based on that information at that time-recieved at least one dose of Gardasil.
In a non VAERS system not mentioned here, there were reported 20,000 adverse reactions directly to Merck -2008. Which is closer to what exists in VAERS in 2010.
October 23, 2008 Cervical Cancer Vaccine Called Safe
[In this information] The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Immunization Safety Office said a study of 370,000 doses given to girls and young women over the past two years found no evidence that the vaccine causes an increased risk of blood clots or other serious conditions, Bloomberg News reported.
So by that above article, here in 2008 the CDC number of estimated doses of Gardasil used, were 370,000, a long ways from 32 million!!! How's that figure, to you??? In other words they used up less than a million doses of Gardasil, from the first use in June 2006, to October 2008; but used 30 million additional doses between 2008 and 2010? Wow? Something smells a little rotten in Denmark as to your use of the CDC figures... there Costner? You better call the CDC and ask what the right number is, as to those actually vaccinated with Gardasil, and the total number of doses used??? Allot of young ladies never completed the shots, after getting sick from the first one or two
So, it doesn't seem that you could ever really get a precisely accurate count of just how many doses of Gardasil vaccine have actually been used. Unless there is a source, I haven't yet run across.
Gardasil and HPV Infection Get the facts.
As to the numbers of adverse reactions; as said, you and the CDC have neglected to inform anyone that there is a well known only 1 to 10% reporting factor as to the VAERS system. So would that matter or make any differance to you? It should. 17160 adverse reactons then become with a 10% reporting factor x 10 and equal to over 171 thousand adverse reactions. 1373 serious reactions then become 13,730. 56 deaths then become 560 deaths. That is if the reporting is even as high as 10%. So what you have created here is just about flat out worthless as to the reality of Gardasil risk.
Gardasil – A different way of looking at the reactions.
VAERS reporting -- is it accurate? [An example of what I showed you].
Gardasil tragedies -- Where are the reports? A few examples of case histories where the girl died, and they say there is no common link found?
Polysorbate 80 and Histidine, a marriage of disaster. [Theres one of your links,]!
Gardasil Update: learn about the concerned womens group that took the Gardasil issue to the FDA. And what happened? It doesn't appear that much of anything resulted. The FDA can not admit to any major issue with any vaccine, as they know it will open the pandoras box questioning all vaccines.
The REAL truth!!! CDC Gardasil Risk Report Is A Cover-up
This week the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in association with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) issued a report on Gardasil vaccine safety that amounts to a cover-up of serious reactions, including paralysis and deaths, that have been reported to the government's Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS).
Today (October 24, 2008), the National Vaccine Information Center issued a press release that calls on the CDC and FDA to release to the public the study design, data and names of principal investigators involved in the report maintaining that Gardasil vaccine is safe with no serious side effects. NVIC will also be calling on the newly elected President and members of Congress to remove the nation's vaccine safety monitoring system from DHHS and place it in a separate entity reporting directly to Congress.
Conflicts of interest are rampant in a mass vaccination infrastructure that has the same people, who are regulating and promoting vaccines, also evaluating vaccine safety. This kind of conflict of interest cannot be tolerated.
October 26, 2008 Gardasil safety questioned, CDC urged to back up statement with data. National Vaccine Information Center Says Government Denies Gardasil Risks.
The CDC and FDA are alleging that the vast majority - if not all - of the approximately 9,000 HPV vaccine adverse events, including (at that time) 27 deaths, reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) are not causally related to the Gardasil vaccine based on internal analysis, including review of medical records of girls and women vaccinated in HMO's participating in the federal Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) Project and other closed government operated databases.
"Transparency in government is essential to trust in government and replication is the hallmark of good science," said NVIC co-founder and president Barbara Loe Fisher. "Parents of young girls and women cut down in their prime - some of them paralyzed or dead within hours or days of getting Gardasil vaccine - deserve better answers than a whitewashing of this vaccine's very serious side effects. Until there is an independent confirmation of these unverified findings by individuals and companies without financial ties to the government or industry, it is not credible."
So out of 17,160 events, approximately 92% (or 15,787 events) are non-serious. This includes things like pain at the injection site (common for any shot), dizziness, headache, fever, or fainting. Since these events are not serious and typically clear up on their own, lets disregard them for the sake of this discussion.
Do you mean, just like they disregarded all the endless number of seizures these girls had a short time after the shots, and as well even days and weeks later. As for some of the reported as Gardasil deaths to VAERS, and I wondered too, how a car accident death could be attributed to Gardasil. They had a seizure and crashed their cars, and someone knew it! It was oddly enough listed the same way in the clinical trials as well. And what did the FDA do? They only placed a new warning to have the woman lying down when injected and watch for them 15 minutes. Again, a total disconnect from the reality of the situation that was and is going on.
This leaves us with the 8% (or approximately 1,373 events) which are classified as serious. Of this 8%, some of these events include girls being diagnosed with Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), although once again if we refer to the CDC source material we find "there has been no indication that Gardasil increases the rate of GBS in girls and women above the rate expected in the general population, whether or not they were vaccinated.
And, how much consideration was given to Gardasil being combined with other vaccines?
NVIC Analysis Shows Greater Risk Of GBS Reports When HPV Vaccine Is Given With Meningococcal And Other Vaccines.
If you actually think Guillian-Barre Syndrome is the issue and the only major issue with Gardasil, you have been drinking the CDC Koolaid for far to long!
Gardasil Trials Update “New Medical Conditions”
Again, do not forget that as to that VAERS reporting, that it is clearly well known that VAERS contains only reporting of 1 to 10% of the total reactions that should and could have been reported. Why? Because the brainwashed doctors refuse to report the reactions, no matter how severe; to include even death it is attributed to something else or no cause found. Look at those VAERS reports! The assumption is always that it couldn't have been the vaccine, and that it is all again a coincidence. When you read the endless real life accounts of this as to all the Gardasil unrecovered outcomes; doctors have repeatedly nearly bankrupted families, looking and testing for any cause - but Gardasil. Oh ya, now they have Cervarix too, with its new Apo4 adjuvant, proven equally if not more dangerous in its now known results. It was first approved in Europe and was held up here over the adjuvant they had no existing way nor set guideline in regard to safety. Just let your daughter be a guinea pig for pharma.
VAERS Usefulness and Limitations.
November 2008 Let us play with the Gardasil numbers. (Theres some damaging information-if I ever seen it)! Read and educate yourself!
So what does that mean? Well it simply means the incidence of girls being diagnosed with GBS occurs in the same rate whether they were or were not vaccinated with Gardisil. Therefore scientifically speaking we cannot link the rate of GBS with the vaccination and the only reason these types of events are reported to VAERS is because the system is intended to collect all events whether related or not. Since there is no proven increase in the rate of GBS, it doesn't appear this is a significant risk.
Ok, ya right, keep believing that. Whatever the CDC states is correct and absolutely right!
Another serious event reported included blood clots. This isn't so much of an issue with Gardisil as it is with an injection itself of course, but as it turns out those girls and women who experienced blood clots were in the "at risk" category which includes those who smoke, those who take oral contraceptives, and those who are considered obese. Thus in this case, a number of factors may have contributed to the blood clots including lifestyle choice... so is this something we can blame solely upon the Gardisil vaccine? Not very likely.
Here is what even JAMA had to say about those blood clots.
Conclusions Most of the AEFI rates were not greater than the background rates compared with other vaccines, but there was disproportional reporting of syncope and venous thromboembolic events. The significance of these findings must be tempered with the limitations (possible underreporting) of a passive reporting system.
The Risks and Benefits of HPV Vaccination -JAMA
[Not exactly a raving review]!
If they were at risk in using birth control pills at the time they were given Gardasil, then why did the FDA not require Merck to study that prior to approval of the vaccine? There no warnings on that, any more than that Gardasil could cause a -44.6% increased chance of cervical cancer, if you already had an existing targeted strain. it is right in the FDA approval douments. As condition of approval Merck was to study it further and report back. Try and find anything in the FDA douments on that outcome? It doesn't exist.
An example of this would be building a home. The foundation is designed to support a single family home with one story above ground, and assuming the house is build as designed everything will be fine. However decades later, the new owner of the house decides he needs more room, so he adds another two stories to the house. He doesn't bother to reinforce the foundation, and assumes everything will be fine. He finishes the project and decides to put a new hot tub on the third floor which holds 1,000 gallons of water. A few weeks after living in the new expanded house it starts to settle. A few weeks after that the foundation develops a huge crack on one wall, and soon the foundation fails and the house falls down bringing the hot tub and the 1,000 gallons of water into the basement
Kind of like the house of Merck should have cracked and fallen, after the Vioxx and Gardasil scandles?
So is the hot tub to blame for the foundation failing? Obviously not - because there was a known weak point in the home. Had the foundation been strong enough to accept a larger structure, there wouldn't be a problem, but we don't blame the failure on the hot tub merely because we didn't know about the weak foundation.
The same is true with a case where a vaccine or medication might result in a condition which was underlying. Even if we didn't know about the condition, is it the fault of the vaccine if it comes to the surface? If we did know about the condition, but didn't think it would impact us, is it still fair to blame the vaccine if we are proven wrong? I dare say there is inherent risk in everything we do, but we can no more blame the vaccine for an underlying condition when we knew about the risk factors than we can blame the hot tub for the failing foundation when the builder knew about the weak foundation.
Translation: Even if it was the Gardasil, that way they can always blame it on something else, and claim there was never any common link found; no matter what. Must of been another coincidence.
All of this said, the one primary serious event that everyone is concerned with is the risk of death, so if it is determined that Gardisil results in girls dying simply by taking the vaccine, then surely it needs to be addressed. Looking at the CDC material, we can see that out of those 32,000,000 doses of Gardisil that have been given thus far, there have been 56 deaths reported among females who have received the Gardisil vaccination.
32 million doses given??? Again, read what I just put further up on this page for information! Are you that cognitively inept that you believe 32 million distributed doses just positively has to equal 32 million doses used? That when there were only slightly over 36 million women age 10 to 29, in the 2000 census? Like noone heard all the bad stuff about Gardasil and refused their daughter to take it. It is not like it is a huge secret.
Anything you can find as always, to distort and twist the truth.
Now if we assume every woman receives the full recommended three dose schedule of the vaccine, that tells us that 10,700,000 woman have received Gardisil thus far, and of those 10,700,000 woman 56 have died. I don't mean to trivialize 56 deaths. In fact I don't even mean to trivialize one single death, but the math tells us these 56 deaths account for approximately 0.0005% of the women who received the Gardisil vaccination. In other words the remaining 99.9995% of women are still alive and with us.
Oh, you are so feeling, what a nice guy?
It looks like you again clearly... ARE... trivializing allot of issues here! No proof..ever!
More importantly however, according to the CDC out of these 56 deaths (which of only 30 have been confirmed thus far), there was "no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine". This means that if a woman died of a totally unrelated heart issue within days or perhaps even weeks of receiving the Gardisil vaccine, that event would be reported to VAERS. It doesn't mean Gardisil caused the issue, but to err on the side of caution, all such events are reported.
Confirmed? You mean they might not be dead?
However since the analysis of these deaths does not include any pattern or clustering when compared to non-vaccinated control groups, no reasonable researcher or scientist (or even anyone with an open mind) can claim that these deaths are all related to the Gardisil vaccine itself. In fact if you read about the actual deaths in greater detail, you will find in some cases the deaths were directly attributed to causes such as illicit drug use and heart failure. Can we really blame a death upon a vaccination when the women decides to inject herself with illegal drugs and dies of an overdose? I personally don't think so.
Now it is quite possible a woman out there has died or been seriously injured as a direct result of the vaccine. Each person is unique, we all have different genetic traits including dominant and recessive genes. We each have different risk factors, different traits such as allergies or reactions to chemical compounds, and we each have our own medical histories which may include other prescription drugs, over-the-counter medications, supplements, nutrient intakes etc, etc. Therefore no medication, supplement, or even food is compatible with all humans, and as such there will always be a risk when someone decides to eat a new food, take a new supplement, use a new brand of toothpaste, or yes even take a new medication or vaccination.
You can not possibly be that ignorant? Eating sandwiches is sure scarey stuff? Considering that, I think I will definately stay with my old brand of toothpaste? Holy buckets. Any harm that comes from pharma, is due to bad and faulty genetics? "We done nothin"!
Obviously anything and everything we do has risk, and it is up to each individual to determine if they feel that risk is acceptable when compared to the benefits of eating the food, swallowing the supplement or vitamin, taking the medication, receiving the vaccine, or undergoing a medical procedure etc. I don't believe that is my place to tell someone else that they must get vaccinated, but at the same time I don't believe it is in Mr. Hubbs' place to tell them they can't. It is a personal decision best left up to the individual when they take all of the risk factors into mind.
Noone said they can't do... anything! Like I marched around to every clinic in town and told them all, no, don't get that Gardasil. Informed decisions is all it was and all it ever will be about. You know the kind you advocated as well but failed to give them the complete information? Decisions made with as well, the non biased information. According to you nothing is biased in the pharmaceutical world, and there is no control of any important information, so you falsely believe people such as me are not needed, nor anyone else out there but pharma the CDC and FDA. You have all the science...remember?
However it seems clear in this case, the risk of receiving a Gardisil vaccination is no greater than the risk of choosing to eat a sandwich for lunch or the decision to take aspirin to relieve a headache. For all of the screaming and yelling and arguments made against this vaccine really don't live up to scrutiny when you look at the facts and examine the real numbers.
Does a sandwich have any aluminum and/or sodium borate in it? Do you think there is any difference in eating polysorbate 80, and injecting it? How about L- histidine? They thought they didn't need to study it before they thought of injecting it in a vaccine, as it is an amino acid already found in the body. What they didn't realize was that injecting it can throw off the natural balance of histidine that exists. Mixed with polysorbate 80 that also causes infertility in mice, wellaa, you get the article published, Polysorbate 80 and histidine a marriage of disaster. But surely you have never read that.
Why then don't you just inject a sandwich, for lunch; to fit your logic? I think Sanfords doing a diabetes study on that? And just like the thimersol issue, you equate eating a substance like tuna, with injecting thimerosal, and as essentially the same thing. You are now as author of that blog, a genuine top notch physiological health scholar! We can all now clearly see that.
Oh, and you have someone else that feels the same way...congratulations!
The Great HPV Vaccine Hoax Exposed
I will debate you publicly any place you choose, and we will videotape it and upload it to youtube, that should be good for a laugh? What did you say your health care credentials... were? Oh thats right, you don't have any identity.
You should have known better than to screw with that!
Granted I'm not the only one who feels this way, as a poster named "Amber" who responded to Mr. Hubbs' comment had the following to say:
"Ah, well, we all know internet research trumps firsthand experience…"
Well played Amber... well played indeed.