Join for free
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Bruce's Avatar
Bruce
Chatterbox
Bruce is offline
Wollongong, Australia
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 15,218
Bruce is male  Bruce has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
25-06-2018, 05:36 AM
11

Re: HPV Vaccine

Isn't this nice? the tin foil beanie brigade have started their own thread.


All we need now is David "Avocado" Wolfe to complete the happy family.
Realist
Chatterbox
Realist is offline
UK
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 9,184
Realist is male  Realist has posted at least 25 times and has been a member for 3 months or more 
 
25-06-2018, 10:11 AM
12

Re: HPV Vaccine

Originally Posted by AnnieS ->
Do you have any evidence which gives scientific proof that the side effects mentioned have been linked to the vaccinations?
I'm confused. Are you refuting or simply discounting the $6 million that has already been paid out in compensation by the VICP specifically for victims of the HPV Vaccine?

Originally Posted by AnnieS ->
It would also be good to know whether any cases have won compensation in British courts.
Why? Is the $6m paid out in the USA somehow inferior to any compensation paid out in the UK?

Originally Posted by AnnieS ->
Every single vaccination has court cases because there is always a risk of severe side effects in some individuals. That's also the case with medication. Is there a single medicine that doesn't have a risk factor? Should you let someone die of infection rather than administer antibiotics?
There is a marked and HUGE difference between known and expected MILD side effects and massively serious side effects like paralysis, blindness and syndromes like POTS and Guillain-Barré.

In respect of the HPV vaccine, the MHRA received 3,972 Yellow Cards between 2010 and 2013, of which 940 were categorised as serious.

If I take antiobiotics I know that I might suffer nausea, diarrhea, vomiting and so on. Not an issue. However if antibiotics were found to cause blindness, sterility, paralysis then people would think twice and consider more natural options.

There's an interesting study that was conducted regarding the HPV Vaccine here, ostensibly I think because shortly after the vaccine was licensed, several reports of recipients experiencing primary ovarian failure emerged. Here's the report link:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...alCode=uteh20&

It used government data to study the fertility/pregnancy rates throughout the history of the HPV vaccine programme.

Here's what they found:

"This study analyzed information gathered in National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, which represented 8 million 25-to-29-year-old women residing in the United States between 2007 and 2014. Approximately 60% of women who did not receive the HPV vaccine had been pregnant at least once, whereas only 35% of women who were exposed to the vaccine had conceived. For married women, 75% who did not receive the shot were found to conceive, while only 50% who received the vaccine had ever been pregnant"

"Results suggest that females who received the HPV shot were less likely to have ever been pregnant than women in the same age group who did not receive the shot. If 100% of females in this study had received the HPV vaccine, data suggest the number of women having ever conceived would have fallen by 2 million"

This graph illustrates visually the impact. It shows the birth rates which were happily rising, suddenly take a dive after 2007 when Gardasil was rolled out.



Pretty shocking really.


If like me you didn't download the full report there, you can find some good discussion and commentary about it here:

http://vaccineimpact.com/2018/study-...en-aged-25-29/

Each to their own but I'm not in the least bit satisfied at this stage that the HPV Vaccine is needed or that it has been sufficiently tested for safety.
 
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2



© Copyright 2009, Over50sForum   Contact Us | Over 50s Forum! | Archive | Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Top

Powered by vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.