Gardasil: "Cancer jab linked to pancreas disease"

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Cancer jab linked to pancreas disease

Louise Hall, Health Reporter August 17, 2008

THE cervical cancer vaccine is under fresh scrutiny after three women were struck down with pancreatitis soon after receiving the injection.

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) is investigating whether the shot of Gardasil caused the sudden inflammation of the pancreas in the three patients, or whether it was just a coincidence.

A 26-year-old woman went to Bankstown Hospital four days after receiving her first dose of the quadrivalent vaccine, which protects young women from the strains of human papillomavirus (HPV) that cause 70percent of cervical cancers.

Writing in the Medical Journal Of Australia, surgery fellow Amitabha Das said the woman developed a fever, rash, severe pain and vomiting and was diagnosed with pancreatitis. After 10 days the symptoms settled and she was discharged from hospital and remains well.

Dr Das and his colleagues said an extensive investigation could find no other cause for the pancreatitis and while a coincidental illness could not be ruled out, "neither can HPV vaccination be excluded as a potential cause".

...more at the link

Edited to say: flame away.

[CATagious]

1. Who's hating on who?

Anyways.... 3 women out of how many hundreds of thousands?

[Warpy]

3. You mean millions, overall

and it's far too soon to announce a link.

This vaccine is under especial attack because it protects young women from some of the consequences of having sex.

Expect to see much more of the same.

In the meantime, the CDC and FDA are both collecting data, as they do after the general release of any drug or vaccine. If there are any side effects that weren't discovered in clinical trials, we can expect to wait at least another year to hear them announced.

In the meantime, take this stuff with a pound of salt.

[mhatrw]

21. This vaccine is under special attack because its benefits

are small and unproven, and its side effects are unknown.

[LeftishBrit]

12. I just looked up the stats on pancreatitis in the UK

Each year, in the UK, between 5-80 people, in every 100,000, are diagnosed with acute pancreatitis. Probably similar in America.

So one would really need to have a lot more info about how big the sample was, and how the numbers with this illness compared with people who had *not* received the Gardasil vaccination.

[mhatrw]

22. How many are 26?

[LeftishBrit]

30. I don't know; but people of all ages get it

It's not a disease of old age, though it is more likely to prove fatal in older people.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

13. 8,000,000 to be more specific.

[cosmik debris]

2. You are beginning to sound like the car alarm

that repeatedly goes off in the middle of the night. Nobody is going to get out of bed to check it out, and pretty soon people start wishing that the car would get stolen.

Do you really think your "boy who cried wolf" tactics are winning any converts? Or are you just pissing off anyone who might listen to a more reasoned voice?

[trotsky]

4. You know, pointing out the facts isn't "flaming" someone.

Though I'm sure you'd like that to be the case.

The article itself even says there is no reason to suspect the vaccine is responsible. But that doesn't stop you from sounding the alarm bells of fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

"No causative relationship with the vaccine has been established but obviously we do take reports of associations like this very seriously," Dr David said.

3.7 million doses, 3 women with pancreatitis. Let's err on the side of caution (I'm skewing the stats here in YOUR favor) and say that since Garadsil is a three-shot series, that ~1.2 million women in Australia have gotten the vaccine. So that's 3 out of 1,200,000, or 0.00025% who came down with pancreatitis following the vaccination. (With no evidence linking it other than temporal proximity.)

Do you know what the typical rate of pancreatitis is in Australia? According to this site, for the *general population* it's 3,385 out of 19,913,144, or 0.017%.

So, women who have had the Gardasil vaccine are approximately 68 times less likely to develop pancreatitis than the general population, if I did the math correctly!

But please, go ahead and screech and scream and wail about the "dangers" of this cancer-fighting vaccine. You are doing farm more harm to your cause than good!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

5. Good work!

Too bad the so-called journalist who put the crap out in the article in the OP couldn't be bothered to do a modicum of research. People I know who are actual scientists tell me they are appalled at the quality of what passes for "science reporting". Is it too much to ask that these writers have at least some training in scientific methodology?

[beam me up scottie]

6. "No causative relationship with the vaccine has been established"

Writing in the Medical Journal Of Australia, surgery fellow Amitabha Das said the woman developed a fever, rash, severe pain and vomiting and was diagnosed with pancreatitis. After 10 days the symptoms settled and she was discharged from hospital and remains well.

***

A spokeswoman for the TGA said in the second case, the patient's level of pancreatic enzymes normalised within 24 hours. A third woman is still under the care of a gastroenterologist.

***

It said the overall level of reporting for Gardasil, following the distribution of 3.7million doses in Australia, was very low and consistent with other new vaccines and rates reported from other countries.

You've got eight anti-vaccination threads on the front page, when can we expect the next Chicken Little rant?



THE SKY IS FALLING!1!11!

[Liberal Veteran]

7. I'm impressed. Is there NOTHING this vaccine doesn't cause?

Death, paralysis, fibromyalgia, cancer, pancreatitis, kidney failure, alzheimers, parkinsons, lymphoma, coma, blindness, schizophrenia, hairy palms, cellulite, vampirism, demonic possession, vagina dentata....

Did it cause your obsessive fixation on Gardasil?

[lizerdbits]

8. Don't forget genitals bursting into flames

what's the medical term for that?

[Liberal Veteran]

10. Genitor incogitatus combustion

[semillama]

26. Good god.

When that's combined with vagina dentata, I shudder to think of the consequences.

[cosmik debris]

9. Hairy Knuckles

Gardasil does not cause hairy knuckles.

Of all the VAERS reports, none report hairy knuckles.

Knuckles all over the world are safe from the tragic effects of Gardasil.

I know I'll sleep better tonight.

[varkam]

11. The stupid, it burns. eom

[Liberal Veteran]

14. Actually, it not only burns....it kills.

Crusades against science rarely give thought to the damage they inflict.

[varkam]

15. And why should they?

After all, they have the Truth(tm) on their side.

[Liberal Veteran]

16. More like Truthiness™

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

17. HPV couldn't be excluded as a potential cause, just plain horrible reporting.

Use the word link in the title even though it wasn't. 200 of the 1000 adverse reactions were soreness, redness or swelling at the injection site. This is from the story "The TGA has received 1013 reports of suspected adverse reactions to Gardasil, including soreness, swelling, redness or other reaction at the injection site (20percent), headaches (20percent), dizziness (15percent), nausea (16percent) and vomiting (6.9percent)." That's 71% of the "adverse" reactions. I had one EMT student faint, 2 get nauseous out of a class of 15 while starting IV's with normal saline and all complained of soreness at the injection site. I guess 0.9% Sodium Chloride needs to be reported to VAERS. Sorry if you think it's flaming to be confronted by the truth.

David

[Hannah Bell]

18. in the clinical trials data, those kind of minor reactions were about double

the rate for the placebo NS injection.

[trotsky]

19. Got a cite for that? n/t

[Hannah Bell]

32. bottom of page 10, "adverse reactions," ns placebo v. aluminum placebo v. vaccine.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/documents/2008/TABS.pdf

(i know it's judicial watch, but the doc is legit.)

[trotsky]

34. Got a cite that actually backs up what you said?

Or are you only comparing vs. saline placebo? That's not really a comparison you can make, since aluminum adjuvants are used precisely *because* they help stimulate a reaction - their presence enhances the immune response to the antigen. Comparison vs. the adjuvant placebo is more appropriate, and those numbers are quite close.

But at least you have friends at Judicial Watch, huh?

[Hannah Bell]

35. "Got a cite that actually backs up what you said?"

What i *actually* said was, the rate was about double the rate v. the normal saline (NS) placebo.

In response to someone saying swelling, etc. occurred even with saline.

[trotsky]

37. And you have nothing to say about the more appropriate placebo?

Probably not, since it doesn't help your crusade.

[Hannah Bell]

38. not on a crusade. entered this discussion because of the volume of ad hom,

like yours.

but since you asked me, what i noticed with the placebo comparisons was:

the incidence of rxn increases with vaccine from injection 1 to injection 3, where it's stable/declining for both placebos.

there's no ns comparison for more severe rxn, & the ns comparison group was quite small. & regardless of your opinion, ns placebo is quite appropriate.

[trotsky]

41. LOL

If you think the word "crusade" is an ad hom, you haven't read much of the Health forum.

Look, you failed to address the main point. The aluminum adjuvant's role in a vaccine is to enhance the immune response. If you want to identify what part of the reaction is due to the active ingredients, it is more appropriate to compare to the adjuvant placebo.

But hey, that's no fun, right?

[Hannah Bell]

42. not the word crusade i was responding to. & if you want to id what

proportion of response is due to the entire synergistic package, ns is proper placebo.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

20. 1013 adverse reactions out of 3.7 million doses.

71% of which were so minor it's hard to believe they were reported. Is NS (normal saline) reported to VAERS? Clearly these adverse side effects are demonstrative of some Big Pharma plan to make obscene profits from the sale of normal saline, they must have rushed it to the market without improperly testing it.

David

[mhatrw]

23. 9,749 adverse reactions were reported to VAERS.

The article is about Australia.

The vast majority of vaccine side effects are never reported.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

24. 1013 adverse reactions out of 3.7 million doses in Australia.

I qouted the numbers from the article which is about Australia. I don't think anyone else had trouble understanding that. What evidence do you have that the vast majority of vaccine side effects are never reported?

David

[mhatrw]

25. Your own attitude toward vaccine side effects for one. n/t

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

27. So you have no evidence to back up your claim.

[mhatrw]

28. Google "VAERS underreporting estimates" and see for yourself

Estimates range from 50% underreported to more than 90% underreported.

[Liberal Veteran]

29. Maybe that's because "injection site soreness" is the medical equivalent of spam.

Fucking duh.

It's like saying "swelling and moderate pain" are adverse reactions to having your wisdom teeth pulled.

You don't report stupid shit (although some do anyway).

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

31. You do realize that estimates aren't proof.

And that VAERS reporting doesn't actually prove that a vaccine caused a symptom.

David

[Hannah Bell]

33. nope. that's from vaers, i'm talking about clinical trials data.

minor adverse rxn like swelling were ~ double v. ns placebo.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

36. Any guesses as to what causes that swelling?

[Hannah Bell]

39. which swelling?

& immune response.

[Hannah Bell]

40. my point wasn't that swelling was untoward, but that it was double ns placebo

in response to a comment that seemed to imply similar response rates.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

43. I'll try again.

Is it your impression that the swelling is an adverse reaction to the vaccine? If so what physiological mechanism is causing that swelling and why does the vaccine cause it at twice the rate of normal saline?

David

[mzmolly]

44. Aluminum.

That's my guess.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

45. Is there aluminum in normal saline?

Do you consider slight swelling at the injection site to be an adverse reaction?

David

[mzmolly]

46. Saline has different properties. It used to contain mercury. Not sure if some solutions used for

comparison in vaccine trials still do.

Aluminum is used as an adjuvant in the Gardasil vaccine. Swelling is an adverse event (not my decision) albeit not a serious one in most cases.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

47. So what do you think is happening physiologically?

A localized immune response?

David

[mzmolly]

48. Could be? But, swelling at the injection site is the least of my concerns.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/mzmolly/34

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

49. At what levels is aluminum toxic when injected?

[mzmolly]

50. Depends upon the person

I imagine? You may wish to email the scientists involved in the mouse study I referenced if you are truly curious. What amount of aluminum do you suggest is safe to inject into a child?

[Liberal Veteran]

51. Give us a ballpark figure. And could a particular salt of aluminum be safer at higher doses than...

...others?

Might aluminum citrate behave different than aluminum hydroxide in the body?

[mzmolly]

54. Are there two competing HPV vaccines with different adjuvants to choose from?

If so I'll be glad to look into your question. In the mean time, let me know what you find out.

[Liberal Veteran]

55. Aw c'mon. It's a simple question.

It shouldn't be a problem to answer.

[mzmolly]

58. I'm not interested in answering your hypothetical question when you

can't answer the question ~ "why do you support experimenting on nine year old girls with an unproven, potentially unsafe HPV vaccine?" How about you answer the related question before suggesting I answer your jibberish?

Here's a sheep study if you're actually interested, have at it.

http://jas.fass.org/cgi/reprint/69/2/792.pdf?ck=nck

Here's another:

http://www.nature.com/ki/journal/v36/n6/abs/ki1989286a.html

And another:

http://www.nature.com/ki/journal/v39/n4/abs/ki199170a.html

My guess is you're on your way once again to the antacid argument? If so you have an issue with memory as you and I have discussed it ad nauseam. We talked about the difference between oral absorption vs. intramuscular etc. Perhaps you have taken a few too many Rolaids? ;)

I'M OUT. I MUST BEHAVE MYSELF! :hi:

[Liberal Veteran]

64. Your guess would be incorrect.

I was actually trying to determine if you had any understanding that one salt of a particular substance might behave differently than another.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

52. Paint with a broad brush don't we.

I don't believe I have made suggestions about injections. Although I would be interested to know if humans and mice become toxic from aluminum at the same levels.

[mzmolly]

53. I said it depends upon the person, how's that a broad brush?

I think the brush is mighty broad when we suggest that EVERY nine year old girl in X state needs a Gardasil jab.

[beam me up scottie]

56. But Dave didn't suggest that.

You won't find a more honest poster in this forum.

Seriously.

And I really don't think he's trying to set you up.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

61. Thank you.

That may be the kindest thing ever said about me here, maybe anywhere. May the wind be at your back and the next day be better than the last.

David

[beam me up scottie]

62. That can't possibly be true.

I've always had a thing for firemen.:P

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

57. Do you still beat your dog?

[mzmolly]

59. Never did. Do you still believe in "experimenting" on children?

That's not my language, that's the language of a researcher who worked on the HPV vaccine for 20 years. If I misunderstood you, you have my apologies.

With that, I must pull myself away from vaccine discussions once again.

Peace. :hi:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

60. Likewise.

[varkam]

63. Some info on aluminum:

Here's an article on aluminum in vaccines:

http://www.webmd.com/parenting/news/20040129/aluminum-in-vaccines-poses-no-harm

Also, there was a study done on rats where they injected them with (I believe it was) several mgs of aluminum and saw neurotoxic effects, whereas the levels contained in gardasil and the placebo were 225mcg IIRC.