Researchers Believe Cervical Cancer Vaccine Could Be Linked to Cases of Lou Gehrig's Disease ~ WEBMD

[mzmolly]

Oct. 16, 2009 (Baltimore) -- Researchers believe that there may be a link between a vaccine against cervical cancer and a rapidly progressive, fatal disease in two young women.

Both the timing of the symptoms and autopsy results “suggest a link between” the Gardasil vaccine and the fatal cases of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, says Catherine Lomen-Hoerth, MD, director of the ALS Center at University of California San Francisco Medical Center.

With only two confirmed cases, “we don’t know for sure if it’s coincidence or if they’re connected ,” she tells WebMD. “We hope that by raising awareness, we will become aware of any other cases."

Pam Eisele, a spokeswoman for Merck & Co., which makes the vaccine, says the company cannot comment specifically on the cases as it has not seen the data.

...

Yadollah Harati, MD, a neurologist at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, says the findings raise a red flag.

The fact that “the postmortem studies show distinct immunological features different from what is typical of ALS” suggest an association between vaccination and ALS, he says.

More at http://children.webmd.com/vaccines/news/20091016/rare-disease-may-be-linked-vaccine?src=RSS_PUBLIC">WEB MD

Some expressed a concern in 2007, when researchers discovered a potential link between the adjuvant used in the vaccine and motor neuron death in mice.

Abstract

Gulf War illness (GWI) affects a significant percentage of veterans of the 1991 conflict, but its origin remains unknown. Associated with some cases of GWI are increased incidences of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and other neurological disorders. Whereas many environmental factors have been linked to GWI, the role of the anthrax vaccine has come under increasing scrutiny. Among the vaccine's potentially toxic components are the adjuvants aluminum hydroxide and squalene. To examine whether these compounds might contribute to neuronal deficits associated with GWI, an animal model for examining the potential neurological impact of aluminum hydroxide, squalene, or aluminum hydroxide combined with squalene was developed. Young, male colony CD-1 mice were injected with the adjuvants at doses equivalent to those given to US military service personnel. All mice were subjected to a battery of motor and cognitive-behavioral tests over a 6-mo period post injections. Following sacrifice, central nervous system tissues were examined using immunohistochemistry for evidence of inflammation and cell death. Behavioral testing showed motor deficits in the aluminum treatment group that expressed as a progressive decrease in strength measured by the wire-mesh hang test (final deficit at 24 wk; about 50%). Significant cognitive deficits in water-maze learning were observed in the combined aluminum and squalene group (4.3 errors per trial) compared with the controls (0.2 errors per trial) after 20 wk. Apoptotic neurons were identified in aluminum-injected animals that showed significantly increased activated caspase-3 labeling in lumbar spinal cord (255%) and primary motor cortex (192%) compared with the controls. Aluminum-treated groups also showed significant motor neuron loss (35%) and increased numbers of astrocytes (350%) in the lumbar spinal cord. The findings suggest a possible role for the aluminum adjuvant in some neurological features associated with GWI and possibly an additional role for the combination of adjuvants.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17114826">PUB MED

Abstract

Gulf War Syndrome is a multi-system disorder afflicting many veterans of Western armies in the 1990–1991 Gulf War. A number of those afflicted may show neurological deficits including various cognitive dysfunctions and motor neuron disease, the latter expression virtually indistinguishable from classical amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) except for the age of onset. This ALS “cluster” represents the second such ALS cluster described in the literature to date. Possible causes of GWS include several of the adjuvants in the anthrax vaccine and others. The most likely culprit appears to be aluminum hydroxide. In an initial series of experiments, we examined the potential toxicity of aluminum hydroxide in male, outbred CD-1 mice injected subcutaneously in two equivalent-to-human doses. After sacrifice, spinal cord and motor cortex samples were examined by immunohistochemistry. Aluminum-treated mice showed significantly increased apoptosis of motor neurons and increases in reactive astrocytes and microglial proliferation within the spinal cord and cortex. Morin stain detected the presence of aluminum in the cytoplasm of motor neurons with some neurons also testing positive for the presence of hyper-phosphorylated tau protein, a pathological hallmark of various neurological diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease and frontotemporal dementia. A second series of experiments was conducted on mice injected with six doses of aluminum hydroxide. Behavioural analyses in these mice revealed significant impairments in a number of motor functions as well as diminished spatial memory capacity. The demonstrated neurotoxicity of aluminum hydroxide and its relative ubiquity as an adjuvant suggest that greater scrutiny by the scientific community is warranted.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6TGG-4X1YCBB-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1052517734&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=3d124154696bcb323f0a2837de9fe296">Science Direct

I'm glad to see that more research is in the works.

*edited due to formatting*

[midnight]

1. K&R!!

I prefer not to use young women to test this vaccine on...... Also I prefer the insurance co. not to block treatment for women with this virus because they did not have the vaccine prior to being diagnosed . Even if you get the vaccine and already have the virus it will not add any benefit. However, if you are sick with this virus the insurance co. should treat. Another preexisting condition that women can be discriminated on.

[mzmolly]

2. I had no idea insurance companies were doing that.

Un-frikken-believable.

:(

[pnwmom]

6. Neither did I. But I guess it's not surprising.

If there is a link here, it wouldn't have been uncovered in premarket testing, since the placebo used as a control ALSO contained the aluminum adjuvant.

[mzmolly]

7. Exactly!

Curious, that. *sigh*

[ellenfl]

3. no surprise there. eom k&r

[pnwmom]

4. But it's only the Director of the ALS Center at UCal, right -- clearly a quack.

I'm sure there are PLENTY of DUers who know much more about this than she does.

:sarcasm:

[mzmolly]

5. LOL - I'm sure you're correct.

Clearly DU-ers are more qualified to investigate these matters. Especially once Orac comes out with "its" biting (entertainment based) rebuttal!

[JoeyT]

22. Sarcasm fail.

2 out of 7 million.
No the woman isn't a crank. The sentence that prevents her being a crank is "With only two confirmed cases, “we don’t know for sure if it’s coincidence or if they’re connected ,” That translates into: We don't know if there's a link, we need to see if more people come forward to find out.
There's also the problem that we don't actually know what causes ALS in the first place.

So you're willing to take away a vaccine that has the potential to stop tens of thousands of cases of cervical cancer on what amounts to "Maybe possibly could sorta kinda be a link. We don't know, but we hope to find out." Of course it doesn't really matter if it's dangerous or not. The important thing here is being able to feel self-righteous about something.

Among the conclusion for the squalene study: "It is important to note that our laboratory-based investigations do not establish that squalene was added as adjuvant to any vaccine used in military or other personnel who served in the Persian Gulf War era."
Some people also carry squalene antibodies even if they've never been exposed to the stuff through a vaccine, further muddying the waters. No one really knows why. Oh, and the WHO also says there was no squalene in any of the vaccines. Fail.

The mouse study is still waiting for follow up studies to be done. Body mass is key here. If you inject practically anything into a mouse at a human dose it's going to mess them up. The important thing is finding out how it messes them up so you know what direction to focus your research in. Even if the stuff does turn out to be as toxic as possible, you should be much more worried about the much higher amounts in your drinking water than the small one shot dose from a vaccine.

However unlikely, it's possible all these things could be a problem. This is why research is being done. Y'all don't let a poor understanding of science interfere with your fearmongering though.

Edited to add: I wish they'd let me get the HPV vaccine. And I've gotten every vaccine they'd let me have. I'm still walking around just fine.

[pnwmom]

33. Where did I say I'd be "willing to take away a vaccine"?

All I've been saying, all along, is that it was wrong to try to MANDATE this vaccine, and that CONTINUING research needs to be done. Under the current FDA rules, a lot of information about drug/vaccine safety only comes in the after-market stage. That is what is happening now with Gardasil. The jury is still out.

I get yearly flu shots and my children have had all the required vaccines, too -- until one of them had a severe reaction to the old DTP vaccine and we subsequently learned that my baby sister, and my mother's cousin, had both developed encephalitis and died after that injection. After that, the pediatrician decided to withhold the pertussis part of the vaccine for my children, but they still were given all the rest of the required vaccines.

Unfortunately, I allowed my daughter to have (a then) optional hepatitis B vaccine when she was 10. She has had elevated liver enzymes ever since then, along with every test the doctors could think of (including three liver biopsies over the last 15 years) but they've never been able to explain the damage to her liver. (And the only antibodies she has are to hepatitis-B.) I just noticed last week that the VAERS system is FINALLY reporting after-market cases of elevated liver enzymes related to the hep B vaccine. Did the vaccine damage my daughter? We may never know. I'd feel a lot better about this if I knew the VAERS system was actually designed to be useful to researchers studying these questions -- but it's NOT.

[mzmolly]

34. As you said, two CONFIRMED cases.

That doesn't mean two cases, period. Also as pnwmom said, no one suggested taking the vax away. And regarding squalene, the aluminum adjuvant is the concern noted in studies above. And, why do you suggest that human doses of the ajduvant were injected into mice? IIRC, the doses were adjusted? Lastly, why is it considered fear mongering to provide information that may lead to more research? Isn't it fear mongering to suggest that girls need an HPV vaccine when the vaccine wanes in efficacy and may wear off by the time it's most beneficial?

We should not fear information about vaccines and/or disease, nor should we consider it fear mongering to provide honest information about either one.

[Th1onein]

43. Logic FAIL

Read re: dosage, again.

[mzmolly]

8. Oh my the "pro-info" crew is unrecommending this thread.

I rec many vaccine threads, pro and con, regardless of the info included because I'm interested in the subject matter.

I can't understand wanting to keep information like this from those capable of reasonably digesting it? Anyone?

[pnwmom]

13. I think there are some pharma reps out there who take it as their duty

to uphold all things pharma.

[mzmolly]

15. Yes

indeed. :shrug:

[pnwmom]

16. Here's a link to an interview with Jenny's mother, which contains some info about Merck

that is quite damning.

Even though Merck is protected by law from lawsuits related to adverse effects, they have been stonewalling attempts from Jenny's family and others to get information about possible injuries, on the grounds that the information is "proprietary." I think that if we're going to indemnify Merck against lawsuits, it should be conditioned on Merck being completely open and transparent with the data.

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php

Now we have found at least one comparable case that we have been told was filed by Merck, the manufacturer of Gardasil. But the information is too vague and incomplete for the CDC to contact the family. To the best of our knowledge, Merck has yet to provide the necessary information. I want to take this opportunity to beg Merck to help our doctors and the government agencies to identify any other cases that might be comparable. I know that Jenny would want us to do everything humanly possible to make sure no other girl ever suffers the pain, humiliation, and misery that she went through in the last two years of her life.

ML: Did anyone from Merck or affiliated with Merck contact you or try to reach you?

Barbara: No. As far as we know, Merck has not responded to requests for information, either from us or from Jenny's doctors. There are two types of information that experts investigating these cases need. First, Merck needs to share widely all information about any other girls with comparable symptoms. Second, Merck needs to answer -- in a transparent and scientific way -- the serious questions that have been raised about batches of vaccines that might be linked to manufacturing problems. There have been reports of bad batches. We have obtained the lot numbers from Jenny's vaccinations and asked how the lot numbers relate to the batches. We have been told that key information that experts need to test hypotheses about bad lots -- key information like how many kids received vaccines from each lot -- is considered proprietary.

ML: Is there a way legally to get them to disclose the information about the lot numbers or bad batches of the vaccine?

Barbara: I don't know, but I hope so. From a humanitarian point of view, Merck should have been much more forthcoming with information that could help the scientists working on this problem. But I see no evidence of it happening. It is a sad state of affairs if our government can't get this important information. It is also ironic, since pharmaceutical companies are protected from lawsuits involving adverse events related to the vaccines.

Read more: http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php#ixzz0UFldPCOr

[mzmolly]

18. Very disturbing.

*shakes head*

[JoeyT]

23. I recced it.

I'm absolutely cool with the debate being held in the public. No information, good or bad, should be hidden.

[mzmolly]

24. Thanks I agree.

I'll respond to your other post later as the PC is being taken from me at present. ;)

[pnwmom]

28. Welcome to DU, JoeyT. And I completely agree. Transparency should be the rule. n/t

[mzmolly]

9. Thanks to those who rec'd this thread, knowing that DU-ers are capable

of making up their own minds on issues such as this.

[HuckleB]

10. Thanks for posting.

I gave it a rec, and I'll explore it more tomorrow, when my mind isn't affected by wine.

Cheers!

[mzmolly]

11. Thanks Huck.

I appreciate your ability to be fair on this issue. :hi:

[mzmolly]

12. Third time to the greatest page!

;)

[mzmolly]

14. And we're off again at 4 recs!

Fun times....

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mzmolly]

20. So you think the mice in the studies I linked

had been swimming recently?

Things dull over at the Merck Sales team board? :eyes:

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[pnwmom]

30. Dislike of women and children? Yeah, right. I think the ones who dislike

women and children are the ones who put profits above everything else -- such as the people at Merck who won't share their information even with the government that is protecting them from any lawsuits, on the grounds that the information is "proprietary."

To hell with "proprietary." If we're going to protect vaccine manufacturers from lawsuits, then it should be conditional on a manufacturer being completely open with its data. As it is, Merck won't even give the CDC the contact info for a families that have filed adverse effect forms related to deaths after vaccines.

[mzmolly]

39. Hear hear!

:toast:

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

53. information that can protect women and children

sure does seem to anger you and your cheering section. You people just don't give up, do you?

You may recall that I'm one of the women without a cervix, as a result of a radical biopsy surgery needed to ensure that pre-cancerous lesions are removed. The surgery that women and girls who are protected against HPV are a lot less likely to need ...

I guess I'll be waiting to see what this "connection" is -- and why it occurs in the case of this particular vaccine ... Voodoo?

[mzmolly]

54. I posted an article published by WebMD.

The article was reviewed by Louise Chang, MD. I also posted science related to the issue, which has been published in reputable medical journals. So what exactly are you suggesting with your snark that I wish to "un-protect" woman and children by informing them?

Heck, when a primary researcher who worked on the vaccine for twenty years said she disagreed with Merck's marketing of the vaccine, SHE was tossed into the anti-vax, woman hater pile. Don't you people ever analyze the absurdity of your own claims? Some people here actually debate this issue respectfully and from a scientific standpoint. Said people are far more valuable to the so called vax everyone with everything cause, than the predictable sandbox crew.

[Why Syzygy]

59. Still with the wedge.

Your prime device is still an attempt to perpetuate warrior mentality. Us vs. Them.

It's old. It's tired. It is a tool of the elite. How childish. Choose a team.

Issues that transcend partisan blockades should indicate to you that not everything has an appropriate party line answer. A bunch of us from all sides are just about done listening to all the party line "solutions". They have failed. We as a civilization have a massive failure on our hands. New rules.

KOOTIES! :eyes:

[iverglas]

61. this, to the person who was accused of being a sales rep for Merck??

Well done.

[mzmolly]

64. In response to being accused of being a "woman & child hating" member of the Eagle Forum, yes.

You must have missed that? :eyes:

[Riktor]

46. Just because somebody disagrees with you...

... doesn't mean they're employed by Merck.

Stop being an ass.

[mzmolly]

52. Did you read my post in the context of what I replied to?

"but for those of you who hate women and chidren -- and worship your full moon shamans -- well this must get you pretty excited.

things dull over at eagle forum these days?"

Stop being an ass is right, but you've got your asses mixed up.

[Why Syzygy]

62. It doesn't mean they aren't.

It is well known that there are industry insiders posting in this forum. No CT. It's real.

[pnwmom]

72. One of them admitted it once -- but in a different forum. Probably didn't

expect the other post would be noticed.

[mzmolly]

74. Wow.

May I ask who? Feel free to PM. :hi:

[pnwmom]

77. I'm sorry, but it was so long ago I've forgotten. I'll see if I can figure it out though.n/t

[mzmolly]

86. No big.

:hi:

[iverglas]

82. I saw a UFO once

I forget where it was ... or when it was ... or who I was with ... but hey, I did! You simply must believe me ...

[pnwmom]

25. Are you a statistician at a major university? The father of the dead girl is,

and his analysis of the statistics is compelling. Just through their little blogsite (with 40,000 views) they uncovered 3 cases of juvenile ALS (possibly connected to Gardasil) -- which is all that would be expected in the entire population of 5,000,000 that had received the vaccine so far. Only Jenny's case had actually been reported to the VAERS system, though, since the system is difficult to use and many doctors never use it. (The form doesn't even include a place to indicate a "diagnosis.") If the population of 5,000,000 girls was surveyed for the incidence of ALS-like symptoms, how many more cases would be uncovered? Is Jenny's case an isolated one or is it just the tip of the iceberg? As long as Merck is sitting on its data, no one will know.

[xchrom]

29. 2 cases -- 3 cases -- ooohh! my god sound the

klaxon alarms!

nothing -- nothing can be made of that.

i'm sure the death of his child is a sad thing -- but dear lord -- by the numbers alone -- nothing can be made of this.


now see i know you know this -- the op knows this -- but your hysterical superstition overides reason -- you want to create some kind of stampede for bad public health -- and you should be treated accordingly.

[pnwmom]

32. You don't seem to understand that the disease in children is extremely rare.

By accident -- through a blog -- they have already uncovered 3 cases -- which is the same number that would be predicted in a total sample of 5 million girls. How many more cases would be uncovered if researchers were given the means to actually look? NO ONE KNOWS. How can you be comfortable with that?

These adverse effect forms were difficult for even two UCal professors and their doctors to understand and fill out. (There wasn't even a place to list a diagnosis.) How can you be assured that Jenny Tetlock's and the other two cases aren't just the tip of the iceberg?

How can you be so confident that the Director of the ALS center at the University of California is wrong -- and you are right?

[mzmolly]

36. Unless you're privy the medical history of every individual

injected with this vaccine, you can't assert that there are only 2 or 3 cases. And, it was MED MD who published the article, I didn't write it -- but you know this -- yet your hysterical defense of Merck overrides the little sense of logic you may have so you attack me. And you pounce with your IDIOTIC, yet PREDICTABLE, 'OH NOES IT'S Phyllis Schaffley, the woman/children hater' bullshit once again.

Grow the F up.

[mzmolly]

38. Nice post

pnwmom. You're far more patient than I am tonight. :hi:

[iverglas]

60. ... so he knows how to misrepresent numbers?

Just through their little blogsite (with 40,000 views) they uncovered 3 cases of juvenile ALS (possibly connected to Gardasil) -- which is all that would be expected in the entire population of 5,000,000 that had received the vaccine so far.

What if it turned out that these were all there ARE in the entire population that have received the vaccine so far?

See my post down at the bottom re the blog. Three "cases" (one of which is their own, no?) have been "uncovered" via 40,000 hits on their blog? No, I don't think so. I think that two people with "cases" were among the 40,000 who visited their blog. You do see how that's not the same thing, right? Familiar with the concept of "freeping" polls? How some samples, particularly self-selecting ones, just are not representative of anything?


http://health.usnews.com/blogs/on-women/2009/03/20/cdc-takes-closer-look-at-gardasil-and-paralysis.html

CDC Takes Closer Look at Gardasil and Paralysis
March 20, 2009 06:08 PM ET

Phil Tetlock and Barbara Mellers were in a race against time to save their 15-year-old daughter, Jenny. As I reported last summer, Jenny developed a degenerative muscle disease nearly two years ago, soon after being vaccinated against the cervical-cancer-causing HPV. ... Sadly, the clock ran out last Sunday, and Jenny passed away.

This is all rather old news, then. Have dozens more "cases" not turned up in the year since Jenny developed symptoms?

Through their efforts to publicize Jenny's case on their blog, Jenny's parents have connected with two other sets of parents whose daughters developed what appears to be ALS after being injected with Gardasil. One was 22-year-old Whitney Baird, who died last August, just 13 months after receiving Gardasil. Another is Alicia Olund, a 12-year-old who began having trouble walking after getting her third shot last September.

It seems not.

I should point out that juvenile ALS is extremely rare, affecting just 1 in 2 million young people.

Uh ... 1 in 2 million young people at any given time? A year?


http://www.als.ca/_news/42.aspx

Gene For Juvenile Form Of Familial ALS
Two groups of scientists have identified a gene, that when mutated, is responsible for juvenile ALS, also known as ALS2. This very rare variant of familial ALS starts before age 25 and tends to progress more slowly than classic ALS, which is primarily a disease of middle and later life with an average survival of less than three years.

The findings are reported in the latest issue of Nature Genetics. One of these has been an international collaboration involving, among others, Dr Michael Haydon of Vancouver, (a member of the CIHR Genetics Institute along with ALS Society of Canada National Executive Director, Suzanne Lawson) and Dr. Guy Rouleau of McGill University (a colleague of Dr. Jean Pierre Julien, whose research projects have been funded by the ALS Society's contribution to the Neuromuscular Research Partnership).

... Juvenile ALS is a rare form of ALS prevalent in populations of North Africa and the Middle East. The onset, on average, is 12 years of age (typically manifests before age 25) and progresses very slowly.

This really doesn't sound much like the reports you're reporting here. But I wonder whether the girls affected are being checked for the gene?


http://www.alsa.org

A search of the ALS Association website for HPV produced no results. Odd.


And I still want to know.

What is it about THIS vaccine that is unique that would "connect" it with ALS?

[mzmolly]

65. If you're confused about what it is about this vaccine, read the OP AGAIN.

It's clearly noted.

Edited to add the last sentence in my post as it sums up the issue ~

"The demonstrated neurotoxicity of aluminum hydroxide and its relative ubiquity as an adjuvant suggest that greater scrutiny by the scientific community is warranted."

[iverglas]

67. don't worry

I'm not at all confused.

[mzmolly]

68. You certainly are.

But I'm not worried about it.

[iverglas]

78. oh, btw

That was clever of you, and anyone who didn't click the "pub med" and "science direct" links wouldn't have noticed - but I did. The two articles share an author: Chris Shaw of UBC. And are about the same experiment. So far, he and his experiment appear to be the sole source of this hypothesis.

http://www.straight.com/article/vaccines-show-sinister-side
- March 23, 2006

And this isn't the first time you all have brought it to this site.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x15216
- February 2007

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2709611
- January 2007

On a quick google.

Christopher Shaw IS NOT a neuroscientist.

http://www.neuroscience.ubc.ca/shaw.htm

DR. CHRISTOPHER SHAW
# B.S. (Calif)
# M.Sc., Ph.D. (Hebrew U. of Jerusalem)
# Assistant Professor
# Ophthalmology, Physiology, and Experimental Medicine

http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/media/releases/1998/mr-98-65.html

"We think we've found a smoking gun," says Christopher Shaw, an associate professor of Ophthalmology. "There is a very suspicious correlation between the characteristics of a chemical once produced in the manufacture of white bread and those of substances known to be toxic to the nervous system."

"My concern is what this tells us about the presence of other toxins in processed foods," says Shaw. "I think this is the tip of an iceberg."

The incidence of neurological disease, notably amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has been on the upswing for the last 50 years.

Shaw and fellow researchers think the culprit might be methionine sulfoximine (MSO), a toxic byproduct of nitrogen trichloride which was used to bleach unprocessed wheat flour. By 1950 the process was banned in the United Kingdom and the United States. Canada stopped using it in 1968.

Reminding me of the BC professor emeritus of business administration who is regarded in some quarters as an expert on firearms policy ...


Bit of a gadfly.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2009/10/05/OlympicsShawQuestioning/

Chris Shaw is, without a doubt, the most outspoken and well-recognized critic of the 2010 Olympics. He's written extensively about negative impacts of the Games, including a piece five years ago published on The Tyee. He's friends with leading activists in the Olympics Resistance Network. His name pops up almost weekly in 2010 media reports.

On June 2, 2009, Shaw was approached by two plainclothes police officers outside Tony's Coffee Shop on West Broadway. The officers asked him for a private meeting to talk about his opposition to the Olympics. He refused. Any talks about security and Games protest should be held in a public forum, he said, with media cameras and tape recorders rolling.

Ten days later, delegates at Play the Game, an international sport conference in England, condemned all such security force visits. The Coventry Declaration urged governments in Canada, B.C. and Vancouver, along with Games organizers and security foreces, to defend against any attack on freedom of speech. Vancouver city council endorsed the spirit of the document last July. But councillors voted to remove sections that could have been construed as criticism of Games security.

Anti-Olympics protestors say police have approached dozens of people opposed to the Games at their work and homes. The RCMP-led Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security Unit (ISU), a $900 million behemoth funded with provincial and federal money, argues such visits are a legitimate tactic. Police need to know all they can about potential threats to the Games.

But to get back to our sheep - surely there is someone else in the neuroscience community eager to get in on this? Nobody?

You'd think someone would have tried to REPLICATE HIS RESULTS by now. People who know about these things know the importance of that. Others may not care, I guess.

[mzmolly]

85. You must have missed the remaining authors in the first study and their credentials?

M.S. Petrik1,2, M.C. Wong1,2, R.C. Tabata1, R.F. Garry5 and C.A. Shaw1,3,4

1Departments of Ophthalmology, 3Physiology, and 4Experimental Medicine 2Program in
Neuroscience, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
5Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Louisiana State University Health
Sciences Center, Tulane University Health Sciences Center, New Orleans, Louisiana,
USA.

Also, there are more studies, (which someone has to fund by the way) though MMF is the terminology used in France for the symptoms described below.

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/124/9/1821

From Pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19748679

Macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF) is an emerging condition, characterized by specific muscle lesions assessing long-term persistence of aluminum hydroxide within macrophages at the site of previous immunization. Affected patients mainly complain of arthromyalgias, chronic fatigue, and cognitive difficulties. We designed a comprehensive battery of neuropsychological tests to prospectively delineate MMF-associated cognitive dysfunction (MACD). Compared to control patients with arthritis and chronic pain, MMF patients had pronounced and specific cognitive impairment. MACD mainly affected (i) both visual and verbal memory; (ii) executive functions, including attention, working memory, and planning; and (iii) left ear extinction at dichotic listening test. Cognitive deficits did not correlate with pain, fatigue, depression, or disease duration. Pathophysiological mechanisms underlying MACD remain to be determined. In conclusion, long-term persistence of vaccine-derived aluminum hydroxide within the body assessed by MMF is associated with cognitive dysfunction, not solely due to chronic pain, fatigue and depression.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11522584 <<< from 2001

The "cleverness" is all yours.

[iverglas]

94. nope, didn't miss anything

You linked to two sources for THE SAME THING without bothering to mention that little fact.

MMF is the terminology used in France for the symptoms described below

No it isn't. Dog you people are amateurs, aren't you? I had already read that, and looked it up.

Macrophagic myofasciitis

http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=7861

Macrophagic myofasciitis: A muscle disease first identified in 1993, macrophagic myofasciitis is named for the findings seen in tissue from muscle biopsies, namely an abnormal infiltrate surrounding muscle tissue of specialized immune cells called "macrophages," a type of immune cell important to swallowing and destroying microorganisms. They also assist other immune cells in the body's response to invading organisms.

The cause of macrophagic myofasciitis is not known. Suspected causes include environmental factors, which may be toxins or infections.

Muscle pain is the most frequent symptom. This can be localized to the limbs or be more diffuse. Other symptoms include joint pain, muscle weakness, fatigue, fever, and muscle tenderness.

The disorder is associated with an altered immune system in some, but not all, patients. A significant number of patients had taken chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for malaria; these drugs are known to inhibit the secretion from macrophages of a cell messenger molecule called interleukin. The cause of macrophagic myofasciitis has not been identified. A unique material that accumulates within the affected macrophages has been seen on electron microscopy but this material has yet to be characterized. Most patients have responded to treatment with antibiotics and/or steroids within a few days or weeks.

I'm sure you're familiar with this:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC97997/?log%24=activity


And I have already realized that you do not give a flying fuck about women and girls infected with HPV and the devastating outcomes that such infection can have.

[mzmolly]

97. I said "MMF is the terminology used in France for the symptoms described below"

which was an accurate statement as the http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11522584">pubmed article I quoted was specifically related to MMF. Talk about amateurish.

I notice how you glazed over the credentials of the other researchers and the fact that the adjuvant used in the vax has been linked to like issues in international studies?

Yes, I saw the study on the effects of AH in vitro. Though I'm not sure what you are trying to imply by nothing that study other than the fact that the aluminum adjuvant stimulates an immune response involving proinflammatory cytokines and is, at certain doses considered toxic?

BTW, you may be interested in this:



:hi:

[iverglas]

100. Speak French? I do. Trust me:

I said "MMF is the terminology used in France for the symptoms described below"
which was an accurate statement as the pubmed article I quoted was specifically related to MMF.


"Macrophagic myofasciitis" is not French. Saying that MMF "is the terminology used in France" is nothing but evidence of your ability to copy and paste shit from the internet without having a clue.

"Myofasciite à macrophages" is French. Now you know. Oh, and that would be "MFM", in French.

Oh, and that wasn't a "pubmed article". Pubmed isn't a source.

The source is:

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/

Google just doesn't tell you everything.


Though I'm not sure what you are trying to imply by nothing that study other than the fact that the aluminum adjuvant stimulates an immune response involving proinflammatory cytokines and is, at certain doses considered toxic?

Well, I just wondered whether you were aware of the reasons for its use in vaccines, or just thought it was there because of a big pharma conspiracy to kill children ...

[mzmolly]

103. Perhaps the translation of the French study will help?

http://brain.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/124/5/974

Macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF), a condition newly recognized in France, is manifested by diffuse myalgias and characterized by highly specific myopathological alterations which have recently been shown to represent an unusually persistent local reaction to intramuscular injections of aluminium-containing vaccines. Among 92 MMF patients recognized so far, eight of them, which included the seven patients reported here, had a symptomatic demyelinating CNS disorder. CNS manifestations included hemisensory or sensorimotor symptoms (four out of seven), bilateral pyramidal signs (six out of seven), cerebellar signs (four out of seven), visual loss (two out of seven), cognitive and behavioural disorders (one out of seven) and bladder dysfunction (one out of seven). Brain T2-weighted MRI showed single (two out of seven) or multiple (four out of seven) supratentorial white matter hyperintense signals and corpus callosum atrophy (one out of seven). Evoked potentials were abnormal in four out of six patients and CSF in four out of seven. According to Poser's criteria for multiple sclerosis, the diagnosis was clinically definite (five out of seven) or clinically probable multiple sclerosis (two out of seven). Six out of seven patients had diffuse myalgias. Deltoid muscle biopsy showed stereotypical accumulations of PAS (periodic acid–Schiff)-positive macrophages, sparse CD8+ T cells and minimal myofibre damage. Aluminium-containing vaccines had been administered 3–78 months (median = 33 months) before muscle biopsy (hepatitis B virus: four out of seven, tetanus toxoid: one out of seven, both hepatitis B virus and tetanus toxoid: two out of seven). The association between MMF and multiple sclerosis-like disorders may give new insights into the controversial issues surrounding vaccinations and demyelinating CNS disorders. Deltoid muscle biopsy searching for myopathological alterations of MMF should be performed in multiple sclerosis patients with diffuse myalgias.

Admittedly I wasn't much concerned with the French pronunciation.

I've never asserted that big pharma has the goal of killing children. I think like any other corporate interest, they want to develop a product as cheaply as possible so they can profit to the utmost. Also, aluminum hydroxide has been used in vaccines for decades so they continue to use it without much ado. It was introduced as an adjuvant before we understood much about heavy metals. Now that we do, I'd like to see pharma use less controversial substances in our vaccines. I admit that at this point, squalene doesn't trouble me as much as aluminum. FYI, the alternative to the Gardasil is free of the aluminum adjuvant.

My apologies if I got hot under the collar. I, like others am subject to abuse whenever we post any info on vaccination that is less than glowing. I know this going in, but being directly or indirectly called a "child killer" gets to me every time. ;)

Peace iverglass.

*edited for formatting*

[pnwmom]

19. The parents of this girl are both professors at the UCal, and were pro-vaccine

enough to not hesitate when -- at an appointment for the hepatitis vaccine, which was necessary for school -- the doctors suggested the Gardasil vaccine, too. And, in the year before their daughter's death, they took her to see specialists everywhere from California to Philadelphia, who eventually concluded that her symptoms were likely to have been an immune-reaction, and therefore vaccine related.

Yet -- instead of demanding that the vaccine manufacturers allow the government access to all its data -- the vax-to-the-max crowd will accuse the bereaved parents of being anti-vax nuts or ignorant.

[mzmolly]

21. Well said! And if they hadn't been credentialed in this manner, they'd be dismissed.

JC WTF does it take?

Of course not everyone will react to this vaccine like the children in question, but what why not try to determine why these people may have vs. sweep things under the rug.

[pnwmom]

27. There's also the question of whether a "bad batch" of the vaccine was involved,

which would be critical to improving manufacturing processes, if this were true.


Merck is already protected from lawsuits. What valid reason could they have for withholding this type of information from researchers?

[mzmolly]

37. Could be? Perhaps there was a vax with an excess amount of aluminum?

:shrug:

[pnwmom]

40. The possibility of a "bad batch" was raised in the article at the other link

I posted.

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php#ixzz0UG4vcsPK

Second, Merck needs to answer -- in a transparent and scientific way -- the serious questions that have been raised about batches of vaccines that might be linked to manufacturing problems. There have been reports of bad batches. We have obtained the lot numbers from Jenny's vaccinations and asked how the lot numbers relate to the batches. We have been told that key information that experts need to test hypotheses about bad lots -- key information like how many kids received vaccines from each lot -- is considered proprietary.

ML: Is there a way legally to get them to disclose the information about the lot numbers or bad batches of the vaccine?

Barbara: I don't know, but I hope so. From a humanitarian point of view, Merck should have been much more forthcoming with information that could help the scientists working on this problem. But I see no evidence of it happening. It is a sad state of affairs if our government can't get this important information. It is also ironic, since pharmaceutical companies are protected from lawsuits involving adverse events related to the vaccines. In the 1980s, the government set up a National Vaccine Court, designed to keep pharmaceutical companies investing in vaccinations. Parents pay a surcharge on each vaccine, and that money is used by the National Vaccine Court to pay families who have experienced adverse events that followed the vaccine.

Read more: http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php#ixzz0UG4vcsPK

[mzmolly]

41. One would think control measures

would be in place to catch this sort of thing? :(

[pnwmom]

42. You would think so, wouldn't you? When my mother's cousin died after a DTP vaccine,

and another cousin was paralyzed, the doctors tried to explain it away as a "bad batch." But there wasn't any effort afterwards to identifying or avoiding these "bad" batches. A certain number of deaths was just considered to be par for the course -- for everyone except the families who lost children.

[mzmolly]

44. I'm so sorry that your family was harmed and worse

for the so called greater good. :( Makes me wonder if it's less of a bad batch issue, than a genetic susceptibility which some would rather not uncover?

[pnwmom]

45. In my family, given three generations of history, I think it's clear there's some

kind of genetic susceptibility to something in the vaccine. The doctors may have been guessing about the "bad batch" because there was more than one injury (two brothers). Decades later, it's impossible to know.

[mzmolly]

51. Very difficult to sort out

I'm sure. :(

[alittlelark]

31. My 15 year old daughter will not be getting it.

It's her choice.

I was exposed to the virus for 2 years after getting back together w/ my boyfriend (now husband). He had to go through painful liquid nitrogen treatments for over a year to get rid of the virus.

I had been exposed for almost a year and have had perfect pap smears for 18 years since.

My OB/GYN said that if your body has a higher Ph you will not get it.


Worse comes to worse cervical cancer is also very easy to catch and cure.

The vaccine is $500+ (with scary side effects).
Condoms are $.50.



I will let my daughter weigh the risks herself.

[Trillo]

47. My guess is that more research into the genetics might be needed. DNA tailoring.

I'm not commenting directly on this Gardasil issue, but rather the seasonal/H1n1 flu. My understanding of the regulation by the government has to do not with the specific genes in the vaccine, but rather with the process used to manufacture it. The studies I have seen in support of its use seem limited, so far, to effecitiveness, dosage, and immediate symptoms (such as headache or injection site soreness).

The vaccines supporters seem to claim that since the process used to manufacture the vaccine is essentially the same as the process used to manufacture prior "safe" vaccines, that the newer vaccine is safe. Isn't that a strawman?

A virus, as I understand it, is a piece of genetic code that penetrates cells and alters how those cells work. It is not "alive" per se, as a cell is alive, but is more of an active string of protiens (code) encased in a a protective covering. Various bad reactions to virus vaccines are reported from time to time, and the answer always seems to be that some small, very small, percentage of folks have bad reactions, but that the 'benefit to many outweigh "the costs" to the few'.

Would we accept these "costs" if it was surgery? To make a seemingly imperfect analogy: If, say, a surgeon was supposed to remove a cataract, and instead amputated a leg, would it be okay as long as it only happened to a very small percentage of surgical patients?


It may be that vaccines will need to be tailored to each person's own DNA in order for them to be "safe" for everybody. There are a lot of implications in this, perhaps even pertaining to patents themselves, but certainly including patients DNA privacy, as well the costs for safety review by government.

My main point is that the approval process used for vaccines may be technically outdated using an old approach. It may not be the "adjuvant" angle, though that may also be a contributing factor in some cases, also perhaps predictable though DNA tailoring.

[mzmolly]

56. Well stated.

"Would we accept these "costs" if it was surgery? To make a seemingly imperfect analogy: If, say, a surgeon was supposed to remove a cataract, and instead amputated a leg, would it be okay as long as it only happened to a very small percentage of surgical patients?"

[pnwmom]

75. Great post. n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

83. We *do* accept those costs with surgery.

Example: My father in law had cardiac plaque buildup. He went to the NHS and his doctor recommended he get a stent put in. His doctor discussed the risks with him, but my FIL and doctor agreed that the possible benefits of the stent outweighed the possible risks.

During the operation, a vessel ruptured, and my FIL died.

The NHS held an inquest and basically ruled that it was just one of those things.

Now, does that mean we suspend all stent procedures? No. Because we weigh the risks.

[mzmolly]

90. But we admit there is a risk and we discuss it with the patient

beforehand. And we work to minimize risks, not simply state "the benefits outweigh the risks" and leave it at that ...

[SemiCharmedQuark]

96. I got Gardasil at Walgreens. They sit down with you in the examination room and provide you a paper

from the CDC about the SPECIFIC risks associated with the vaccine. They did this for both the first and second shot.

[mzmolly]

101. You were probably given this?

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/pubs/vis/downloads/vis-hpv.pdf

It's now standard with all vaccines that you're provided with some info about potential risks. However most of the info is exactly the same from handout to handout regardless of the vaccine you're getting so I don't consider it fully informative, personally.

If you'll note, the CDC handout says:

"Like all vaccines, HPV vaccine will continue to be monitored for unusual or severe problems."

The point of my OP is to spread information so that people who have had symptoms can report them to the proper authorities. I simply wish to help the CDC monitor this situation regardless of the nefarious goals I've been assigned.

[pnwmom]

150. Does the paper mention any risks of giving more than one vaccine at a time?

No, because it wasn't tested under real-world conditions, where doctors DO inject patients with multiple vaccines on the same day.

Jenny Tetlock had Gardasil as well as Hep-B. Too bad there is no research to show whether such a combination could increase the risk of an immune system reaction.

Ironically, the vaccine information from my vet (not a "natural" vet, just a regular neighborhood vet) does discuss the benefits of spreading out vaccines to reduce the possibility of immune reactions. I wonder when MD's will catch up to where vets already are in terms of understanding what animal studies are already telling us?

Although, this may not persuade you if you don't believe that humans are animals, too.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

169. It addressed multiple vaccinations.

The reason that it doesn't list specific risks with multiple vaccinations is because there is no scientific evidence that there are risks.

[Why Syzygy]

172. Bullshit!

Every vaccine package insert lists loads of RISKS! If there is no scientific evidence for risks associated with combined vaccinations, that's because there has never been a STUDY!

Your post is blatantly false.

[Trillo]

93. It was an imperfect analogy, but I'm sure I've read of large damage

awards presented for similar cases reported in the news over the years. That was one of the reasons that I chose an ocular surgery that would typically be conducted by an ophthalmologist or eye surgeon (that would likely often be conducted as an outpatient, probably with a local, instead of general, anesthesia), but somehow the orthopedic guy somehow magically appeared in the operating room with his big knives and saws to cut the leg off and the wrong patient was magically moved into a different kind of operating room and was prepped and put in a deep sleep for the completely wrong procedure.

I had hoped my analogy would suggest gross negligence, but realized it might not fit the vaccine issue perfectly. Somehow the combination reminded me of a very unlikely occurrence, which would be similar to getting ALS from a cervical cancer vaccine. Sort of completely unrelated to each other, while at the same time, distantly similar through some unknown medical mechanism or process, one that might not even get reported as related.

But, your observation is noted and I agree similar, more related situations as that which you describe do seem to happen with the best of intentions and skill. I'm sorry about what happened in your case, unwanted or unexpected family deaths are always hardest on loved ones. It's good that you've come to some kind of peace and acceptance with the situation.

We'll all be there one day as well, and loved ones will probably miss us and grieve for awhile. Life does go on for the survivors, and were we in their shoes, we'd probably want them to get on with their lives, to live as well as possible while they still can.

[pnwmom]

149. But with surgery we *do* hold inquests. And we *do* allow lawsuits.

One of the issues in the OP is that Merck is withholding from Jenny's doctors information that they need to get to the bottom of why she died. And Merck is choosing not to cooperate even though, by law, all vaccine manufacturers are protected from lawsuits by people claiming injuries.

Don't you think it would be more than fair -- in exchange for being protected from lawsuits (entailing "discovery motions," etc.) -- if manufacturers allowed researchers and physicians and the CDC full access to their data (including contact info for their subjects.)

[pnwmom]

152. re: stents. There is actually a great deal of ongoing research on whether

the risks of the various stents outweigh the benefits.

I doubt that you would criticize those who call for more research, and for cooperation by the manufacturers with the researchers..

[SemiCharmedQuark]

170. They are criticizing the medications used WITH stents, not the stents themselves.

[Celebration]

48. "Trust" in vaccines

Some people here want us to put our "trust" in vaccines, even though long term studies have not been done on the cervical vaccine, studies on the combinations of vaccines have not been done, and in this case there wasn't even a true "control" group, because the "control group" had the aluminum adjuvant. Why was that necessary and desired by Merck? The only answer to that question is that they suspect that the adjuvant is not inert. If it is not inert, and has effects, then THAT aspect of the vaccine should be studied.

And I have never understood why regular tort law doesn't allow for lawsuits. In tort law, "fault" has to be proven. Why should I want to have a vaccine when the MANUFACTERER won't even stand behind their product? There would be no need for an exclusion from lawsuits if there weren't problems with vaccines that involved "fault" by the manufacturer. The "bad batches" comes to mind...............

[Why Syzygy]

66. 1976

My understanding is that after the fiasco of 1976, when pharmcos were sued, they passed laws to protect themselves in the future. A dyslexic insurance plan. Of course Congress acted as the middle man to get the laws on the books. Corporations are our masters. Taxpayer money paid for the new flu vaccine. Billions. No guarantees. WTF is wrong with us that this doesn't seem to shock and outrage anyone?

[mzmolly]

70. The Reagan admin passed immunity for vax makers because they threatened

to stop production. Apparently they had no issue with the notion of a society free of their products? Curious to say the least.

http://aapnews.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/4/1/1

"A decade long fight to ensure the stability of the childhood vaccine program culminated on Dec. 22 when President Reagan signed legislation making the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act operational.

"This legislation promises a secure vaccine supply, encourages competition within the vaccine market, provides a fair and reasonable alternative to litigation and offers greater protection for vaccine administrators and manufacturers." AAP President Richard Narkewicz. M.D. FAAP said."

There is no current incentive for the makers to consider anything but profit. And of course the making money thing partly involves sending out their minions to tamp down legit criticism with the predictable responses we see here.

[Happyhippychick]

49. Thank you for posting this. I have always been skeptical of Gardisil and my daughter will not be

getting it unless she decides to do it herself.

We have had a family member go through the horror of ALS, my thoughts are with the families of those two girls.

[SidDithers]

50. With only two confirmed cases “we don’t know for sure if it’s coincidence...

or if they’re connected"

Sid

[pnwmom]

73. Yes. And we don't know for sure that the vaccine did NOT kill them either.

Wouldn't that be an important thing to know?

That's why the OP, and the parents of the dead girl, are calling for Merck to cooperate with researchers -- such as those at the University of California -- trying to get to the bottom of this thing.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

87. We also don't know if a fire-breathing dragon caused their ALS

Because we can't definitively prove that the dragon DIDN'T kill them. Sorry for the snark, but that's what your argument amounts to.

Until we see some real data, it's impossible to say whether the vaccine did or did not cause the ALS. If it did, something should be done about it. Until then, it's been proven a relatively safe vaccine that has the potential to save thousands of lives.

[pnwmom]

121. The point is that Merck is withholding information, such as contact info

from patients with adverse effects, that researchers from CDC and elsewhere need.

They say the information is "proprietary." I say that as long as our government is going to protect them from lawsuits (lawsuits which would subject them to legal discovery), then they should cooperate by being open with the data that they have.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

123. I have no problem demanding that data be released

How do you know that they're withholding the information from us? I'm not saying that I think you're lying, but the FDA has this information, so I don't think Merck can hide it.

[pnwmom]

124. Jenny Tetlock's mother, a professor at the University of California, says so.

and I believe her. According to her, Merck is withholding needed information both from Jenny's doctors AND from the government.

http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php


ML: Did anyone from Merck or affiliated with Merck contact you or try to reach you?

Barbara: No. As far as we know, Merck has not responded to requests for information, either from us or from Jenny's doctors. There are two types of information that experts investigating these cases need. First, Merck needs to share widely all information about any other girls with comparable symptoms. Second, Merck needs to answer -- in a transparent and scientific way -- the serious questions that have been raised about batches of vaccines that might be linked to manufacturing problems. There have been reports of bad batches. We have obtained the lot numbers from Jenny's vaccinations and asked how the lot numbers relate to the batches. We have been told that key information that experts need to test hypotheses about bad lots -- key information like how many kids received vaccines from each lot -- is considered proprietary.

ML: Is there a way legally to get them to disclose the information about the lot numbers or bad batches of the vaccine?

Barbara: I don't know, but I hope so. From a humanitarian point of view, Merck should have been much more forthcoming with information that could help the scientists working on this problem. But I see no evidence of it happening. It is a sad state of affairs if our government can't get this important information. It is also ironic, since pharmaceutical companies are protected from lawsuits involving adverse events related to the vaccines. In the 1980s, the government set up a National Vaccine Court, designed to keep pharmaceutical companies investing in vaccinations. Parents pay a surcharge on each vaccine, and that money is used by the National Vaccine Court to pay families who have experienced adverse events that followed the vaccine.

Read more: http://www.momlogic.com/2009/07/did_gardasil_kill_jenny_tetloc.php#ixzz0ULYJiCKB

[EvolveOrConvolve]

151. I don't expect the companies to give information to the average citizen

That will probably never happen. Asking large corporations to divulge this sort of information is really, really tough.

But, the FDA does have statutory access to this data, and should be able to make a confirmation or denial of the charges that the drug causes death. I haven't heard from them yet.

[pnwmom]

153. Why should it be tough? By law, we've protected them from liability lawsuits.

We can and should amend that law to allow researchers access to the names and addresses of subjects who have filed claims so they can be followed up on, as well as other data that the manufacturers have. It would be a fair exchange, since these pharma companies are protected from the liability lawsuits that would normally give injured parties access to this very same data through the process of DISCOVERY.

The CDC/FDA has not been given contact info by Merck that would allow it to follow up on adverse effects reports. Therefore, the CDC/FDA can't confirm or deny charges that the drug caused a death.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

79. 2 cases..out of how many people vaccinated?

[mzmolly]

91. “We hope that by raising awareness, we will become aware of any other cases."

No one knows how many people may have been affected at this time. However the goal is to raise awareness so we do know, which is why I posted the article.

[pnwmom]

154. You're forgetting to ask a key question: how rare is the disease?

According to the OP, 5 million girls were vaccinated, but it is impossible to know how many deaths from ALS occurred in the population.

All that is known is that -- through the Tetlock's little blog with 40,000 hits -- an additional two cases besides Jenny's came to light. And this disease is so rare in its juvenile form that 3 cases would be all that you would expect to find in a population of 5 million. So how many more cases would be discovered if the CDC performed follow-up studies on those given the vaccine? No one knows.

[iverglas]

55. jenjensfamily.blogspot.com

The CDC does not inspire confidence, so we conducted our own shoestring search to determine whether Jenny was alone. We created a website (jenjensfamilyblogspot.com). Although this website has only drawn 40,000 visitors, it has out-performed the federal government in finding girls ominously similar to Jenny (current score is: Jenny site 2; CDC’s VAERS: 0).

One does not need to be a statistician to see how unlikely it is that these two other girls are the only cases out there—or how frightening it is that we already know of three documented cases of girls (those two plus Jenny) who developed ALS within several months after their vaccinations. After all, if the odds of ALS in teenaged girls are 1 in 3 million and we found 3 in only 40,000, it is very possible that many other of the 6 million girls vaccinated have already developed severe neurological collapse, like Jenny.

One does not need to be a statistician to know that they have not found 3 in 40,000 at all.

Not much confidence inspired here, I'm afraid.


edited to add full url:

http://jenjensfamily.blogspot.com

[mzmolly]

57. I certainly don't agree with their research methods

But I do hope to see more credible research given scientist who've conducted animal studies have observed like issues. Why not follow up with people who've had the vax? Much like they do in the case of a recall?

[pnwmom]

76. Defective cars get more attention than defective vaccines. n/t

[mzmolly]

89. Sadly

true.

[mzmolly]

63. FYI the father is a statistician

so I defer to him on his method of gathering info as best he can. It's unfortunate that there is not a formal investigation at this point.

[iverglas]

69. FYI, I am not a straw person

I defer to him on his method of gathering info as best he can

Good for you. That has nothing to do with what I said.

So either
(a) you don't have a clue about statistical methods
or
(b) you are intentionally obfuscating

Whatever.

[mzmolly]

71. My point is that a statistician does have a clue and I find it shameful

that he's left to his own devices to gather this information! Don't you? Don't you think the CDC/FDA should do an extensive investigation vs leave it to the parents to try?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

80. For two cases? If the FDA had to launch an extensive investigation everytime

something bad happened to someone after a vaccine, the department would have to be expanded 10 fold.

[mzmolly]

84. I suggested simply questioning those who've had the vaccine.

Drs. can be asked to follow up with patients and/or info can be mailed from health insurance providers, Dr's office etc. A system to learn more is already in place.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

129. I don't really consider that an extensive investigation. That being said,

you're right. As long as said information is used in a statistically sound manner and conclusions are not reached until a large enough sample size has been assessed, more information can't hurt and checking in with those that have had the vaccine would not be a bad way to accomplish this.

[mzmolly]

142. Extensive in terms of the breadth and how the information is later compiled.

But at least we agree that this matter should be investigated on some level. That's the important thing.

:hi:

[pnwmom]

155. They don't have to. The researchers at the ALS institute are ready and waiting.

All that they need is the contact info for people who've filed adverse effect reports and certain batch numbers, both of which Merck is withholding on grounds that they are "proprietary."

[iverglas]

81. I find it very shameful

that a "statistician" would say:

After all, if the odds of ALS in teenaged girls are 1 in 3 million and we found 3 in only 40,000

I find that absolutely, utterly shameful. Beyond belief shameful. The sort of thing I do expect to read on freerepublic. Appalling.

And having read that, I would be prepared to discount pretty much anything else that "statistician" said about anything.


http://polisci.berkeley.edu/faculty/bio/permanent/Tetlock,P/


So, so far, you have a dishonest "statistician" and an opthalmologist for this ongoing dog and pony show.



html fixed

[mzmolly]

88. Actually what we have is a dishonest

person making dishonest claims about a grieving parent and the many independent, international researchers and scientists who may have provided much needed insight into the death of this poor child.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mzmolly]

95. You imply again that Shaw is THE lone researcher involved, which is DISHONEST.

Perhaps I should have used the word "clever" as you did? You had hoped to distract with the assertion that I was being "clever" and, frankly dishonest by insinuating Shaw is alone in the discovery of negative side effects of aluminum hydroxide. By doing so you disregard the international research and the credentials of other researchers involved, which IS DISHONEST or, I'm sorry, perhaps you prefer "clever?"

I'm not engaging in a "bizarre battle" against any vaccine. I simply provided information which is the plea made by researchers noted in the article: "We hope that by raising awareness, we will become aware of any other cases."

As for where I take my "weeping" I'll post what I want to on this subject, right here.

[iverglas]

98. I SAID again that you gave two links to the same thing which is DECEPTIVE

But hey, you keep pretending, and dishonestly calling me dishonest. I think it's pretty much the only weapon you people have in your arsenal -- accusing everyone who isn't suited up for your battle of dishonesty.

And yes, you have been engaged in this bizarre battle for quite some time, including for nearly three years (that I'm aware of) right here at DU.


As for where I take my "weeping" I'll post what I want to on this subject, right here.

Hey, colour me surprised.

[mzmolly]

105. What you SAID was wrong. TWO studies were noted, with a couple researchers in common. I also posted

more studies from international sources which you'd prefer to overlook.

Here a list on pubmed noting five studies, two of which, I posted in my OP.

1: Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration.

Shaw CA, Petrik MS.

J Inorg Biochem. 2009 Aug 20.

PMID: 19740540

2: Magnetic resonance microscopy and immunohistochemistry of the CNS of the mutant SOD murine model of ALS reveals widespread neural deficits.

Petrik MS, Wilson JM, Grant SC, Blackband SJ, Tabata RC, Shan X, Krieger C, Shaw CA.

Neuromolecular Med. 2007;9(3):216-29.

PMID: 17914180

3: Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice.

Petrik MS, Wong MC, Tabata RC, Garry RF, Shaw CA.

Neuromolecular Med. 2007;9(1):83-100.

PMID: 17114826

4: Examining the interaction of apo E and neurotoxicity on a murine model of ALS-PDC.

Wilson JM, Petrik MS, Moghadasian MH, Shaw CA.

Can J Physiol Pharmacol. 2005 Feb;83(2):131-41.

PMID: 15791286

5: Quantitative measurement of neurodegeneration in an ALS-PDC model using MR microscopy.

Wilson JM, Petrik MS, Grant SC, Blackband SJ, Lai J, Shaw CA.

Neuroimage. 2004 Sep;23(1):336-43.

PMID: 15325381

Also if you know my history at DU, you'll note that vaccines interest me. Much like they do others involved in this conversation. Do you feel it's "bizarre" to discuss the so called benefits of vaccination? Or is it only bizarre to note the potential risks?

I recommend threads regarding vaccination regardless of the content, again because the subject is interesting to me. And, I'll post information on this and and other subjects here in the years to come, I don't much care who approves.

*edited again for formatting/grammar*

[iverglas]

130. mm hmm

2: Magnetic resonance microscopy and immunohistochemistry of the CNS of the mutant SOD murine model of ALS reveals widespread neural deficits.

The MRM findings in mSOD over-expressing mice are similar to data previously obtained from a model of ALS-parkinsonism dementia complex (ALS-PDC), in which neural damage occurred following a diet of washed cycad flour containing various neurotoxins.

This has nothing to do with aluminum hydroxide or vaccines. I was already aware of the study (one of the authors of which is Chris Shaw, of course). It cites rising incidence of ALS coexistent with the use of certain chemicals in flour/bread. Interesting, not our subject. I believe the same would be true of your 4 and 5.


TWO studies were noted, with a couple researchers in common.

1: Aluminum hydroxide injections lead to motor deficits and motor neuron degeneration.

Gulf War Syndrome is a multi-system disorder afflicting many veterans of Western armies in the 1990-1991 Gulf War. ... In an initial series of experiments, we examined the potential toxicity of aluminum hydroxide in male, outbred CD-1 mice injected subcutaneously in two equivalent-to-human doses. ... A second series of experiments was conducted on mice injected with six doses of aluminum hydroxide.

3: Aluminum adjuvant linked to Gulf War illness induces motor neuron death in mice.

Gulf War illness (GWI) affects a significant percentage of veterans of the 1991 conflict, but its origin remains unknown. ... Young, male colony CD-1 mice were injected with the adjuvants at doses equivalent to those given to US military service personnel.

You don't seem to be grasping that these are the same researchers reporting the same experiment.

Since you cite the same articles, I tend to think you were reading this:

http://labvirus.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/dr-chris-shaws-papers-on-vaccines-and-toxic-adjuvants/

http://labvirus.wordpress.com

Also I strongly suggest everyone review the published papers of Dr. A True Ott PhD ND which are all available here. These should give everyone an even deeper understanding of the depths from which this agenda originates.

... Reviewing: on June 11, 2009 the WHO (world homicide organization) declared level 6 pandemic, which automatically assigned it dictatorial powers over all 194 nations signatory to UN charter, of which the USA is one. Sovereign states are not party to treaties entered into by the federal government without their proper ratification. The US has the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act just waiting to be invoked.

http://labvirus.wordpress.com/a-bit-about-a-true-ott-phd-nd/

Dr. Ott’s show was days away from broad syndication, until it was cancelled by the host station following disclosures aired on The Story Behind The Story concerning the TRUE events of September 11, 2001. These disclosures showing “controlled and planned demolition” were deemed “too controversial” and “un-American” at the time, but have now become more readily-accepted as self-evident today.

I have no a priori problem with outliers; I've been one all my life and admire / agree with many. But simply being one doesn't make someone credible, or a good bedmate.

Yes, the premise that the underlying problem is unfettered capitalist greed is different from the premise that it is the machinations of the Illuminati. But if unfettered capitalist greed were a sufficient reason to reject its products, we'd pretty much all be unfed, unclothed and unhoused, and unwell.

[mzmolly]

133. Well have to

agree to disagree once again. Regardless, there are international studies I noted down thread. And, I'm sure we can agree that more studies about this substance are needed under the circumstances? One mice study or two, I find the results compelling.

We have more than one HPV vaccine available now. One does not contain aluminum. Choice is good.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

99. Excellent post.

[iverglas]

102. you may not be aware

but 20 years ago I was found to have pre-cancerous cervical lesions; abnormal PAP followed by colposcopy which found lesions and indicated further biopsying. The "cone biopsy" (mine was more radical than the "LEEP" procedure) essentially removes the cervix. No further lesions were found, but believe me, I was happy to be safe rather than sorry.

Cervical cancer rates, and deaths from cervical cancer, have fallen dramatically. This is because more women have regular PAPs and more cancers can be averted, and lives saved, by taking preventive measures.

PAP smears themselves do not PREVENT any disease. They detect disease in early stages so it can be treated. The treatment can be painful, of course expensive (I was in hospital three days), and carries the risks associated with any surgeries; in the case of cone biopsy, it can cause incompetent cervix, meaning a woman is then unable to carry a pregnancy to term.

The notion that girls don't need to be protected against the virus that is known to be a causal factor for cervical cancer, because they can just get their yearly smears and then get the necessary treatment and not die, offends me in the extreme.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

104. One of the best posts ever on the value of the HPV vaccine.

[mzmolly]

107. You're easy to please today.

:hi:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

108. Logic and facts have a way of doing that to me.

[mzmolly]

109. Too bad you're overlooking both

in favor of unfounded insults in this case.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

110. Please show where the unfounded insults are in post #102.

[mzmolly]

111. I wouldn't say

that post 102 has unfounded insults. But it does contain the typical straw man assertions.

The notion that girls don't need to be protected against the virus that is known to be a causal factor for cervical cancer, because they can just get their yearly smears and then get the necessary treatment and not die, offends me in the extreme.

No one here suggested girls don't need to be protected against HPV. The issues with the vaccine are complex. It's not as simple as stop vaccinating or get the vaccine b/c for one thing, we don't know how long anyone will have so called protection. And, we don't know what the trade off is.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

112. That exact quote has been made here dozens of times. No strawman. Your apology is noted.

[mzmolly]

113. Many quotes are made here, that doesn't mean they pertain

to the OP. And, no apology was given. You commented on more than one post, as you know.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

114. You specifically responded to my response to post #102.

[mzmolly]

115. Note the word "today" in my response?

:hi:

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

116. good thing I didn't expect any honesty in your response.

[mzmolly]

117. Well you got honesty

in spite of your expectations.

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

118. LOL, yeah right.

[mzmolly]

119. Right indeed.

:)

[iverglas]

131. no one has said it here

The notion that girls don't need to be protected against the virus that is known to be a causal factor for cervical cancer, because they can just get their yearly smears and then get the necessary treatment and not die, offends me in the extreme.
No one here suggested girls don't need to be protected against HPV.

But you know as well as I do that it was said repeatedly in discussions of this issue at DU in 2007.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3032880&mesg_id=3045475

mzmolly
Sun Oct-28-07 12:46 AM
9. Who said cancer isn't a big deal?
Most HPV clears on it's own, and early detection of cervical cancer is KEY ...

-- as I replied there -- HPV does indeed clear on its own; that has absolutely nothing to do with whether it is a causal factor in the cell changes that end up as cancer.

Early detection of cervical cancer is key to NOT DYING. It is NOT key to not having invasive, painful, expensive - and possibly unsuccessful - treatment.

Does anyone argue that early detection/treatment of polio is key to survival against polio vaccination? I hesitate to ask ...


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2709611&mesg_id=2716009

mhatrw
Sat Feb-03-07 05:24 PM
294. The Facts About Gardasil
... 3) Cervical cancer is not a deadly nor prevalent cancer in the US or any other first world nation. Cervical cancer rates have declined sharply over the last 30 years and are still declining. Cervical cancer accounts for less than 1% of of all female cancer cases and deaths in the US. Cervical cancer is typically very treatable and the prognosis for a healthy outcome is good. The typical exceptions to this case are old women, women who are already unhealthy and women who don't get pap smears until after the cancer has existed for many years.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2709611&mesg_id=2714583

mhatrw
Fri Feb-02-07 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #179
183. What is it you don't understand? This is a risk vs. benefit analysis.
... So I at least want to quantify the supposed benefit of this vaccination in terms of the expected improvement in cervical cancer mortality rates versus relying instead on protect sex, an annual pap smear and prompt treatment for anything that shows up on the pap smear. Where is this data?

-- as I replied there -- Pap smears do NOT prevent cervical cancer. Pap smears can detect pre-cancerous conditions so that chunks of a woman's body can be cut out to reduce the risk of cancer.

[mzmolly]

132. No one said it in your reply either.

HPV can be prevented by the http://abcnews.go.com/Health/ReproductiveHealth/story?id=2102991&page=1&page=1">use of condoms and or by getting one of two vaccines that last for an undetermined period of time.

To suggest that A) the vaccine is the only way to prevent HPV and B) I wish to see an end to the option of getting a vaccine, is false. I don't support mandates, neither did the primary researcher involved in the development of the vaccine.

[iverglas]

136. funny what no one says

To suggest that A) the vaccine is the only way to prevent HPV

Like that. No one said it.

It is the only way to protect against HPV infection without (a) abstaining, or (b) practising no-fail condom use. And as I never tire of pointing out, neither of them is an option for women and girls who are sexually assaulted, as a very large proportion of women will be, at least once, in their lifetime.

HPV can be prevented by the use of condoms

HPV can be prevented by the use of condoms (a) IF all girls and women are in a position to enforce condom use, and (b) IF condoms never fail.

Otherwise, i.e. in the real world, HPV CANNOT be prevented by the use of condoms, although the prevalence of HPV in a population, and any individual's risk of infection, can be reduced by their use.


To suggest that ... B) I wish to see an end to the option of getting a vaccine

Don't recall saying that, either.


I don't support mandates, neither did the primary researcher involved in the development of the vaccine.

The public policy views of a scientist are not generally relevant to public policy on science.

And again, something we both know perfectly well: in the US, without mandatory vaccination, the vaccination will not be available to large numbers of girls at the age when it should be administered.

You really do know as well as I do that this has been the impetus behind the "mandate": to ensure that girls can obtain the vaccine regardless of insurance coverage or ability to pay.


html fixed

[mzmolly]

137. HPV is a single concern. It's a good idea to engage in

condom use unless you're in a monogamous relationship with a partner free of STD's, regardless of vaccination status. HIV, and other serious STD's are still a risk. Also as I've indicated the vaccine has an undetermined period of efficacy.

Regarding the second point, when a scientist who conducted research on a certain population indicates that the vaccine is being used in a manner she disagrees with, it's noteworthy. And, public policy on vaccination is supposed to be determined by science, vs those who will ultimately profit.

Lastly, mandates don't = free vaccines. If you don't have insurance, you don't get vaccinated.

[iverglas]

139. am I typing in invisible ink?

It's a good idea to engage in condom use unless you're in a monogamous relationship with a partner free of STD's, regardless of vaccination status.

It's a good idea NOT TO GET RAPED. Any ideas on how a girl or woman can put that idea into practice?

I probably didn't contract HPV when I was raped; I had other partners who were probably the more likely source. But hey, who knows?

I do find it very difficult to believe the pious assertions of caring about girls and women when they come from people who so studiously avoid addressing the realities of girls' and women's lives, while pontificating about proper sexual practices.


Also as I've indicated the vaccine has an undetermined period of efficacy.

Well gosh, I wonder whether it might be determined, if it is at some point determined that immunity has worn off (as is the case for many diseases, whether immunity is from infection or vaccination), and whether boosters might then be administered ... as they are for many diseases ...


Regarding the second point, when a scientist who conducted research on a certain population indicates that the vaccine is being used in a manner she disagrees with, it's noteworthy.

No, not really.

In any event, the vaccine is NOT being used in a manner she disagrees with, and it is utterly deceptive to say that. I'm not actually stupid, you know, and I don't find it at all difficult to spot these little bits of sophistry.

The vaccine is being USED in precisely the way it was developed to be used: as a vaccine against HPV infection. The public policy regarding who is to be the subject of its use is the issue. And they are not the same issue. They are entirely distinct, separate issues.


And, public policy on vaccination is supposed to be determined by science, vs those who will ultimately profit.

I love a good false dichotomy for my mid-afternoon snack.

No, public policy is not supposed to be determined by science. I don't even know how that would work. Science tells us that gravity causes things to fall down. Does this determine a public policy on, what, the direction in which things should fall? Does the science of nuclear fission determine public policy on nuclear weapons? Utter nonsense.

The science of a matter is a factor to be considered in making public policy. So are constitutions, budgets, public health and safety, and a lot of other things.

[mzmolly]

140. You bring rape into the conversation

and accuse me of false dichotomies? So now the HPV vaccine should be mandated for eleven year olds because someone might be raped?

:crazy:

You're not typing in invisible ink, I'm just not taking the bait on your unrelated, attempts at distraction.

Here's what Diane Harper has had to say the roll out of the vaccine in case you're actually interested?

"There is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue".

"Giving it to 11 year olds is a great big public health experiment", said Diane M. Harper, who is a scientist, physician, professor and the director the Gynecologic Cancer Prevention Research Group at the Norris Cotton Cancer Center at Dartmouth Medical School in New Hampshire.

Internationally recognized as a pioneer in the field, Harper has been studying HPV and a possible vaccine for several of the more than 100 strains of HPV for 20 years - most of her adult life.

All of her trials have been with subjects ages 15-25. In her own practice, Harper believes the ideal way of administering the new vaccine is to offer it to women ages 18 and up. At their first inoculation, they should be tested for the presence of HPV in their system.

http://www.offtheradar.co.nz/vaccines/34-merck-hpv/53-researcher-diane-harper-blasts-gardasil-hpv-marketing.html

I'm done with your convoluted drama. Have a nice day. :hi:

[iverglas]

143. failing to see your difficulty here

So now the HPV vaccine should be mandated for eleven year olds because someone might be raped?

No.

Because a majority of women will find themselves, at some point in their lives, in situations in which they are not in control of the terms on which sexual intercourse takes place.

NOT because "someone might be raped".

Because A MAJORITY of women, at some point in their lives, have non-consensual sex or sex in which they are unable to protect themselves, for a variety of reasons.

And many people think it wise to protect girls and women against the possibly devastating consequences of unprotected sex with an infected partner regardless of the reasons why it occurs, and particularly because it can occur without consent regardless of how pure or careful any girl or woman is. Or isn't. I don't regard disease or death as the wages of sin, myself.


In her own practice, Harper believes the ideal way of administering the new vaccine is to offer it to women ages 18 and up. At their first inoculation, they should be tested for the presence of HPV in their system.

Well forgive me, Dr. Harper, but YOU'RE A FUCKING MORON.

What other vaccine is dealt with like this? Does she wait until her patients are 18 to administer vaccines against other diseases? Does she wait until they are INFECTED with the fucking virus that causes a disease before -- what, telling them the vaccine is pointless? What in the bloody hell is this about?

And how many times does this crap about "the presence of HPV in their system" have to be debunked?

HPV infection DOES, yes, clear up on its own.

And this does NOT mean that the virus has not instigated the process that leads to cancer if left untreated.

The dishonest demagoguery just doesn't end.


I'm done with your convoluted drama. Have a nice day.

I think I responded appropriately some time ago, in two words.


typo fixed

[mzmolly]

145. Ah, now a researcher who worked on the vaccine is a "f*cking moron?" You've removed all doubt about

your ability to reason on this issue.

Off to IGNORE with you.

[iverglas]

146. no, a physician who treats patients in this negligent way

is a fucking moron, and worse. I don't care whether she invented the wheel.

Off to wherever disingenuous demagogues hang out when they're not mithering the general public with you.

[iverglas]

147. some more evidence

that you conveniently omitted when you quoted that article:

All of her trials have been with subjects ages 15-25. In her own practice, Harper believes the ideal way of administering the new vaccine is to offer it to women ages 18 and up. At their first inoculation, they should be tested for the presence of HPV in their system.

If the test comes back negative, then schedule the follow-up series of the three-part shots. But if it comes back positive?

"Then we don't know squat, because medically we don't know how to respond to that" Harper said

And I just don't know how to respond to that. In any way.

The zealousness to inoculate all these younger girls may very well backfire at the very time they need protection most, she said. "This vaccine should not be for 11 year old girls", she reiterated. "It's not been tested in little girls for efficacy. at 11, these girls don't get cervical cancer - they won't know for 25 years if they will get cervical cancer.

What century is this woman living in?

In THIS century, women in their early 20s, who have not been on this planet for 25 years, in rising numbers, are being diagnosed with cervical cancer.

My opinion stands. She is a fucking moron. And worse.

[mzmolly]

106. You might not be aware

that no one is suggesting we end vaccination.

I've had friends and family effected by cervical cancer. People in this forum have lost family members to vaccination side effects. Your personal concerns are no more or less valid than theirs.

[iverglas]

128. not a matter of personal concerns

and your characterization of what I said as such is inappropriate.

I have no dog in this race. The HPV vaccine is far too late for me. At the time I was likely infected, there was only beginning to be an understanding of the correlation between multiple sexual partners and cervical cancer; the operation of a virus had not yet been discovered.

I have two pre-teen nieces. I certainly hope they receive the vaccine eventually. At the moment, they are both hopefully coming to the end of a long period of treatment for Lyme disease, and I imagine their parents will delay vaccination until they are back in good health.

The difference between me and people whose family members may have died of vaccine-related causes is that I am quite certain that the HPV virus was the determining factor in my disease state. Unfortunately, and certainly through no fault of the people affected, this is not the case where vaccines are advanced as the causal factor in death or disability.

[mzmolly]

135. You have no dog in the race

but you did attempt to use your experience as a factor in the debate.

I'll say it again, we don't know how long this vaccine will confer protection, which is one of the reasons Diane Harper (a researcher involved in developing the vax) disagreed with Mercks Marketing and mandating the vax for young girls. If this questionable vaccine were not mandated for children, you'd not hear one peep from me about it.

[iverglas]

138. yeah, here's the interesting thing

you did attempt to use your experience as a factor in the debate

What I didn't do is say "I was born with measles and I'm just fine", as someone did in another thread this week, to argue against vaccination.

What I did do is offer my experience as an example of the HARM - the real harm - caused by the disease state that the HPV vaccine is intended to prevent.

I do this because I get fed to the nose with people yapping about how PAP smears / early detection/treatment will save women from dying of cervical cancer.

Death from cervical cancer IS NOT the sole harm to be prevented. My experience is an EXAMPLE of the other VERY REAL HARMS that are associated with HPV infection.

It isn't me pretending that my experience settles some debate.

It's others obfuscating and pretending that my experience (the experience of thousands and thousands of other women) is not relevant to the debate.

That is what yapping about early detection/treatment blah blah IS. Treatment of cervical dysplasia isn't a course of antibiotics. It is painful, expensive, unpleasant surgery in many cases, not always successful, and sometimes with adverse effects on women's lives.

That is the pretense here.

[mzmolly]

141. I could offer my personal experience

to denote the fact that the virus often clears on it's own, but I haven't - until now. Why? Because my experience doesn't match that of everyone impacted, neither does yours.

Cheers.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

161. I see something remains to be said

I wonder what <oh, you know, insert your own words> decided it shouldn't be said.

I wonder who had the utter gall to report a post by a woman whose experience consists of having surgery as a result of an infection possibly contracted during a rape, objecting to the mischaracterization of that experience and the references to it in this discussion.


Because my experience doesn't match that of everyone impacted, neither does yours.

My experience DOES match (at a minimum; it may well be less than) the experience of every woman whose PAP smear discloses a cervical condition that necessitates surgery. THAT is what the experience I have recounted was. I have no idea what you are trying to misrepresent my words as.

A woman who is diagnosed with dyskaryosis, dysplasia or cancer will lose part of her body. She will undergo surgery, she will experience pain and anxiety, someone will have to pay the costs of the treatment, she may experience consequences like the inability to carry a pregnancy to term -- and in spite of it all, the surgery may be unsuccessful AND SHE MAY DIE.

Is your experience of NOT having any of these experiences somehow a rebuttal of the fact that MANY WOMEN DO? Do you have any idea how common these experiences have become, and how young many of the women enduring them these days is?

I think you do. And I just shake my head when I contemplate the implications of that fact.


Evidently your experience is that you have been infected with HPV and ... what? Not had cervical cancer or any of the precursor conditions?

One word, dear.

"Yet".

You do know that, right? You may never have such a disease condition. You may one day have it. Just like so many others of us.

Whatever it is you claim to have been "impacted" by, your experience will undoubtedly match that of some who have been, and not match that of others.

I have been "impacted" by a pre-cancerous condition of the cervix. Your experience has precisely fuck all to do with mine.

[iverglas]

163. and this is NOT going unsaid

Quite the stunning decision -- to eliminate information like this from this thread, I have got to say.


I might have to retract my comments about Diane Harper. First, I keep meaning to say -- she was NOT one of the "developers", let alone the developer (as asserted in another thread) of the HPV vaccine. She was one person among others involved in trials of the vaccine.

And here's the fun bit, discussed in certain dank corners of the internet under the rubric "who got to Diane Harper?" :rofl:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/oct/10/ben-goldacre-cervical-cancer-jab (emphases mine)

One really does need to read it all to get it -- it's quite short, but there's more than I can copy here under the rules. (Oooh, I get an extra paragraph, because one of them is quoted from somewhere else!)

Cancer jab fantasy closes down a debate
o Ben Goldacre
o The Guardian, Saturday 10 October 2009

... "Jab 'as deadly as the cancer'," roared the Sunday Express headline this week. "Cervical drug expert hits out as new doubts raised over death of teenager," said the sub-heading, although no such new doubts were raised in the article. We will now break with tradition and reproduce a paragraph from the story. I'd like you to pay attention and perhaps build a list of its claims in your mind. This is a story where every single assertion made on someone else's behalf is false.

"The cervical cancer vaccine may be riskier and more deadly than the cancer it is designed to prevent, a leading expert who developed the drug has warned. She also claimed the jab would do nothing to reduce the rates of cervical cancer in the UK. Speaking exclusively to the Sunday Express, Dr Diane Harper, who was involved in the clinical trials of the controversial drug Cervarix, said the jab was being 'overmarketed' and parents should be properly warned about the potential side effects."

The story seemed unlikely: Prof Harper is not a known member of the anti-vaccination community, which is vanishingly small. Second, it was in the Sunday Express. Last, it was by specialist health journalist Lucy Johnston, whose previous work includes Doctor's MMR fears, Exclusive: Experts cast doubt on claim for 'wonder' cancer jabs, Children 'used as guinea pigs for vaccines', Dangers Of MMR jab 'covered up', Teenage girls sue over cancer jab, Jab makers linked to vaccine programme, and many more, including a memorable bad science story, Suicides 'linked to phone masts'.

So I contacted the professor. I will explain Harper's position in her own words. They are unambiguous: "I did not say that Cervarix was as deadly as cervical cancer. I did not say that Cervarix could be riskier or more deadly than cervical cancer. I did not say that Cervarix was controversial, I stated that Cervarix is not a 'controversial drug'. I did not 'hit out' – I was contacted by the press for facts. And this was not an exclusive interview."

... Here is the tragedy. In a clear example of how academics are often independent-minded about the interventions they work on, Harper is a critic of Gardasil, or more specifically of how it is marketed. Briefly, her view is that we do not yet know how long the protection from these vaccines will last, and this will affect the cost-benefit decisions.

The article has now gone from the Express website, and Harper has complained to the Press Complaints Commission. "I fully support the HPV vaccines," she says. "I believe that in general they are safe in most women. I told the Express all of this."

I remember when I first went to get The Pill in 1970 and was immediately asked by the cold male doctor at the university clinic whether I was married. No. Engaged? No. Why are you asking me these questions? Because there are concerns about the effects of long-term use of The Pill.

So the assumption was that if I was married or engaged, I would soon be going off The Pill to make babies, and if not, I might be looking at what was considered a risky period of pill-taking.

Well, all he had to do was ask about my reproductive plans, or not ask at all and inform me of the concerns. He might not have been a patronizing sexist asshole, but he was playing one well by the approach he took.

I wonder whether Harper has spoken as ineptly about her concerns, e.g. about the possible problem of loss of protection over the long term.

The bit of the article I haven't reproduced points out Harper's concerns about the possible impact of direct marketing of Gardasil to the public -- and that it could lull women into believing they are perfectly protected, and not maintaining regular screening. Well, such marketing is not allowed in Europe or Canada, for instance. Obviously her concern is not about the vaccine, it is about the marketing of the vaccine in a particular market where particular conditions prevail.

So the answer is obviously to either (a) eliminate those conditions - stop the direct marketing of prescription medications and vaccines and other matters reserved for decision by medical practitioners to the public; or (b) advocate measures to counteract the potentially negative effects of such marketing, e.g. education/awareness campaigns directed at high school students and the general public.


The thing not to do is adopt Diane Harper as the poster child for the anti-HPV vaccine disinformation campaign. The only way to do that is through even more disinformation. And that's exactly what we got here.

[xchrom]

165. i've followed your story closely and empathies more than you know

as a gay man.

i've had to deal with sexism and bigotry on two different fronts -- from conservatives for sure -- but also from 'liberals' -- who -- very much like exposed on this thread -- have way way more in common with sexists and conservatives than real liberals

i lose my temper -- but they are NOT honest and can't deal with the facts presented by you in this thread. -- the
what they present is NO different than the nonfactual hysteria presented on eagle forum.

[iverglas]

166. oooh, I always hate it when I do that! ;)

I do appreciate the fellow feelings, for sure. I just hate to think I've painted myself as a tragic figure. ;)

My point is always to speak as une femme comme les autres - an ordinary woman - as somebody I can never remember, not Simone de Beauvoir, put it. It really isn't about me!

My experience - the sexual assualt, the cervical biopsy - are common to a lot of women, a large proportion of women. And that experience is what I want to be included in the discourse, in this situation in particular, precisely because it is the experience of so many women whose voices need to be included.

And I can indeed imagine how people who belong to other excluded groups feel when their experience is discounted in discussion of an issue that affects them.

And the personal-responsibility crowd loves to point at us all. I was just looking at a thread from 2007 when I mentioned that I likely contracted HPV in the early 70s, a time when we were all very conscious of and careful about contraception and dutifully waffled between the pill and IUDs, but were getting no information about STDs at all, let alone about HPV, which had only just been discovered, or even the correlation between multiple partners and cervical cancer. I had one poster following me around the thread denouncing my promiscuous-woman irresponsibility and quoting Bill Maher at me. I was gobsmacked, that anyone would think my sexual behaviour was their business, let alone that a stranger would, let alone that a member of DU would, let alone that they would be spewing religious-right talking points at me!

Yes, women should get regular cervical screening and use barrier methods to prevent any infection. Not all women are able to do that, no matter how "responsible" they may be, for the infinite number of reasons that an infinite number of women will have.

Harm prevention beats trying to close the barn door, every time.

[xchrom]

167. i can appreciate that --

and if you think about the community i come from -- you can see how i can relate and empathies.

[iverglas]

168. I hadn't wanted to be indelicate, but yup

It's that lifestyle thang, isn't it? ;)

[xchrom]

173. lol -- indeed. nt

[Why Syzygy]

58. Thanks for posting, mzmolly

Frankenbeings eating frankenfood and taking frankenshots. Except we're mortal.

[HuckleB]

120. The piece is informative and fair.

I'm happy they're doing more exploration and research to see if they can determine a link, and, if there is a link, the cause.

Thanks for sharing.

Cheers!

[mzmolly]

122. Thank you HuckleB.

You're always a voice of reason, even if we don't always agree. :hi:

[pnwmom]

125. Did you notice that Jenny had the Gardasil vaccine at the same time that she had

the Hep-B?

Hep-B has been connected to neurological problems, like Multiple Sclerosis.

I wonder if doctors are considering the possibility that the Hep-B vaccine could have injured Jenny, or that the combination of Hep-B and Gardasil vaccines could have put her system into over-drive?

Gardasil was never tested for safety in combination with other vaccines, as it is used in the real world. All of this is so hard to untangle -- I think that's why some people don't even want to try.

[mzmolly]

126. I did not notice this.

Could be a combined effect in this case you say?

[pnwmom]

127. Both of the vaccines have been linked to possible auto-immune effects.

So the question is, is this more likely if the two are administered together?

Veterinarians are more on top of this than most M.D.'s -- over the last several years, there has been a push to reduce the number of vaccines (which are still many fewer than human babies receive) and to spread them out. And they freely acknowledge that immune reactions may be connected with vaccines, which is why they're being more cautious.

Also, they have divided the vaccines into "core vaccines" -- a few vaccines that all dogs should have -- and "non-core" vaccines that are recommended only for dogs at risk.

I wonder what the human vaccine schedule would look like if we divided vaccines into "core" and "non-core" groups.

[mzmolly]

134. Good question.

"I wonder what the human vaccine schedule would look like if we divided vaccines into "core" and "non-core" groups."

[mzmolly]

148. Somewhat unrelated, but I'm enjoying the ignore feature.

I don't miss the irrational, reactionary, illogical, overly dramatic conversations one bit. :D

[pnwmom]

156. I see that word skipping here and there all over this thread.

But we must be ignoring different people, because you were patiently engaging with some of my "ignoreds."

[Name removed]

157. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

160. "It does no good to engage the mentally unbalanced."

Maybe you can't see my post. But I'll bet the moderators can see yours!

{insert stupid faceything of your choice}

[mzmolly]

159. I see "ignored" keeps responding to my posts.

What a great feature this is. I must use it more! ;)

[iverglas]

162. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Dog_and_pony_show

Dog and pony show was a colloquial term used in the United States in the late-19th and early-20th centuries to refer to small traveling circuses that toured through small towns and rural areas. The name derives from the typical use of performing dogs and ponies as the main attractions of the events.

Performances were typically held in open-air arenas, such as race tracks or municipal parks, and in localities that were too small or remote to attract bigtop performances. In the latter part of the 20th century, the original meaning of the term has largely been lost. More recently, smaller areas of the mid-western United States have come to know the term as 'horse and pony show'. This term is not widely accepted in other areas of the country.

The term has come to mean any type of presentation or display that is somewhat pathetically contrived or overly intricate, or put on for purposes of gaining approval for a program, policy, etc.

:rofl:

[pnwmom]

164. I beat you!

I got an "ignored" and also a "deleted message/name removed." On the same post!

[mzmolly]

171. LOL

You did indeed! :hi:

[iverglas]

158. one of you poseurs may want to tell the other

that once you have claimed to put another poster on "ignore", you IGNORE that poster.

You do not scamper around the boards dogging and ponying on with your stupid ventriloquist act spewing sad invective about the poster you claim to have on ignore.

Not, I mean, that it isn't fun to watch, in a freak show kinda way.



typo fixed