OT: new study on the dangers of Gardasil vaccine and aluminum adjuvants

Vaccines are routinely tested for safety, even if you and Jamie don't know about it. Synergism does happen, but not very often.

Lobbying works on legislatures. You can't "lobby" the FDA. The pharmaceutic al companies can try and pressure the FDA and other regulatory agencies, bu t if they get too obvious about it the newspapers get told about it and the re's a scandal.

atory-in-texas.html

The strains of the HPV that get immunised against are the most common ones

- those most effective at getting transmitted.

There's no evidence that viruses compete inside the body, and they certainl y don't interact. Blocking the viruses that are best at getting transmitted just means that fewer people will get infected - which is what we want.

No. It's a moronic misapprehension about how virus infection works, and wha t viruses exist to do. A virus can only do one thing - invade a cell and ta ke over its replication system, and set it to making more of that virus. Th ey don't invade all that many cells - because if they did the host would di e before it has replicated the maximum possible number of virus particles. Viruses don't interact.

Innoculation isn't "safe" - it's just a lot less dangerous than getting the disease. Everybody seems to be happy with admitting liability when somethi ng does go wrong, but that doesn't extend to accepting liability for someth ing that probably would have gone wrong at the same time and in the same wa y if the vaccination hadn't happened.

The Nuremberg trials

were war crimes prosecutions. "Hard cases make bad law" and trying to gener alise the principles allegedly underlying the prosecutions isn't a task where an ignorant half-wit like you is likely to do well.

But it's 100% for every unfortunate woman who gets the cancer.

Chronic fatigue syndrome is recognised as a debilating condition. It has a recognised set of symptoms. It takes a while before they can be recognised as a syndrome. By now, enough people have been immunised against HPV to gen erate an increase in the incidence of the syndrome if the vaccination did m ake it more likely. Nobody is talking about any epidemic of chronic fatigue syndrome, so - even if the vaccine did have this side-effect (which seems unlikely) - you are balancing it against a reduced chance of getting cervic al cancer, which induces terminal fatigue.

Granting the kind of "fact" that you pay attention to, and the kind of fact s that you ignore, this merely betrays the fact that you haven't a clue abo ut what you are talking about.

You haven't quoted a single statistic in this entire post, let alone identi fied a statistic that I've got wrong or misapplied. As advice, that line is unexceptionable, but you are the last person entitled to give it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

}snip{

Yeah, with the same dedication as Monsanto tested her glyphosate-resistant GMO corn and didn't find any adverse health effects in her rats study of, what was it, 6 weeks? Then a real researcher passes by, does the same safety study over again, but then for a slightly longer period, and lo-and-behold: the rats start developing cancer, all kinds of birth defects, spontaneous abortions, infertility and what not.

'routinely tested for safety'... another fart trotted out by the establishment to make the gullible citizen think all is well and cared for. No it's not.

Ok, but you can create a revolving door to the FDA. Same effect.

That's why they do it in a hidden non-obvious way. Only a fool would deny that it happens.

}snip{

No they are not. They are the most common causes of HPV-related cancers, not 'the most common ones'.

With 'there is no evidence' you probably mean: "I didn't look for it, so I didn't see any, so there must be none"?

If one virus strain gets blocked, another strain takes over. And probably with a vengeance.

}snip{

Then let people decide for their own whether they want to get vaccinated or not.

Thanks. (I learned that from you :) }snip{

You exaggerate. In Denmark some doctors *are* warning their (until now playing deaf) health authorities that there is an increased number of cases of girls with very serious CFS-like symptoms caused by the HPV-jab.

You are the one without a clue about how many girls in for instance Denmark got a debilitating amount of CFS-like symptoms very shortly after being injected with a HPV-vaccin, who were otherwise completely healthy and probably wouldn't have gotten the HPV-caused cancer anyway. And you are probably also totally clueless about the fact that these extremely severe side effects occur more frequently, if not almost exclusively, in girls with a very high physical activity level. As in top sport. But no, Bill Sloman is the know-it-all and I am ignorant. No Sir, here YOU are the ignoramus.

If I would quote any statistic you would brush that aside as probably coming from an anti-vac site. Point is that you are ignorant about the facts, and you don't even know it, let alone would ever admit it.

Well, I know those facts, so for me you are the ignorant clueless idiot. You haven't even looked for the facts.

joe

Then where is the concern of the Am. Coll. Ped. coming from?

joe

Yet there are enough associations occurring in Denmark to make it a possible cause.

Yet this is not what happened. Girls who otherwise would not have gotten sick got severe CFS symptoms shortly after vaccination. And in such a high number that it doesn't fit in a random occurrance of those symptoms in girls 'anyway'.

Because it happened a statistically significant number of times that when you are confronted with a medical study that contradicts your position you suddenly come up with that argument, but never seem to mention it when you come up with *your* cherry picked studies.

You don't need to work in that field to get exposed to those rubbish papers. They are everywhere, except when you cite them of course.

And many time not published because 'the industry' didn't like the results. Scientific fraud therefor.

Let me fix that for you: Nearly every study...

Yes, they mostly are. And with a purpose: the results they're after.

And they do. "Don't publish this paper, instead we'll fund your next study."

And many of the so called 'hits' are also a fraud.

What's wrong with your understanding of 'done due to reported damage in humans from the vaccine'? Did I say with that they it was carried out on people? Oh, wait let me do a short test:

C A N Y O U R E A D T H I S ?

Now how's that for a scientific argument?

}snip{

joe

Link?

Where? How often?

Except that you don't cite the numbers or provide a link to any place where these numbers might have been cited. There's anecdotal evidence and there' s invented evidence.

I do pick the studies I take seriously enough to cite. I'm unlikely to put forward anything that stinks of medical-anxiety making.

I do take care not to cite papers that strike me as rubbish. Your standards do seem to be lower.

And you've got lots of documented examples of this happening? I'm afraid th at this sounds more like something generated by your conspiracy theory orie nted imagination.

How many? Cite a study. Your "impressions" are little too predictable to be taken seriously.

Can you work out that a study reporting damage to mice isn't reporting dama ge to human beings? The authors might claim that damage to mice might sugge st damage to human beings, but one medical paper that I read claimed eviden ce that ultra-sound damaged fetal mice. The follow-up studies found that th e experimental protocol used damaged fetal mice just as much if you left ou t the ultrasound irradiation, but did everything else (like staking the pre gnant mice to a board for six hours).

Since you introduced an irrelevant figure, and persistently snip the link t o MacBride, who is relevant, the example illustrates your grasp of what con stitutes scientific argument, which you clearly can't manage, as opposed to text-chopping, at which you excel.

Thalidomide didn't damage pregnant guinea pigs ...

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

They are anxiety-makers, like many of their medical bretheren. They enjoy making patients anxious, and they enjoy the attention it gets them.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Really? If I get innoculated against one strain of flu, does a new strain s pring up immediately to give me a different strain of flu?

Influenza is a fast-mutating virus, and it can't manage that.

Sure, and let them make up their own minds about when they can drive a car well enough to go out on the road. Vaccination doesn't just affect your own health, but also the health of everybody your might infect if you got sick .

Cite.

What makes you think that? Provide a link to the information you claim to h ave.

Since I've never heard of anything of the sort, I'm supposed to take your w ord for it?

I don't have to know much to know more than you do, and I can substantiate my facts, which you rarely bother to do - and when you do try, you are pron e to misunderstand what your "facts" actually mean.

You do like to think that. A more objective observer would be unlikely to s hare your opinion.

Not if you provided the link, so that I could see whether it was a propagan da site, or something with some faint hint of credibility.

Your idea of a what constitutes a fact needs work. When we argued about the usefulness of vaccination against measles, you deliberately ignored the UK statistics on the number of people who caught measles (which went down dra matically after immunisation against measles was introduced) and denied tha t immunisation had any effect on the death rate although the death rate wen t down in portion to the reduction in the number that got infected, preferr ing to to argue that the reduction in the death rate was all due to "better hygiene" ...

I'm not pushing this nonsense, you are. You are citing "facts" which you mi ght as well have imagined, and on past history, have almost certainly misun derstood.

I'm not spending any more effort on proving that you are an idiot than I ha ve to, and I don't need to do much research to do it.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

Yeah I remember about that. they hand picked a guy and got him into a posit ion to "unpublish" that study claiming it was not done "according to Hoyle" . Strangely though, there has been ZERO research offered up that refutes it in any way. All they could come up with was some very minor issues with th e procedure.

not caused by the vaccine and there has not been a noticeable rise in POF cases in the last 9 years since HPV4 vaccine has been widely used."

Hi,

The American College of Pediatricians wrote this with input from scientists as well as vaccine proponents, so there are parts of the text that say vaccines are probably ok, and then another part that gets the real science across showing the dangers of Gardasil.

Here is an unbiased scientific quote from the article, showing the association with Gardasil and ovarian dysfunction.

"Many adolescent females are vaccinated with influenza, meningococcal,

reports related to ovarian dysfunction since 2006 are associated with

The overwhelming majority (76%) of VAERS reports since 2006 with ovarian failure, premature menopause, and/or amenorrhea are associated solely

which amenorrhea occurred for at least 4 months and is not associated with other known causes like polycystic ovary syndrome or pregnancy,

0/89 with other vaccines administered independently of an HPV vaccine.5 Using the same criteria, there are only 7 reports of amenorrhea from 1990 through 2005 and no more than 2 of those associated with any one vaccine type."

There are politically written sections of the article, as you point out but that just shows the debate around vaccines.

Pediatricians make money by vaccines being administered too, so it is nice to see that they still are willing to tell the truth about their concerns with them.

cheers, Jamie

development, and any mutation that messes up the mechanism is pretty much bound to make the brain work less well.

Hi,

I realize you consider all the systems in the body to be separate, but that is incorrect.

"immune cells activated in the mother during severe inflammation produce an immune effector molecule called IL-17 that appears to interfere with brain development."

cheers, Jamie

with it as well as it would cope with any other assault (such as a measles infection).

FDA and other regulatory agencies, but if they get too obvious about it the newspapers get told about it and there's a scandal.

Hi,

The drug companies already figured out it is easier to avoid lobbying the FDA, instead they "drug" up the FDA with pharmaceutical insiders which is what they are good at, by using the government industry revolving door.

"WASHINGTON, Jan. 26 ? Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) announced today that he has placed a hold on Food and Drug Administration Commissioner nominee Dr. Robert Califf because of his close ties to the pharmaceutical industry and lack of commitment to lowering drug prices. Sanders joins with Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), who also placed a hold on Califf?s nomination.

?Dr. Califf?s extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry give me no reason to believe that he would make the FDA work for ordinary Americans, rather than just the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies,? Sanders reiterated.

Califf has deeper ties to the pharmaceutical industry than any FDA commissioner in recent history. He ran a multimillion-dollar clinical research center at Duke University that received more than 60 percent of its funding from the pharmaceutical and medical device industry. And his financial disclosure form last year listed seven drug companies and a device maker that paid him for consulting and six others ? including Merck, Novartis and Eli Lilly ? which supported his university salary. "

cheers, Jamie

to give me a different strain of flu?

Hi,

Pretty much, since being infected by a single flu virus is not what actually occurs, really there is a group of viruses that cause the infection.

cheers, Jamie

What makes you think that?

General brain development, during pregnancy. Neutral pruning happens quite a bit later, and is a lot more specific.

So what? What has chromosome 6 got to vaccine adjuncts, or severe inflammation in the mother during pregnancy?

I'm afraid that you are babbling, rather than producing anything that looks even vaguely like a coherent argument.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

He did not 'unpublish' the study, it was Elsevier who, against their own rules regarding retraction of articles, retracted it anyway. And put a ex-Monsanto 'supervisory editor' in place to prevent that kind of papers to be published ever again.

The professor, Seralini is his name, did some legal fighting and won the case and I donated some money in support for his legal costs. In that chronological order by the way. :)

Because his paper was 'unpublished' by Elsevier, he was able to submit it to another peer reviewed (IIRC) journal and got it 're-published' there. Rightfully so IYAM (how about that one :).

joe

Not immediately, bonehead.

Having to have your car maintained properly can in no way damage your health.

Having all kinds of live virii, cancer virii, inherently toxic adjuvants injected in your blood can, and sometimes does cause great damage, where the chance of damage from the target disease was small anyway (as in chicken pox, measles).

I demand freedom of choice for that kind of questionable medical procedures.

I don't have to. I'm mentioning it to you, and if you don't want to know then by all means DON'T look for it.

I have mentioned this before, and I have posted the youtube link to the documentary in which some of those doctors actually are interviewed and say exactly the things that I mentioned.

But of course, you don't even want to know that. Are you that interested in the facts that you did watch that documentary already? Lemme guess... no.

BTW, here's the video (again): youtube.com/watch?v=lBE90cgcsMU

joe

}snip{

}snip{

You also do that all the time, so what's the point now?

joe

}snip{

ry give me

?

supported

They should take a good look at the guy(s) who nominated him...

joe

in

They do have to generate enough variation to become antigenically distinct, so that the vaccine which works against one group of strains will work les s well against the new group, and that doesn't happen often even with flu, which is relatively fast-mutating.

Most mutations don't make a scrap of difference - flu has 2,821,103 nucleot ides - and the only ones that matter to it's antigenic properties are those that control the protein packages that injects the RNA content into the ho st cell, and subsequently get it out again after the host cell has replicat ed it. Hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) are the two large glycopro teins on the outside of the viral particles.

If you want to pose as an expert it's useful to confine your bursts of expe rtise to explanations of significant differences, rather than pointlessly o bserving that reality is more complicated than has been set out - although the complication doesn't make any difference in practice.

--
Bill Sloman, Sysdney

}snip{

}snip{

That is such a fake argument...

If there are so many children with autistic spectrum disorder and almost *all* their parents are doing just fine, then where are those 'duff genes' supposed to come from?

Autistic milk man perhaps?

joe