The Risks and Benefits of HPV Vaccination

Editor’s Note: There has been some discussion, though not enough, of the safety of the Gardasil vaccine for HPV, which is supposed to protect women against cervical cancer. Beth Bagner, my friend and co-conspirator, is a registered nurse who follows this issue closely. She sent me this editorial from the Journal of the American Medical Association that has the guts to stand up to the pharmaceutical industry and the lock-step thinking of the American medical establishment, which usually says ‘inject first, ask questions later’. We need to be asking the same questions now, not later, about other trendy vaccines. The author is a doctor from Norway named Charlotte Haug. — efc

WHEN DO PHYSICIANS know enough about the beneficial effects of a new medical intervention to start recommending or using it? When is the available information about harmful adverse effects sufficient to conclude that the risks outweigh the potential benefits? If in doubt, should physicians err on the side of caution or on the side of hope? These questions are at the core of all medical decision making. It is a complicated process because medical knowledge is typically incomplete and ambiguous. It is especially complex to make decisions about whether to use drugs that may prevent disease in the future, particularly when these drugs are given to otherwise healthy individuals. Vaccines are examples of such drugs, and the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine is a case in point.

Read more in the Journal of the American Medical Association

5 thoughts on “The Risks and Benefits of HPV Vaccination”

  1. Laks,

    Very interested to read your post and informative. However, I would ask – what, then truly is the conclusion? To a lay-person, this is a non-conclusive conculsion. It answers the study, but what does the study tell us other than what we knew going in – we have a problem with what we call HPV.

    Seems to me it says we have a deeper problem and the vaccine (and issues associated with the vaccine) isn’t a deeper answer.

    ?

  2. Human papilloma virus infection prior to coitarche

    American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Volume 200, Issue 5, May 2009, Pages 487.e1-487.e5

    Abstract: ObjectiveThe aim of our study was to determine the prevalence and the natural course of anogenital human papilloma virus (HPV) infections in girls prior to coitarche attending an outpatient gynecological unit.Study DesignSpecimens were taken from the anogenital region of 114 unselected 4-15 year old girls who were referred consecutively for various gynecological problems.ResultsFour girls were excluded because of sexual abuse. Low-risk HPV-deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) was detected in 4 girls (3.6%) and high-risk HPV DNA in 15 children (13.6%). Two girls testing positive for HPV DNA had clinical apparent warts. After 1 year, 2 children had persistent high-risk HPV DNA, and in 1 case we found a switch from high-risk to low-risk HPV DNA.

    Conclusion
    Subclinical genital low- and high-risk HPV infections are common in girls without any history of sexual abuse or sexual activity. We found persistence of genital HPV infection in children, which could be a reservoir for HPV-associated diseases later in life.

  3. Eric,

    Your additional post Nessus and “innappropriate touching” really hits home. Once again I am “Personal Experience 101”.

    And on that energetic level, how might we be reinforcing the guilt factor in daughters who mostly (at the prescribed age for the vaccine) haven’t experieniced vaginal intercourse yet?

    Another less esoteric issue I have with the HPV vac (notwithstanding the probable toxicity of the vaccine) is that many many girls who are given the vaccine will mis-understand it and assume they are “protected” – and therefore be prompted to have un-protected (and condomless) sexual activities.

    This type of vaccine has struck me as far more dangerous than even the flu-vaccine issue, as it play directly into our communal fear of our own sexualities.

    Thank goddess the flu-vaccine discussion is “out there”. Perhaps it will help lead eventually to healthier information/discussion this HPV vac and if we’re really on the ball (lead to) the uncloaking of other Fear Based Profiteering of our legal drug “industry”.

    Thanks again, Eric.

  4. The HPV discussion is worth having. As you will read in this editorial, the lifetime infection rate is about 79%; that is to say, four out of five of us will encounter this virus in one of its forms directly. That may seem to be a reason not to worry; I would say it’s a reason to raise awareness. In my long relationship with this issue, I have noticed that the psychic/energetic signature of HPV involves guilt; which is the product of conflicted relationships (in particular, conflicts of interest in relationships): situations where people are cheating and feeling guilty about it; or where someone’s body becomes an emotional battleground. HPV has the energy signature of Nessus. The “potentially inappropriate touching” of that Centaur manifests as the intense guilt trip that comes with incestuous relationships and is close to the exclusive cause of cervical cancer in young girls who have been inappropriately touched by older men. But with a 79% lifetime infection rate, the issue is obviously much larger than that.

  5. And my mother “force”fed me milk and wheat for 18 years because the government chose to support our argiculture economy (which is not inandofitself a bad thing) and the Myth of the Daily Four Food Groups.

    My health as an adult is in chronic risk due to the unfortunate ramifications of the unfortunate childhood dietary choices (which seem extrodinarily difficult to undo.)

    My children have been influenced by me such that they are ultra-anti-vaccinations of any kind. Will they thank me later? Or ?

    As long as we have choice in this matter and are able to access alternative POV and information…….

    Thanks for the VIP* Eric (*Very Important Post)

Leave a Comment