Why are we replacing the Pap smear with a test for HPV?

Why are we replacing the successful Pap smear program with an HPV test when we don’t know if HPV is the cause of cervical cancer?

Joan Shenton, is a British broadcaster and producer of Sacrificial Virgins:  Not for the greater good.  In Part One of the series, Shenton interviews molecular biologist Professor Peter Duesberg who is also the author of What if HPV does NOT cause cervical cancer?  and asks him whether there is a causal relationship between the human papilloma virus and and cervical cancer. “Absolutely not”, he replied, adding that if HPV is there at all then it is what is known as a passenger virus. “It does nothing…these are fossils of HPV which are still in some cells. They are from an infection decades prior to the cancer.” This is damning and we must ask what on earth we are doing vaccinating girls and boys all over the world with a vaccine protective against a harmless wart virus. But the vaccine is not harmless. On the contrary there are more adverse events following its administration than for all other vaccines.

From the 1960s to 1991, cervical cancer screening was available to women in Australia on an opportunistic basis in that the test was done on the request of the doctor or the woman herself. Then, in 1991, an organised program was set up which in 1995 became the National Cervical Screening Program. Since the Australian National Cervical Screening Program began in 1991, the number of deaths from the disease have halved (Cancer Council Australia, 2017).

In December 2017 the successful two-yearly pap tests for women aged between 18 and 69 will be replaced by a five-yearly HPV test for 25 to 74-year-olds. An  ABC online article explains that HPV screening looks for DNA from the human papillomavirus virus strains that cause the vast majority of cervical cancers. (Or so they say). The mainstream media was all over this new test yesterday. Why? Because according to Karen Canfell, director of the Cancer Research Division at the Cancer Council NSW, HPV screening for cervical cancer had been extensively studied and modelled, and shown to be better than Pap smears and liquid-based cytology. And the end of the year when this new program commences is fast approaching. It is time for promotion. And the media follows suite. They do not ask how these changes might adversely affect women or some women. They do not ask if there might be a problem with over treatment.

I suggest that these changes to the national cervical screening program are highly problematic. Firstly because the test is predicated on the basis that HPV causes cervical cancer. But we do not know that. We are told that cervical cancer is caused by HPV but even if the common human papilloma virus is found in tumour cells it may just be a harmless passenger. The real causes of cervical cancer are most likely socioeconomic and environmental factors such as poverty, nutritional deficiences, smoking, multiparity, prolonged contraceptive use and ageing. This test is for HPV not for cervical cancer. HPV is a very common virus so much so that most of us have had this at some stage in our lives. HPV is likely to be found in cervical cells but as Professor Duesberg has explained if the virus is detected it is a fossil, left over from earlier infection.

Pap smear testing has often been seen as excessive and resulting in cases of over-screening and treatment but this new test amounts to much more of the same. If the HPV test finds that a woman has HPV type 16 or 18, she will be given a colposcopy to look for any pre-cancerous cervical lesions. And if the HPV test finds any of the other high risk strains of HPV, then a Pap test will be ordered to ascertain if a colposcopy is required (Sifferlin, 2014). All of this of course will result in more colposcopies, and a lot of unnecessary worry for women who return a positive HPV test. And a great business opportunity for those in the sickness industry. This includes the vaccine industry – for this is sure to mean more women lining up for HPV vaccines and more adverse events resulting in more sick girls and boys who then need expensive medical care if they are to recover their former health. This policy is disastrous as is the HPV vaccination program which vaccinates teenagers all over the world with a vaccine that at best is preventative against a few strains of the human papilloma virus but does not protect them against cancer. How could it – it is a vaccine against a wart virus, that is all.

With these changes to the screening program there is particular concern for women who test negative for HPV but who have cervical cancer. HPV-negative tumours are present in many types of cervical cancers. Zhao MD and his colleagues report that large-scale studies reveal the existence of HPV-negative cervical cancers present in almost all types of cervical cancers (Zhao MD et al., 2014). According to Bosch et al. (2002), there has been little investigation of older women with cervical cancer, but it is likely that the HPV-negative cancers can be found in this group of women.These HPV-negative women will not have their disease found as early as they would have with a routine Pap smear.  There has been little investigation of older women with cervical cancer but it is likely that the HPV negative cancers can be found in this group of women.

With the arrival of videos such as Sacrificial Virgins:  Not for the greater good  and books such as Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed the HPV causes cervical cancer is being exposed as the shocking sham it is. The vaccination program needs to stop until there is proof that HPV causes cancer and so far there is none. And the mainstream media need to up their game. After all this is what they are being paid for.

 

 

Advertisements

Press release in response to media reports about the new Gardasil 9 vaccine

Re: ‘New, improved Gardasil 9 fights 90% of cervical cancers, beats genital warts too’ (The Age, September 6, 2017).

“A new version of the Gardasil vaccine has been developed and, according to Professor Suzanne Garland, ‘the eradication of cervical cancer is now firmly within our sights.’ Garland is the lead Australian author of a global trial published in The Lancet and funded by the drug’s manufacturer Merck which came to the conclusion that the new HPV vaccine Gardasil 9 could prevent 90 per cent of cervical cancers worldwide.

However, parents of teenage children need facts not empty promises. We do not know if Gardasil 9 or its predecessor Gardasil can prevent cervical cancer. To date Gardasil has not been shown to prevent a single case of cervical cancer. Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccines have never been tested against cervical cancer outcomes. It can take decades from HPV infection to the development of cancer so researchers used a surrogate endpoint to support the conclusion that HPV vaccines might be preventative. The suitable surrogate end-point chosen was cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2/3 lesions, and adenocarcinoma in situ. This end-point was decided even though these precursor lesions are common in young women under 25 years and rarely progress to cancer. In sum, very few of these CIN 2 and 3 lesions in young women develop into cancer so it is difficult to support their use as end-points or markers.

Wording is important. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) lists Gardasil 9 as a vaccine for the prevention of HPV. It may well be that these vaccines do prevent HPV but the question is whether they will ever prevent a single case of cervical cancer, a very slow-growing cancer easily detected during Pap smear testing with the five year survival rate for women diagnosed being 72%. There is no epidemic of cervical cancer in Australia. In 2014, there were 223 Australian deaths due to the disease.

What this means is that all over the world millions of girls and now boys are injected with a vaccine which has only been measured against a surrogate endpoint — precursor lesions — that most often do not lead to cervical cancer. While the efficacy of the vaccines is unknown what we do know is that according to Vigibase, the World Health Organisation’s database, there are now over 73,000 recorded adverse events after HPV vaccination. There have also been at least 324 deaths following Gardasil.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) has recommended that Gardasil 9 be listed on the Australian National Immunisation Program as a 2 dose schedule replacing the current 3 dose Gardasil vaccine. Parents who are considering whether HPV vaccines are right for their children need to be informed that the new vaccine Gardasil 9 contains more than twice the amount of aluminium, a neurotoxin, used as an adjuvant to stimulate the production of antibodies, than the current vaccine. Gardasil 9 also contains more antigens (the HPV LI proteins) with the total number increasing from 120 mcgs to 270 mcgs. How will additional antigens and more aluminium affect the health of these young people who are now told they need this new vaccine?

It is incredible that the obvious conflict of interest, with the manufacturer funding studies into its own product, seems to have been entirely ignored in the hype surrounding the Gardasil 9 vaccine.

What Merck has done is fund a study into its own product. Buoyed by the claims of the study’s author, even though they are purely speculative, Merck will now endeavour to ensure that every Australian teenager is administered with Gardasil 9, by accessing the limited resources of the public health purse.

What a lucrative profit-making exercise: fund studies into your own products, talk up the results, and thanks to the newspapers of Australia and their blinkered journalism, sit back and watch the money roll in.”

Parents need to know the facts in order to make an informed choice whether Gardasil or Gardasil 9 is right for their child.

Helen Lobato 7 September 2017

“We can now prevent cancer. You can stop your kids getting infected with this cancer-causing virus. It’s staggering,” says expert.

RE: Vaccine could almost eradicate cervical cancer, experts say

The lead author and Medical Director of the National HPV Vaccination Program Register, Associate Professor Julia Brotherton is quoted in the Herald Sun: “We can now prevent cancer. You can stop your kids getting infected with this cancer-causing virus. It’s staggering.”

Brotherton’s enthusiastic statement comes as The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) decides whether to replace the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccine, Gardasil with the two-dose Gardasil 9 for early secondary students.

Wording is important. The PBAC lists Gardasil 9 as a vaccine for the prevention of HPV. It may well be that these vaccines do prevent HPV but the question is whether they will ever prevent a single case of cervical cancer, a very slow-growing cancer easily detected during Pap smear testing with the five year survival rate for women diagnosed being 72%. There is no epidemic of cervical cancer in Australia. In 2014, there were 223 Australian deaths due to the disease.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) will shortly decide whether Gardasil 9 is to be listed on the Australian National Immunisation Program as a 2 dose schedule replacing the current 3 dose Gardasil vaccine. Parents who are considering whether HPV vaccines are right for their children need to be informed that the new vaccine Gardasil 9 contains more than twice the amount of aluminium, a neurotoxin, used as an adjuvant to stimulate the production of antibodies, than the current vaccine. Gardasil 9 also contains more antigens (the HPV LI proteins) with the total number increasing from 120 mcgs to 270 mcgs. How will additional antigens and more aluminium affect the health of these young people who are now told they need this new vaccine?

Parents of teenage children need facts not empty promises. We do not know if Gardasil 9 can prevent cervical cancer. Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccines have never been tested against cervical cancer outcomes. It can take decades from HPV infection to the development of cancer so researchers used a surrogate endpoint to support the conclusion that HPV vaccines might be preventative. The suitable surrogate end-point chosen was cervical intra-epithelial neoplasia (CIN) grade 2/3 lesions, and adenocarcinoma in situ. This end-point was decided even though these precursor lesions are common in young women under 25 years and rarely progress to cancer. In sum, very few of these CIN 2 and 3 lesions in young women develop into cancer so it is difficult to support their use as end-points or markers.

What this means is that all over the world millions of girls and now boys are injected with a vaccine which has only been measured against a surrogate endpoint — precursor lesions — that most often do not lead to cervical cancer. While the efficacy of the vaccines is unknown what we do know is that according to Vigibase, the World Health Organisation’s database there are now over 73,000 recorded adverse events after HPV vaccination. There have also been at least 324 deaths following Gardasil.

Parents need the facts in order to make an informed choice whether Gardasil or Gardasil 9 is right for their child.

See: Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed by Helen Lobato

 

 

No Gardasil for UK boys

UK boys and their parents are able to breathe a sigh of relief after the decision has finally been made on whether to vaccinate boys against the human papilloma virus (HPV).  The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) has been considering whether to include boys along with girls in the current vaccination program since 2014. There have been ongoing campaigns aimed at a ‘gender-neutral‘ approach to the vaccination, that would make sure that 400,000 school-age boys are able to access HPV vaccines. The committee made its recent decision based on their findings that it wouldn’t be cost-effective to vaccinate boys along with girls. Unlike the situation in the UK, in Australia there was no such deliberation and in 2013 we became the first country to extend our HPV vaccination program to boys. We cannot afford the luxury of relaxed breathing – in fact none of us can while the Gardasil vaccination program continues.

As I have written in Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed:

The roll-out of Gardasil was preceded by years of promotion by the manufacturer Merck (USA) and CSL Ltd, the New Zealand and Australian distributor culminating in a relentless propaganda campaign waged by both Australian and international mass media. Behind the Australian Gardasil campaign was the PR giant Edelman that worked with the Australian and New Zealand distributor CSL Biotherapies in promoting the vaccine to health professionals and the public. There were 974 pieces of media devoted to the campaign with over 40 hours of coverage available to the Australian audience of almost 24 million. The campaign engaged 21 women between the ages of 14–26 who were to be given the vaccination nationally. Gardasil was launched to the public on 28 August 2006 and Ian Frazer himself vaccinated the first woman at the Sydney launch.

In The Re-selling of Gardasil, blogger Lynn McTaggart has written: And now this vaccine with one of the worse track records in vaccine history, is being resold to boys. And when it comes to vaccines, where the US leads, the UK meekly follows. But this time UK has said no –  for the time being at least. But it may be pressured to change this decision for as we know in the lead up to the introduction of HPV vaccines for young girls the media message was intense and scarcely a day passed without a cervical cancer story. This time the pressure is on to vaccinate boys against HPV for cancers linked to oral sex. But are young girls and boys and their parents making an informed consent to the vaccination? Are they informed that there are over 73000 reported serious adverse health effects occurring after HPV vaccination. These include death, seizures, paralysis, autoimmune diseases, chronic fatigue, pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrhythmias, infertility, cervical cancer and in boys there are now reported cases of erectile dysfunction following HPV vaccination. This would no doubt be of concern to young pubescent boys.

This current wave of re-selling Gardasil is being aided by the mantra of gender equality. Boys need HPV vaccine, too, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. According to the CDC every year in the United States around 11,000 men get cancers caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) infections. Scary reports of young men and throat cancer abound, but just as in the case of cervical cancer the human papilloma virus may well be present in many cancers but it may just be a passenger virus. According to the authors of ‘What if HPV does NOT cause cervical cancer?’ Norma Erickson and Peter Duesberg, the pieces of inactive HPV DNA that can be found in cervical cancers are from infections or warts that occurred 20-50 years before the cancer. There other factors at play. For example smoking and other environmental toxins may be the real causative factors. But once again the search for truth is forsaken when there is profit to be made.

As Lynn McTaggart concludes: We failed to lock up our daughters away from this terrible vaccine. But there’s still time to lock up our sons. Not in the United States,  Australia and New Zealand where the boys are already being vaccinated.

 

 

 

Where’s the debate?

What health official in their right mind is willing to anticipate 2,300 serious adverse events to try and prevent 7.9 cases of cervical cancer? asked Norma Erickson, in her article FDA approved Gardasil 9: Malfeasance or Stupidity?

Serious adverse events  are defined as death, life-threatening events, hospitalization, disability or permanent damage. According to information on the Gardasil 9 package insert, for every 100,000 people using Gardasil 9 there would be 2,300 serious adverse events. This is a huge risk to take for a disease that affects 6-8/100,000 women in Australia, or 7.9/100,000 in the United States.

Gardasil 9, said to be protective against infection with HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in December 2014. It was approved without the usual review process that is usually undertaken by the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee. In the clinical trials funded by the manufacturer Merck, a placebo was not used but instead trial participants received either Gardasil 9 or the quadrivalent Gardasil. The package insert reveals that in the case of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine, the original Gardasil, for every 100,000 people receiving the vaccination there would be 2500 serious adverse events – more than is expected for the new Gardasil 9. As we now know thousands of girls and boys are becoming very unwell after their HPV vaccinations. We are seeing this right across the globe after 10-11 years of HPV vaccination. According to Vigibase, the World Health Organisation’s database there are now over 73,000 recorded adverse events after HPV vaccination. And this figure is regarded as not accurate for so many events are not recorded. The correct figure is estimated to be closer to double that number.

The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) will shortly decide whether Gardasil 9 is to be listed on the Australian National Immunisation Program as a 2 dose schedule for females and males aged 12 -13 years as part of a school age program for the prevention of HPV. This will replace the current 3 dose schedule of the 4 valent HPV, Gardasil vaccine. This is not a good move for Gardasil 9 contains more than twice the amount of aluminium, a neurotoxin, used as an adjuvant to stimulate the production of antibodies. The current HPV vaccine Gardasil has 225 micrograms of aluminium per dose whereas each dose of Gardasil 9 contains 500mcgs. Gardasil 9 also contains more antigens (the HPV LI proteins) with the total number increasing from 120 mcgs to 270 mcgs. Do we know the effect of these changes? How will increased antigens and more aluminium affect the bodies of these young people who are told that they need this vaccination for a disease they are most unlikely to ever get.

Wording is important. The PBAC listing information uses the phrase for the preventi0n of HPV. It may well be the case that these  vaccines do prevent HPV but the question is whether they will ever prevent a single case of cervical cancer. HPV is a common virus, one that is even found in newborns. It is also a virus which is naturally dealt with by the body’s immune system within 2 years. Cervical cancer is a very slow-growing cancer. It is detected during Pap smear testing. There are around 900 cases of the disease in Australia each year and the death rate is around 200.

Surely the public should be given this information? Doctors must understand the risks and explain these to the recipients as part of the process of informed consent. The ill-health and death ensuing from HPV vaccination is likely to worsen with the listing of Gardasil 9 on the National Immunisation Program. Such bad news should form part of our public debate but it isn’t.

See: Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed

 

 

 

Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed

 

high res

Forthcoming June Release

In Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed  Helen Lobato argues that we do not know whether HPV vaccines will decrease the incidence of cervical cancer. What is emerging, however, is evidence of their harmful effects. In 2006, the experimental HPV vaccination program began and there have been at least 315 associated deaths and more than 50,000 adverse events following HPV vaccination.

Gardasil was fast-tracked through the FDA, a process usually reserved for life threatening diseases to fill an unmet and urgent medical need. Improved living conditions had already reduced the incidence of cervical cancer significantly in Western countries. So why is the HPV vaccine so heavily promoted in Australia, a country with one of the lowest rates of cervical cancer in the world?

Gardasil: Fast-Tracked and Flawed documents the early history of cervical cancer and tracks its progression from a disease of obscurity to one of mainstream prominence. It includes the stories of vaccinated girls and boys who remain ill after receiving a vaccine purported to prevent a disease they were most unlikely to get. It records the voices of dissenters and resisters who call for an inquiry into HPV vaccines approved for use after a relentless propaganda campaign promoting a vaccine against a virus that many had never heard of.

This in-depth investigation exposes cracks in the pharmaceutical industry and highlights the problems that arise when government regulators and corporate interests are prioritized ahead of patient safety, independent science and common sense.

To order: women@spinifexpress.com.au

This scientific debate cannot be ignored – too many lives are at stake

 

HPV-vaccine-3

The Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Causes Cervical Cancer Hypothesis states that HPV encodes proteins which cause cancers as the virus replicates.

However this hypothesis raises many questions (more…)

What’s wrong with the new HPV test?

d61b1d866e5f08185db93c1037f4bca6From 2017 testing for the presence of human papilloma virus (HPV) will replace Pap smear testing and the age at which women are advised to start screening will be raised to 25. At present women over the age of 18 are advised to get a pap smear every two years to screen for cervical cancer. (more…)

A new HPV vaccine is approved amid global concerns over Gardasil

 

Screen shot 2014-12-28 at 7.38.33 PMThe FDA has approved a new Human Papilloma Vaccine covering 9 strains of HPV. The approval of this vaccine, to be marketed as Gardasil 9 is of great concern for it has double the amount of the aluminium adjuvant – a neurotoxin – as Gardasil. (more…)

Why the recommended HPV test is not good for women

 

Screen shot 2014-05-02 at 8.17.43 PMThe Medical Services Advisory Committee has recommended a new test for human papillomavirus, or HPV, to replace Pap smears from 2016. Women would have their first screening for cervical cancer at 25 and would be tested only every five years. (more…)

%d bloggers like this: