4 ms·

Even one of the original developers of the vaccine questioned the benefits: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gardasil-researcher-speaks-out/ https://www.cbsnews.com

Even one of the original developers of the vaccine questioned the benefits: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gardasil-researcher-speaks-out/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gardasil-researcher-speaks-out/ . In VAERS post-market data there are more issues associated with Gardasil than any other vaccine prior to the covid vaccines. You just don't hear about it because pharmaceutical companies spend an incredible amount of money on advertisement and lobbying.

magicalist 3y ago
> Even one of the original developers of the vaccine questioned the benefits You mean "She says data available for Gardasil shows that it lasts five years; there is no data showing that it remains effective beyond five years." well, there wasn't any 5+ years data in 2009. Weird that when this comes up in the antivaxxer catechisms it's always this story from 2009 and never Dr. Harper's 15 years of work since then firmly establishing the efficacy, safety, and longevity of the vaccine, and setting up vaccination and screening programs world wide to hopefully eliminate cervical cancer within the next few decades.
kstrauser 3y ago
How do the adverse reaction rates compare to the negative effects of the HPV that it prevents? Without those numbers, your claim is unhelpful. For instance, HPV causes about 37,000 cases of cancer each year: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/statistics/cases.htm https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/statistics/cases.htm That works out to about 1 in 9,000 Americans. What are the rates of bad reactions to Gardasil that are worse than cancer? According to the CDC, at https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/hcp/vaccine-safety-data.html https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/hcp/vaccine-safety-data.html, "Approximately 28 million doses of Gardasil 9 distributed in the United States; 7,244 reports of adverse events (AEs); 97% of AEs classified as non-serious and 3% classified as serious" 3% of 7,244 is 217. 28,000,000 / 217 is one serious adverse reaction per 129,000 recipients, or 1/14th as common as HPV-related cancer. In other words, if you care about your health, you're 14x better off getting Gardasil than waiting to see if you get cancer from having HPV.

magicalist 3y ago

> Even one of the original developers of the vaccine questioned the benefits You mean "She says data available for Gardasil shows that it lasts five years; there is no data showing that it remains effective beyond five years." well, there wasn't any 5+ years data in 2009. Weird that when this comes up in the antivaxxer catechisms it's always this story from 2009 and never Dr. Harper's 15 years of work since then firmly establishing the efficacy, safety, and longevity of the vaccine, and setting up vaccination and screening programs world wide to hopefully eliminate cervical cancer within the next few decades.

kstrauser 3y ago

How do the adverse reaction rates compare to the negative effects of the HPV that it prevents? Without those numbers, your claim is unhelpful. For instance, HPV causes about 37,000 cases of cancer each year: https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/statistics/cases.htm https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/hpv/statistics/cases.htm That works out to about 1 in 9,000 Americans. What are the rates of bad reactions to Gardasil that are worse than cancer? According to the CDC, at https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/hcp/vaccine-safety-data.html https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/hcp/vaccine-safety-data.html, "Approximately 28 million doses of Gardasil 9 distributed in the United States; 7,244 reports of adverse events (AEs); 97% of AEs classified as non-serious and 3% classified as serious" 3% of 7,244 is 217. 28,000,000 / 217 is one serious adverse reaction per 129,000 recipients, or 1/14th as common as HPV-related cancer. In other words, if you care about your health, you're 14x better off getting Gardasil than waiting to see if you get cancer from having HPV.