Monday, October 8, 2007

THREE GIRLS DIE, OTHERS HOSPITALISED AFTER CERVICAL CANCER VACCINE

A new trend in medical intervention has been heralded with a vaccine for cancer! First, a possible link between genital papilloma and cervical cancer was proposed. This opened the pandora's box, since if they could prevent the "infection" with a vaccine, THEN, maybe they can prevent the development of the cancer. I'm always fascinated by the release of new medicines - first they are introduced as the wonder cure, with NO side effects. But if you follow the stories through time - first they discover that they do have side effects; usually more and worse than first predicted. Then they discover that they aren't the wonder cure first hoped for.

But never mind, I'll guarantee that they have a "new and improved" formula which costs more, and comes with bigger claims.

Questions have emerged in the United States and Australia about the effectiveness and possible dangerous side effects of Gardasil, Merck's newly licensed vaccine for human papillomavirus.

In the US, three deaths closely time related to immunisation with the vaccine were among 1637 adverse reactions reported by Judicial Watch, a public interest watchdog. Judicial Watch obtained the reports from the Food and Drug Administration using the Freedom of Information Act. The reports were filed through the FDA's vaccine adverse event reporting system.

In Melbourne , 25 girls at a Catholic high school who had just received their first injection of the vaccine on 22 May experienced headache, nausea, and dizziness, the Age reported. Four were sent to hospital and two were admitted overnight. All were discharged. One expert called it mass hysteria (that's a new one). Shares of the vaccine's Australian developer, CSL, fell after news reports of the incident...

Click Here To Read The BMJ News Release...

But of course the owners of the patent on the drugs will tell you that the side effects are due to some other cause, they are not as severe as everyone is claiming, and that the benefits outweigh the risks anyway, and then they'll ask the government to indemnify them for the compensation costs...

No comments: