Vaccinations for better or for worse?

Published on PrisonPlanet, by Adam Murdock, M.D., The Freeman Institute, October 31, 2009.

There are some fundamental questions that should be asked of any proposed treatment including vaccines. Does it do what it claims it will do? What are the benefits? What are the risks? What are the alternatives? How has the proposed treatment been promoted to physicians and the public? Yet, as I have demonstrated in my last article entitled Stop the Swine Whine, these questions have been largely ignored by H1N1 flu commentators, who have substituted propaganda, hysteria, and fear-mongering for legitimate information …

… What about the risks?   

The vaccine makers claim that the HPV vaccine carries no long-term side effects. However, the “Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has received more than 15,000 reports of reactions to the vaccine, including more than 3,000 injuries and 48 deaths” after patients received the Gardasil vaccine. (3) While these reactions may not be all attributable to the vaccine, it is clear that reactions, sometimes severe, have occurred after vaccination.

Has this information caused the vaccine makers to withdraw their promotional material and cervical cancer reduction claims? Quite the contrary, their promotion efforts have continued. The Gardasil vaccine, with sales of $1.4 billion in 2008, has not only received generous advertisement promotion but has also been promoted through generous donations to physician organizations such as the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and Society of Gynecologic Oncologists. It is these organizations that have further disseminated HPV vaccine hysteria to member OB/GYNs and primary care providers. In addition, “Merck has been lambasted for tactics such as lobbying lawmakers to make vaccination mandatory.” (1)

In a final straw, Merck has sought and been approved by the FDA to vaccinate boys with Gardasil. This vaccination, which as has been demonstrated can cause serious side effects, will now be given to boys in order to treat relatively innocuous genital warts and extremely rare penile cancer. I am sure that it is no coincidence that according to Bloomberg, “approval in boys could add as much as $200 million to $300 million in annual sales” to Merck. (4)

What has been lost in all the disinformation has been the requirement of sexual intercourse for transmission of the Human papilloma virus. All it would take to put a stop to cervical cancer for good would be for providers to promote and patients to practice monogamy.  As usual, this aspect has been downplayed by the vaccine makers.

Adam Murdock, M.D. is founder of The Freemen Institute.

References: … (full text).

Links:

Swine Flu Side Effects To Be Monitored, Nov. 02, 2009;

New HPV Vaccine Making Girls In UK Sick, Sept. 20, 2009;

Courriel no 7 (en français, du 23 oct. 2009), de Jean-Jacques Crèvecoeur, Montréal (Québec).

Comments are closed.