Posted on 02/17/2009 7:14:40 AM PST by BGHater
A Wichita teen and her mother want a popular vaccine taken off the market. Doctors say Gardasil is killing the 16-year-old.
The drug is used to prevent the HPV virus which causes cervical cancer. The makers of Gardasil recommend girls and young women ages 9-26 get the vaccine to protect them from the virus that causes cervical cancer.
Twenty-eight women have reportedly died from Gardasil.
Sixteen-year-old Gabi Swank used to be a cheerleader, a gymnast and a 4.0 student at Wichita's South High, but after getting the Gardasil vaccination last year, her health deteriorated quickly.
She's had two mini strokes, seizures and swelling of all the tissues in her body. She even has paralysis on the right side of her face. After months of testing, doctors finally pointed to Gardasil as the cause.
"I want this drug off the market. I want it off the market," said Swank from her home.
The CDC and the FDA say they have received thousands of reports of adverse reactions to the vaccine, but the government adds, it continues to find that the benefits of Gardasil outweigh the risks.
There are quite a large number of us who are not having our daughters given this vaccine, not because of some MSM story or stories, but because we have done our own research on this drug.
Merck spent a very large fortune lobbying states to make this mandatory for girls as young as 9, however it has not tested for pre-pubescent girls.
Sad we have to hear such from another culture.
So much for the light in the hill...
Yes it was. Further, there is no evidence in the medical literature that Gardasil is responsible for any of the diseases that have been attributed to it in poorly sourced stories such as this one. Numerous clinical trials both pre and post-approval have shown Gardasil to be both safe and effective.
What really got my goat over the bill when it was being worked on was all the support it got from the Rs, which is why Kaine only modified it and did not outright veto it. There were enough votes to over ride n outright veto.
I’m an equal opportunity basher, so I feel I should commend Kaine for at least making it more palatable. Yes it is on the books as one of the “mandatory” vaccines, but the opt out is so simple as to make it meaningless.
Yes, those are the sorts of factors an adult would weigh in making a decision about this vaccine. Another issue is that, as someone mentioned above, cervical cancer (or pre-cancerous tissue deformation) can be treated very simply. Even without a vaccine, almost all cervical cancers are in women who did not have regular tests or did not have the recommended treatment for negative results.
IMO, the Gardasil commercial on TV have the teens made up like little whores.
no, i agree, credit where credit is due.
marking......
I have had many discussions with numerous MDs in regard to this vaccine. I’m not telling anyone to not have their daughter vaccinated, I’m just stating my position on not having my own daughter given this vaccine at 11 years old.
My position and opposition to this vaccine has nothing to do with morality and some blind faith idea my daughter will forever remain a virgin. My position is based upon my own research and my opposition is to the state mandating this vaccine.
HPV is not a communicable disease in the same way as measles, mumps, or chicken pox are communicable diseases and for that reason alone there should be no mandate for it.
The drug was never tested on pre-pubescent girls at all, but that’s for whom it is prescribed!! Merck’s just trying to make back the losses on its arthritis drug that was killing people...
Look, I don't want to get into the whole mandate debate. I will say, however, that approx. 80% of American women are infected with one type of HPV or another in their lifetimes. 50% of these occur within three years of the onset of sexual activity. The time to vaccinate is before women become sexually active, which is why we recommend vaccination at around age 12.
Was it ever tested on women who already were infected? Aren’t some vaccines dangerous if the person already carries the virus? Just wonderin’.
Having said that I dislike this vaccine - it is given on the false notion that all little girls sex around, which is what increases the risk of this kind of cervical cancer. I would never give it to my daughter.
Yes, the vaccine was tested on women who had already been infected and no, there was no evidence of any danger to these women. I'm not aware of any vaccine that is dangerous to people who have already been infected with the disease.
Many studies have looked at this. The rate of illness and death in the Gardasil groups in these studies was no different than that in the placebo-control groups. The number of Gardasil vaccinated women who become seriously ill or die is what one would actuarially expect in any group of women of that age.
well, i guess she got what she wanted... odds are, she won't be contracting HPV now.
ok, i'm sure that was a bit unfeeling. then again, she did take a fairly untested drug everyone was screaming shouldn't be on the market at this time.
meanwhile, not flit'ing around like bees to flowers will also radically reduce HPV cases... of course, that would require all the kids being told something different then what the media is selling now (now == girls & boys are the same; sex is casual; have it with your friends). having over 100 partners in your lifetime, let alone by the time you're 20, is just unhealthy
That is the primary point of the debate about this vaccine. I have no idea who the "we" you speak of is, but even some of the MDs I've discussed this with who do think it's a good idea for the vaccine before the onset of sexual activity have a huge problem with it being made mandatory.
Actually, I’m amazed that the American Cancer Society allowed word on the HPV-cancer link to get out. Even after a clear link had been established, they continued to repeat the bogus claim that it was caused by smoking.
Actually, I'm an MD, a pathologist specifically (quiet week so I have time for Freeping). My objection to the mandate has nothing to do with the supposed danger of the vaccine, this danger has never been documented. My objection is that the debate over the mandate has actually impeded the acceptance of Gardasil and has diverted attention away from the very real danger of HPV.
Really? Has there been a trial showing what is going to happen in ten to twenty years when these girls enter child-bearing age? What about in thirty to forty years when they enter menopause?
Numerous other drugs (which unlike Gardasil actually treated something) have been initially viewed as "safe and effective". Merck lost a fortune on one of these, Vioxx, and is lobbying to regain some revenue with Gardasil. Let's not forget other "wonder drugs" like Fen-Phen and Thalidomide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.