link from 1993 article lauding the vaccine might soon be released
report on phase one trial on women in 1988, that checked for side effects on women, but not a study if they got pregnant, since the Lancet aricle notes that it was used only on women already sterilized. I can't find phase two or phase three studies.
link to review article on these vaccines from 1996
However, I can't find any articles after those dates, except for articles on anti vaccine and other sites that aren't known for their scientific knowledge.
Since I've seen babies die of neonatal tetanus, I have little patience with this type of stuff.
and giving "sterile" scissors to midwives that one stupid person suggested won't work, because trained midwives already boil their scissors, and many tribes use a self trained midwife or even untrained relatives to deliver the baby. (In Liberia, we had a program to retrain these women to help prevent such problems)... Yet even if the stump was cut with a clean knife and dressed by the midwife, often mom (or grandmom) will remove it and place dirty herbs on the umbillical site.
I am sincerely interested understanding the above information. It's not like "they might use" or "they are accused of using" β-hCG to sterilize women. They do it intentionally as a birth control method. Except often the women are told it's just a tetanus vaccine.
Important as it is to prevent tetanus, don't you think that simultaneously sterilizing the women without their informed consent is unjustified?