No announcement yet.

Piece on HPV vaccine = linked to Nobel Award 10th of December

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Piece on HPV vaccine = linked to Nobel Award 10th of December



    By Janine Roberts

    There are two licensed HPV vaccines in the world.

    Merck makes Gardasil. It contains proteins said
    to come originally from four different types of
    HPV. By early 2008 over 10 million doses had been
    distributed, three-quarters of these in the USA.
    It is thought to be earning the company over $1
    billion a year at $360 a course of three
    injections, far more than is charged for the
    common vaccines The other is Cervarix, made by
    Smith Klein Beecham, which is not yet licensed
    for use in the USA (as of May 2008). It contains
    proteins said to come from 2 different types of
    HPV. Both vaccines contain aluminium adjuvants.
    Both manufacturers recommend that women are still
    regularly scanned for cervical cancer thus the
    vaccine does not save costs. In fact these scans
    give women far better protection than does the vaccine.

    On December 10th, a Nobel Prize will be awarded
    for finding HPV and proving its link to cervical
    cancer to Dr Harad zur Hausen. However this is a
    missing link in this for he failed to find a
    way to persuade cells to make his virus.


    Measles, mumps, rubella, and polio all the
    usual childhood vaccines are produced from cell
    cultures for viruses are products of
    cells. But there is something very different
    about the HPV vaccines. Unlike all the usual
    vaccines, they do not contain any virus.

    Extraordinarily, at no point during vaccine
    production is the HPV virus claimed to be
    present. The reason for this is very simple. So
    far scientists have failed to persuade any cell
    culture to produce this virus, even cultures made
    of cervical cancer cells. A statement by the
    International Agency for Research on Cancer
    reported that this type of virus, the
    papillomaviruses (HPV), “cannot be propagated in tissue culture.”

    Rather these vaccines are the product of a new
    synthetic vaccine industry based, not on
    isolating viruses, but on reproducing short
    lengths of genetic codes postulated to come from
    proteins that once formed the outer coat of the
    virus that is not itself found for the vaccines.

    Extremely sensitive new tests, variants of a
    laboratory tool called PCR or Polymerase Chain
    Reaction, make it possible to study very small
    fragments of genetic code found among broken up
    cellular material. In this case, what are
    searched for are fragments of codes for certain
    protein molecules. These are presumed to come
    from the outer coating of HPV and the vaccine
    is based on manufactured versions of these proteins.

    They seem to assemble naturally into “virus
    like” empty shells and are thus known
    officially as “Virus-Like Particles’ (VLP),
    even thou’ this is like calling a brick a
    house. To make Gardasil, these are put into cells
    and multiplied in yeast cell cultures, or in
    baculovirus cultures for Cervarix. Fluid from the
    culture containing these particles is then used
    as the vaccine. The vaccines are thus certain to
    contain many particles from the yeast fungi or
    baculovirus, and whatever additives are used -
    and thus Gardosil is not officially recommended
    to those who are sensitive to yeast.

    The HPV vaccines have then added to them aluminum
    chemicals as an ‘adjuvant’. This is to
    provoke our immune cells into producing
    antibodies for longer although it has recently
    been discovered that many people have become
    seriously ill because of this aluminum. [1] The
    aluminium is in the form of tiny sharp
    needle-like crystals. These our immune cells
    attempt to digest, but they cannot. The needles
    remain stuck inside. No wonder our cells respond for longer.


    Why is HPV virus thought to cause this
    cancer? It seems only because Harald zur Hausen
    found certain genetic codes in or near the
    cervical cancer cells; for, in about 90% of
    cases, ‘DNA and transcripts of specific HPV
    types are regularly detected in biopsies from
    cervical cancer and in its precursor lesions.’ [2]

    He presumed these codes were from proteins that
    were unique to this virus. We have to say,
    “presumed,” as most viruses have not yet been
    studied so logically it is impossible for us to
    be certain that a protein is unique to any virus.
    Also, finding them in these cancer cells does not
    mean that they cause the cancers. The cells may produce them for other purposes

    Thus, because this virus cannot be grown, the
    vaccine is instead based on ‘Virus-Like
    Particles;’ made from synthetic versions of
    proteins said to be parts of HPV. In reality,
    human skin cells make these proteins but these
    same cells have not confirmed their ability to
    make HPV itself by doing so in the laboratory.
    This makes it near impossible to prove that these
    proteins come from this virus.

    The ‘P’ of HPV stands for papillomavirus.
    This is described as containing a double strand
    of circular DNA 8 kb long. So far some seventy
    different proteins thought to come from variants
    of this virus have been found in human tissues,
    and some 20 in animals. It seems that they are
    “highly host specific” meaning that they do
    not move between animal species.

    Where are the genetic codes identified as
    papillomavirus found? Van Hausen did not find
    them in viruses produced in cell cultures, not in
    isolated viruses, but in the human genome, the
    most protected part of our cells.[3] He did not
    find there the whole code of his virus, but only
    part of the code. He postulated from this that
    the virus must exist and must have transported
    this code to our cell. But it is hard to
    distinguish these sequences from our normal DNA,
    as they seem to be in nearly all of us.

    PCR tests suggest nearly 80% of healthy human
    adults in the USA have these proteins, meaning
    their cells make them, but far less than 1% of
    women get cervical cancer, suggesting the
    proteins normally do not cause cancer.
    Furthermore, an antibody test for the virus has
    also proved difficult to develop as ‘antibodies
    to early HPV proteins have also been detected in
    patients with HPV-associated diseases as well as in healthy individuals.’ [4]

    So, why were these proteins linked to the cancer?
    Some HPV scientists say these proteins might
    affect a normal protein found in cells called p53
    that helps protect us from cancers. “The E6
    protein (one thought to come from a certain form
    of HPV) binds to p53 and this interaction results
    in a decrease in the half-life of p53 within
    cells,” [5] but this is very much an argument
    from association. There seems to be less p53 in
    circumstances where this protein is present. This
    does not prove that one causes the other.

    These proteins were presumed pathogenic after an
    experiment in which these proteins (not the
    virus) ‘were transiently transfected into HeLa
    Cells’. The cells that died after this were
    counted. Their death rate went up by ‘about
    5%.’[6] HeLa cells are malignant human cervical
    cancer cells. If they died after these proteins
    were added, surely this might indicate why our
    cells make these proteins when threatened by
    cervical cancer it seems far more likely that
    they do so to protect us by destroying cancer cells, not to cause them!

    Many retroviruses are similarly reported to have
    strong anti-tumour effects. It has been suggested
    that cells use retroviral particles to transport
    genetic codes that the damaged cells can use to
    repair themselves or to induce apoptosis,
    natural death, in the damaged cells as is suggested by this HeLa experiment.

    The question is then, why do our cells make the
    “HPV” proteins? Why do nearly 80% of adult
    western females have them without getting
    cancers? ‘By age 50, approximately 80% of U.S.
    women have or have had a genital HPV
    infection.’ [7] So why do most of us have these
    proteins - when nearly all of us never get cervical cancer.

    It seem that the entire focus of research up
    until now has been on discovering if these
    proteins might cause diseases not on
    discovering if they might be valuable to us in
    some way such as protecting women from cervical cancer.

    If this is so, then there is utterly
    counterproductive to take a vaccine aimed at
    making our bodies produce antibodies against
    these proteins, for if this were achieved, it
    would create an autoimmune disease for it would make the body attack itself.

    Viruses are made by cells in many variants,
    making it extremely difficult to classify then
    into species like ‘HPV.’ A viral species is
    allowed to contain particles with up to 20%
    differing genetic codes despite there being
    less than a 5% difference between the genetic
    codes of a chimpanzee and a human. The difference
    within viral species is so great that it is
    questionable if these are true species.

    As for these proteins, they are identified in the
    lab by finding very short and hopefully unique
    segments of their genetic codes, as follows:
    (These letters are sequences of 4 nucleotides.) [8]

    HPV-16 type-specific sequencing primer 5'-GCTGCCATATCTACTTCAGA-3'

    HPV-18 type-specific sequencing primer 5'-GCTTCTACACAGTCTCCTGT-3'

    HPV -6 type-specific sequencing primer 5'-GTGCATCCGTAACTACATCTT-3'

    HPV -11 type-specific sequencing primer 5'-GTGCATCTGTGTCTAAATCTG-3'

    But the same paper also says that the “majority
    of multiple HPV infections are transient”,
    “vary among patient populations and are
    influenced by the stage of carcinogenesis “ and
    that “in 93% of initially infected women, the
    same viral type is not detected upon
    re-examination four menstrual cycles later,” In
    other words, the proteins thought from HPV do not
    stay the same in the cervical cancer patients. Is
    this because waves of different HPV viruses are
    attacking or because cells make different types
    of these proteins according to needs?

    An earlier paper by Peter Duesberg et al
    reported: “no subset of viral DNA is
    consistently found or expressed in HBV-positive
    tumors. Only 11-19% of tumors in HBV positive
    patients express some viral antigens, compared to
    26-61% expressing them in surrounding
    non-tumorous tissues”[9] Again, this could be
    explained if these proteins are there to protect.

    However despite this theory, after spending many
    millions of dollars trying to prove this virus is
    the cause of these cancers, most of the
    scientists in the field have been forced to
    conclude that this virus by itself cannot be the
    cause of cervical cancer. They have had to look
    instead for a toxin or other factor that triggers the cancers.


    It has now been found that: ‘HPV infection
    alone is not sufficient to cause cervical cancer.
    Host, environmental, and virological co-factors
    clearly exist that influence the risk of
    progression from HPV infection to cervical
    cancer. Factors that may influence progression of
    HPV infection to cervical cancer include young
    age, immunosuppression, smoking, and co-infection
    with herpes simplex virus or Chlamydia trachomatis.’ [10]

    It was also reported: ‘The long latency period
    between primary infection and cancer emergence
    suggests that additional factors are involved in
    the process of tumor development: sexual
    behavior, immune status, genetic predispositions,
    nutritional status, tobacco use, socio-economical level.’ [11]

    The above-cited International Agency for Research
    on Cancer also reported: ‘The effects of
    chemical or physical carcinogens on progression
    of papillomavirus-induced lesions have been
    documented in a number of studies.’

    Why cannot the virus be easily blamed for the
    cancer? Because the cancer develops over a
    decade, or even longer, after the presumed
    exposure to the virus, making a causal link hard
    to establish. ‘Progression from HPV infection
    to invasive cancer is usually a slow process,
    taking 10 to 15 years.’ [12]Given this, and
    that the vaccine development only started around
    2000, surely the efficacy of the vaccine in
    preventing this cancer cannot yet be known?

    What then is the major cause of cervical
    cancer? Is it the co-factors or these codes
    and proteins? I would suggest that it is more
    likely to be the co-factors, particularly toxins
    as toxins are widely implicated in other human
    cancers such as asbestos in mesothelioma and
    tobacco in lung cancer. In a safety vaccine trial
    in Utah, women who smoked were found have a 3.42
    times greater risk of developing cervical cancer
    than had women who had little exposure to tobacco
    smoke. Also, women whose diets were high in
    vegetables had half the risk of getting cervical cancer. [13]

    Incidentally, the PR firm used by Merck used to
    help it get rapid licensing for this vaccine and
    to persuade governments to make it compulsory
    with a ‘celebrity-led’ campaign, is Edelman,
    the same company that has worked hard to protect
    cigarette companies from legislation against tobacco smoke.

    It has been suggested that ‘the long-term use
    of chemical-based feminine hygiene products might
    alter the normal bacterial environment in the
    uterus that protects it, which in turn induces
    pre-cancerous lesions.’ Douches designed to
    kill bacteria, may well damage other cells as
    well. Toxins accumulate in body tissues, and may
    eventually reach critical levels. [14]This could
    explain why the highest mortality rate from
    cervical cancer is in the 75-79 age group.

    So does HPV vaccine lessen our chances of
    getting this cancer? If the virus is present in
    many healthy people it seems unlikely it to be
    the cause. If the ‘co-factors’ are the main
    causes, then a vaccine cannot give us immunity.
    It has also to be said that the vaccines have not
    yet been proved to work as the cancer takes 10
    60 years to appear and the vaccines have not been
    tested for more than a few months.


    The safety trials on which Merck are relying to
    prove their vaccine is safe were only over a
    period of about 18 months with children and four
    years for older children and adults, far less
    time than it may take a cervical cancer to
    develop. Furthermore the control group were
    given a “placebo” that contained the same
    aluminium adjuvant as is in the vaccine, making
    the results unreliable as the control group could
    contain many who reacted against this aluminium hydroxide.

    Merck also warns that its vaccine is not for
    women who are “already infected” with one or
    more of the 4 proteins it guards against. Adding
    more of these in synthetic forms through
    vaccination is highly hazardous. It is reported
    to increase the risk of precancerous cervix
    lesions by 44.6%! `It is reported that
    “injection of HPV vaccines into women who have
    concurrent vaccine-relevant HPV type infections
    may increase the risk, by 44.6%, of developing
    high-grade precancerous lesions in the cervix.” [15]

    Of course, it is very difficult to tell if any of
    these proteins are present near impossible in
    practice as no one looks for them prior to
    vaccination. Thus are we endangering people by
    using it on people who have not been tested for
    these proteins. This suggests that the added
    synthetic proteins upset the body’s natural
    process of protection against these lesions.
    Merck seems to have no explanation for this at all.

    It’s safety trials have also shown that the arm
    muscles, into which it is injected, react against
    it with some strength. Pain, swelling, itching,
    bruising and inflammation are reported to be
    frequent.[16] MS, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and
    severely disabling muscle pains have been linked
    to the aluminium adjuvant used.[17] One
    possibility is that the cause might be sometimes
    contaminants such as free DNA fragments as
    these are reported by senior UK and US vaccine
    scientists to be possible causes of cancer and autoimmune diseases. [18]

    Merck itself warns that its vaccine

    1. “Has not been evaluated for the potential
    to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.” (In
    other words, Merck cannot guarantee that it will not cause cancers.)

    2. “The safety and efficacy of Gardasil have
    not been evaluated in children younger than 9
    years” or “in adults above 26
    years.” (Most cervical cancer cases are in women above 35.)

    3. “The administration of Gardasil with other
    vaccines (other than Hepatitis B) has not been studied.’

    4. “It is not known whether GARDASIL can
    cause fetal harm when administered to a pregnant
    woman or if it can affect reproductive capacity."

    Because of the lack of testing in older women,
    the FDA on June 25, 2008 denied Merck's
    application to market Gardasil to women ages 27-45.

    Dr Diane Harper, who helped develop this vaccine,
    said on CBS television news on 7th May 2008 that
    making the vaccine compulsory was wrong as “the
    vaccine has not been out long enough for us to
    have post-marketing surveillance to really
    understand what all the potential side effects
    are going to be.” Since June 8th, 2006, when
    this vaccine was approved for use in the USA,
    over 8,000 possible side effects have been reported, including 18 deaths.

    One news organization summed it up thus:
    ‘"Anaphylactic shock," "foaming at mouth,"
    "grand mal convulsion," "coma" and "now
    paralyzed" are a few of the startling
    descriptions included in a new federal report
    describing the complications from Merck & Co.'s
    Gardasil medication for sexually transmitted
    human papillomavirus which has been proposed as
    mandatory for all schoolgirls.’ [19]

    Here are 3 official reports of possible side-effects observed in patients:

    ‘Severe form of Guillain-Barré syndrome after
    HPV vaccine . . . Respiratory failure with
    prolonged mechanical ventilation and tracheostomy
    tube Placement . . . vital capacity deteriorated
    on day 3 . . . able to move only jaw and eyes.’ [20]

    Information has been received . . . concerning an
    approximately 19-year-old female who was
    vaccinated IM with a first dose of Gardasil.
    Subsequently, the patient was diagnosed with
    Guillain-Barré Syndrome and was hospitalized.
    The patient’s Guillain-Barré Syndrome
    persisted . . . Guillain-Barré Syndrome was
    considered to be disabling and immediately life-threatening.’

    A 18-year-old female patient was vaccinated with
    the first dose of Gardasil . . . In the evening
    of the same day she was found unconscious (or
    liveless) [sic] by the mother. Resuscitation was
    performed by the emergency doctor but was
    unsuccessful, i.e. the patient finally died . . .
    The cause of death of this patient remains totally unclear. [21]

    Many more such cases remain to be investigated.


    [1] . Fear of the Invisible. Second Edition.

    [2] International Agency for Research on Cancer op cit

    [3] Journal of Biological Chemistry - 2000 jan 7th pp 87-94

    [4] International Agency for Research on Cancer op cit.

    [5] Journal of Biological Chemistry - 2000 jan 7th pp 87-94

    [6] WHO paper cited above

    [7] US Pharmacist. 1st Sept. 2007

    [8] Infectious Agents and Cancer 2007, 2:11doi:10.1186/1750-9378-2-11

    [9] Peter Duesberg and Jody Schwartz. Latent
    Viruses and Mutated 
Oncogenes: No Evidence
for Pathogenicity Progress in Nucleic Acid
    Research and Molecular Biology 
43:135-204, 1992

    [10] Vaccinating against the Human Papillomavirus
    in Young Women.’ 1 Sept. 2008. Chicago University Paper sponsored by Merck

    [11] Mougin C. et al Epidemiology of Cervical
    Papillomavirus Infections. Recent Knowledge. Presse Med. 9 June 2001

    [12] WHO 2008.’Preparing for the introduction
    of the HPV vaccine in the European Region.’

    [13] Sedjo et al. 2002 Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

    [14] Gary Krasner, Is HPV the cause of Cervical

    [15] Infectious Agents and Cancer 2007, 2:11doi:10.1186/1750-9378-2-11

    [16] VRBPAC background document - FDA briefing on cervical cancer pdf

    [17] Fear of the Invisible, 2nd Edition.

    [18] Fear of the Invisible, 2nd Edition Chapter
    on the “Impurity of Vaccine’ and also on the Vaccine Plague?.’

    [19] June 30, 2008 WorldNetDaily.

    [20] VAERS ID: 268143-1 (S) (These reports were obtained by Juridical Watch)

    [21] VAERS ID: 300741-1 (D).

    Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath
    Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK
    Vaccines - Vaccine
    Dangers & Childhood Disease & Homeopathy Email classes start in December 2008

    Sheri Nakken, former R.N., MA, Hahnemannian Homeopath &
    ONLINE/Email classes in Homeopathy; Vaccine Dangers; Childhood Diseases Reality
    next classes start December 3 & 4