Ovarian failure caused by Gardasil? Not so fast...

Well, I'm home.

AFter spending a fun-filled three days in Nashville at CSICon communing with fellow skeptics and trying to awaken them to the problem of quackademic medicine, I made it back home. There were plenty of attendees who didn't make it back on time because flights to the East Coast were being cancelled left and right, courtesy of Hurricane Sandy. For example, Steve Novella and the entire SGU crew were forced to rent a van and drive 950 miles to Boston after their flight was cancelled sometime Saturday night. Difficulties aside, if there's one thing that almost always happens whenever I go out of town, regardless of whether it's for my real job, my blogging avocation, or an actual vacation, it's that something pops up right before I'm scheduled to leave that I want to blog about but don't get to. Rarely do I make it back to such topics, but this time around I felt as though I wanted to get back to this one. The reason is that I noticed something going on that rose above the usual chatter coming from antivaccine cranks.

Antivaccinationists, of course, fear and loathe vaccines. However, they fear and loathe certain vaccines more than others, and the level of fear and loathing depends somewhat upon location. Here in the U.S., if there's one vaccine that's feared and loathed perhaps more than any other, it's the vaccine against the human papilloma virus (HPV). That usually means Gardasil. I've speculated before why certain antivaccinationists seem to hate Gardasil more than any other vaccine, and I think I've come up with a plausible explanation. Basically, the hatred of Gardasil is the result of an unholy fusion of antivaccine beliefs with the fundamentalist religion so prevalent in the U.S. that makes the brain dead argument that protecting young women against infection by sexually transmitted organisms that can lead to cervical cancer will somehow inevitably lead to promiscuity, godlessness, and the Downfall Of The American Way of Life, because, you know, if women didn't have sex before marriage and only had sex with one man for the sole purpose of reproduction they wouldn't need Gardasil. I exaggerate, but only a little. No, wait. Actually, I don't exaggerate. This is the basic belief behind the fundamentalists' fear of Gardasil. Sometimes this belief leads to some of the absolute dumbest canards ever. (Just use the search box to search this blog for "Gardasil" if you don't believe me.)

What I had noticed is that the arguments coming from the antivaccine fringe had been flying fast and furious right before CSICon, and I was curious why. For instance, the antivaccine crank blog Age of Autism ran a series of posts with titles like Spotlight on Gardasil, complete with three chapter excerpts from Mark Blaxill and Dan Olmsted's epic paean to pseudoscience, Age of Autism, and Age of Autism Science Summary: Death after Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination. Meanwhile, over at Gaia Health, The Refusers' blog, and something called the Population Research Institute, antivaccinationists were going wild over a case report published in, appropriately enough, BMJ Case Reports that suggests (to antivaccinationists at least) that Gardasil caused premature ovarian failure leading to menopause a 16 year old girl.

I am not impressed.

Let's start with the last one first, because it's hard to believe that gruel this thin was published in the peer-reviewed literature. The case report is, beginning to end, the speculative chasing of the specter of Gardasil, trying desperately to blame it for this unfortunate girl's ovarian failure leading to premature menopause at the extremely young age of 16. And the antivaccine movement is eating it up, too. For instance, the PRI states:

It is very rare for a healthy 16-year-old girl to go through menopause. It is also a personal tragedy of the first order, one that will only grow in magnitude as she marries and yearns to start a family.

While Dr. Little could not confirm that Gardasil caused the destruction of the girl's reproductive system, she was able to rule out all other possible causes. The circumstantial evidence implicating Gardasil is strong.

And Gaia Health opines:

The girl has been thoroughly examined and tested. There is no known explanation other than the series of three Gardasil vaccinations she had.

That is the basic argument at the heart of this case report: Because investigations didn't turn up any obvious cause for this unfortunate girl's premature ovarian failure, it must have been the Gardasil that done it. Yes, the argument is just that vacuous and weak. Let's go back to the report itself, and then let's go to how antivaccinationists are spinning it. This case report was published by Deirdre Therese Little and Harvey Rodrick Grenville Ward from Australia. The case is basically described thusly:

A 16-year-old girl presented with a history of 5 months amenorrhoea, preceded by approximately 12 months oligomenorrhoea. Menarche had occurred at the age of 13 in 2007 with initially light periods which became heavier and developed a regular monthly pattern over the following 12 months.

Early in 2009 menses became irregular. In early 2010 they became scant and occurred infrequently, two or more months apart. Menstrual periods ceased in January 2011. Following the development of amenorrhoea, the patient experienced hot flushes. She identified that an alteration in the menstrual pattern had started following HPV vaccination.

On first presentation to her local doctor she was prescribed the OC for amenorrhoea after exclusion of pregnancy. She elected not to take the contraceptive pill at that time and sought further opinion regarding her continuing amenorrhoea.

Investigations were quite thorough, including a complete battery of tests related to reproductive function, including prolactin levels, androgen profile, FSH and LH levels, and many others. They even did a karyotype to check and make sure that the girl had two X chromosomes. Well, I shouldn't say "even." It's part of the routine investigation. Now here's where the authors reveal their bias. They point out in the introduction that premature ovarian failure has an estimated incidence of 10/100,000 person-years between the ages of 15 and 29. Other sources suggest that the incidence of such ovarian dysfunction might be as high as 1 in 1,000 before the age of 40. The authors also cite sources that find that the cause of ovarian failure before the age of 40 "remains unknown in up to 90% of cases." In other words, in the vast majority of cases premature ovarian failure is idiopathic. We don't know what caused it. In the cases where a cause can be identified, potential causes are several and include autoimmune disorders (I bet you know where this is going), genetics, chemotherapy, hysterectomy (a rather obvious cause), thyroid dysfunction (no word in the case report whether thyroid studies were done; I'll assume that they were), Turner syndrome, inadequate gonadotropin secretion or action, and viral infections.

Because Little and Ward can't find any evidence that any of these causes were the root cause of this girl's premature menopause, they gleefully leap to the conclusion that—you guessed it!—it must have been the Gardasil! I kid you not. And when did this girl receive her anti-HPV vaccine? According to the case report, she received doses in May and August of 2008. Now let's go back to the case report. this girl started to have irregular menses in early 2009, more than five months after her last dose of Gardasil, and then she didn't stop menstruating until a year later, in early 2010.

Yes, obviously, it must have been the Gardasil. (That's sarcasm, in case you didn't notice it.) In fact, the authors think it's the Gardasil so much that not only did they report this girl's premature ovarian failure as a possible adverse event to the Therapeutic Goods Administration of Australia, but they undertook a search for reports examining whether the HPV vaccine had any effects on rat ovaries, after having found a report that showed no effect due to Gardasil on rat testes. They even went so far as to submit a Freedom of Information request for such data, which, they darkly point out, hasn't panned out yet.

Obviously, it must have been the Gardasil, and obviously the pharmaceutical companies are hiding something. (That's more sarcasm, in case you didn't realize it.) The authors even go so far as to write:

Had this young woman taken the OC as prescribed for correction of her oligomenorrhoea/amenorrhoea, her diagnosis of premature ovarian insufficiency may not have been determined for perhaps some years. The possibility of its link to an adverse pharmaceutical event might also have been lost.

Anecdotal evidence from an informal discussion with high-school students suggests that one in three girls of this age is taking an OC for reasons of cycle control, acne management or for contraception. Given the prevalence of OC usage in this age group, combined with the possibility of initial OC prescription for the management of oligomenorrhoea (presumably to reduce associated anxiety, re-establish a ‘normal’ cycle and to protect bone mass, etc), conditions affecting menstrual function in this age group will be undetected and undiagnosed. Menstrual abnormalities and particularly ovarian insufficiency at this time may therefore be under-reported as possible adverse events following vaccination or other medication.

You read it right. The authors are saying that, because the first symptom of premature ovarian failure is irregular menstrual cycles and because the treatment for irregular menstrual cycles is often oral contraceptives, menstrual abnormalities up to and including premature ovarian failure might actually be underreported, leading to the underreporting of ovarian insufficiency due to Gardasil. Yes, according to Little and Ward's insinuation, we'd see this horrific epidemic of young girls robbed of their womanhood before they even had the chance to experience it and bring new life into the world if it weren't for those darned birth control pills! Now, I realize that journals tend to have a laxer standard for the sorts of speculation allowed in case reports (their being case reports and all and hypothesis-generating rather than hypothesis testing), but this is ridiculous. It goes far beyond the pale. Even though the authors say multiple times that their observations do not prove that the quadrivalent HPV vaccine is toxic to ovaries, based on the way they wrote this case report it is breathtakingly obvious that this is exactly what they think and that the reviewers probably made them put those caveats into their case report.

Little and Ward even suggest an epidemiological study of young women vaccinated with quadrivalent HPV vaccine versus those not vaccinated against HPV with long term followup of ovarian function. This is a ridiculous suggestion. Unless Gardasil is pure poison to the ovaries, it would take thousands of women to detect differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated women even if the incidence of premature ovarian failure were as high as 1 in 1,000, and it would take many years of followup. That doesn't even take into account how hard it would be to control for confounding variables. It would be one thing if Little and Ward had actually observed correlation between Gardasil vaccination and premature ovarian failure, but in reality they confused correlation with causation without even having the correlation. It is a common failing of antivaccinationists.

Meanwhile, over in the antivaccine underground, this report is being used to resurrect even wilder speculation about L-histidine somehow invoking autoimmune disease (which, by the way, this girl appears not to have had), all because girls not infrequently complain of joint pain and because weight gain has been reported in girls who have received Gardasil. The L-histidine gambit is one of the dumbest of many dumb antivaccine gambits, but, like the formaldehyde gambit, it keeps rearing its ugly head, just not as frequently. Then, of course, there's the polysorbate 80, which has become another vaccine additive that antivaccinationists love to hate, so much so that they take reports that polysorbate 80 can cause infertility in rats and extrapolate them to humans, even huge doses were required to cause the effect in rats. In Gaia Health, polysorbate 80 allegedly combines with aluminum in a horrific fashion:

The most frightening trait of polysorbate 80 may be that it crosses the blood-brain barrier and can take other substances with it. It is used for that purpose. The drugs loperamide4 and doxorubicin5 are coated with polysorbate for just this purpose—to drag them into the brain.

So what else can polysorbate 80 drag into the brain? Gardasil utilizes aluminum as an adjuvant, even though it’s a dangerous neurotoxin. Injection of aluminum is associated with several neurological disorders, as is reported in Gaia Health and Mechanisms of aluminum adjuvant toxicity and autoimmunity in pediatric populations6, rheumatoid arthritis, autoimmune thyroid disease, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, and autism may all be associated with aluminum adjuvants in vaccines.

Can polysorbate open the blood-brain barrier to let aluminum in? No one really knows because no one has looked. There is, though, no legitimate reason to assume that it cannot.

No evidence whatsoever is presented to support this speculation. These guys are starting to sound like Mark and David Geier and their "theory" about how testosterone somehow binds mercury and keeps it from being chelated. Gaia Health's speculation is what we in the biz like to call pulling it out of one's nether regions. The result is just as stinky.

There's almost no limit to the ridiculousness to which antivaccinationists will descend to attack Gardasil, and, unfortunately (or, depending on your point of view, fortunately) I just realized that I've gone on longer than I had planned (big surprise!) on the first article, leaving myself no room for a discussion of the claim of death by Gardasil publicized by AoA, the subject of which is the latest spew by Lucija Tomljenovic and Christopher A Shaw, whose previous spew you might remember.

Maybe tomorrow. It would allow me to follow up a case I discussed about three months ago, and—who knows?—maybe Christopher Shaw would notice and deign to comment again. On the other hand, his latest paper is pretty bad; I don't know if I can deal with two papers this bad two days in a row.

Either way, the attack on Gardasil continues apace.

ADDENDUM: I intentionally concentrated on the biased and utterly speculative nature of this particular case report, which was so speculative and biased that the editors of BMJ Case Reports should hang their heads in shame for having published such twaddle. What I didn't mention (although I thought about mentioning it) is that whenever you see a publication as bad as Little and Ward's case report, it's at least 95% likely that the authors have a serious axe to grind and that they are publishing because of ideology leading them to twist the case report or data to fit rather than having their conclusions flow naturally from the data. In this case, some of my commenters have pointed out that Dr. Little is on the board of advisors for an Australian Catholic anti-abortion group called Family Life International, whose official patron laments the growth of promiscuity and the "redefining" of marriage (big surprise, the group is against gay marriage as well). On the website is a diatribe against Gardasil, which, FLI gravely notes, is "often associated with promiscuity," along with a link to a YouTube video of the antivaccine propaganda film The Greater Good. It also turns out that Ward is, as one of my commenters put it, cut from the same cloth, described as a "pro-life obstetrician/gynecologist." He also apparently helps an antiabortion activist named Stephanie Gray give talks at local churches in Canada in which she shows graphic abortion videos to convince the audience that abortion is "wrong 100% of the time."

More like this

Here we go again. When you've been blogging for over 11 years, particularly when what you blog about is skepticism and science-based medicine, with a special emphasis on taking down quackery (particularly cancer and antivaccine quackery), inevitably you see the same misinformation and lies pop up…
Whenever I take a day off from blogging, as I did yesterday because I was too busy going out with my wife on Wednesday night to celebrate my birthday, I not infrequently find an embarrassment of riches to blog about the next day. Sometimes it's downright difficult to decide what to write about. So…
One of the oldest antivaccine tropes that first encountered is one that I like to call the “toxins gambit.” Basically, this is an antivaccine lie that portrays vaccines as being laden with all manner of “toxins” because they have—gasp!—chemicals with scary sounding names and even some chemicals…
THWOMP! THWOMP! THWOMP! TWHOMP! THWOMP! TWHOMP! That's the sound of me hitting my head against the table. Hard. What provoked this reaction in me is Medscape, specifically an article that my blog bud PalMD turned me on to. That the article, entitled HPV Vaccine Deemed Safe and Effective, Despite…

Shaw's out fishing - he needs to get more 'evidence' to publish more BS in third rate journals.

But regarding the polysorbate 80 and L-histidine - the newest buzz I've been reading from the AV camp is the 'obvious synergism' between the compounds.

Despite there being no evidence of such an occurrence, of course. IIRC the whole polysorbate 80 passing the BBB is being hung on a nanoparticle study where they used polysorbate 80 coated (I don't recall if it was steric or electrostatic) particles to deliver drugs to the brain.

The obvious AV jump to conclusion - it had to be the coating that allowed the particles to pass the barrier. They ignore the size of the particle itself - anything less than 300 nm can pass a cell membrane, particles under 75 nm can pass the nuclear envelope. One of the reasons I shake my head at folks who give their kids nanosilver, yet scream about 'heavy metals' in vaccines.

Dr Little is also associated with the anti-abortion lobby in Australia. Not saying her extreme beliefs led her anywhere with this case report, but, you know
http://www.fli.org.au/

By reasonablehank (not verified) on 29 Oct 2012 #permalink

You would think that if exposure to HPV antigens reduced fertility, someone would have noticed it by now.

The authors are saying that [...] menstrual abnormalities up to and including premature ovarian failure might actually be underreported.

More specifically, their Occam's-razor-defying auxiliary hypothesis is that routine Gardasil would be causing an EPIDEMIC of teenage menopause, but when the incidence of this complication is reduced to 2/3 (subtracting the 1/3 of teenage girls taking OC), the EPIDEMIC disappears below the threshold of visibility.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 29 Oct 2012 #permalink

From the Family Life International site, to which Dr Little is an advisor:

Keynote address by the FLI's patron, given to FLI advisors:

"2. Defending Marriage and Family

Marriage and the family have been wounded by the growth in promiscuity..."

http://www.fli.org.au/?page_id=1499

No. Dr Little has no axe to grind at all.

By reasonablehank (not verified) on 29 Oct 2012 #permalink

"Even though the authors say multiple times that their observations do not prove that the quadrivalent HPV vaccine is toxic to ovaries, based on the way they wrote this case report it is breathtakingly obvious that this is exactly what they think..."

This is the kind of thing that drives me bonkers, when people act like giving caveats about how they're not doing what they're doing proves they're not doing it...even though they are. Like when you ask someone to support a claim they made that can't be proven, and they'll say "Hey, I'm not saying I'm 100% sure of this" before insisting that they can't be wrong, while still refusing to support their claim at all. They might even go so far as to say they're only "99% sure" of their claim, as if that's a meaningful difference which means they don't need to provide any proof at all. But of course, *any* claim requires proof, even if you're only 10% sure it's true...whatever that means. As if you can quantify the certainty you have on something that you believe to be true, and only 100% certainty requires evidence.

But people do that all the time, in order to justify lazy thinking. They know they can't be making the logical leaps they're making, yet...they just can't help themselves, because they soooooo want their belief to be true, while also wanting to claim the mantle of "Science," not because it's deserved, but because they know it's respected. But the whole reason science is respected is because it backs up its claims with proof, and doesn't make leaps of faith. And if you think something's true before you have evidence supporting it, you're doing it backwards.

By Doctor Biobrain (not verified) on 29 Oct 2012 #permalink

I was wondering what angle Deirde Little had. The paper fairly leaps from correlation to causality.

It may also have some relevance that she is convenor of bioethics for the Catholic Womens League of New South Wales.

The paper fairly leaps from correlation to causality.

Not even hindered by the absence of correlation.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

[ off-topic - but does that ever stop anyone here? :-) ]

Darwy,

"Red fruits with cream"? (Google translate thinks that's Danish, which obviously I don't know…) What's the story behind that?!

What’s the story behind that?!
I think it's a way of finding out who can't pronounce Danish (i.e. just about everyone).

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

In that case, I could just ask those of my relatives who are native Danish speakers... ;-)

More seriously, I’m looking forward to Orac’s take on the latest from Lucija Tomljenovic and Christopher Shaw.

Anyone being able to explain why one would like to get a diuretic into the brain - with or without polysorbate 80?

By Pharmacist-in-Exile (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

One of my grad-school buddies was a Danish student, and he taught me how to say "Røde grøde med fløde". Pronounced correctly in Danish, it sounds approximately like someone gargling.

By palindrom (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

The paper fairly leaps from correlation to causality.

Not even hindered by the absence of correlation.

Oh no, there is a correlation. It's just hidden because of the use of oral contraceptives. So the absence of correlation is actually evidence that OCs mask the effect.

BTW, anti-vaxxers howl all the time about conflict of interests. However, COIs go well beyond Jake Crosby's 7 degrees. Where is the disclaimer that "At least one of the authors is an active participant in an organization that promotes the belief that Gardisal causes promiscuity and needs to be stopped:"

By Marry Me, Mindy (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

"Menstrual abnormalities and particularly ovarian insufficiency at this time may therefore be under-reported"

And I may be Michelle Pfeiffer. If you can get past the part about not being thin, blonde and beautiful.

As soon as I read the connection between one of the researchers and an organization with the word "Family" in the title, I started smelling a rat.

Interesting. It's a vaccine to prevent a sexually-transmitted disease that can lead to cancer of the reproductive organs. That's irrelevant to the action of the vaccine, of course, since it works like most vaccines, and is administered like most vaccines (in the arm, not the unmentionables). There is no reason to think Gardasil would be any more likely to cause ovarian failure than FluMist would be, and yet . . . to some, this seems persuasive, because Gardasil is for prevention of cervical cancer, therefore its related to the reproductive tract in people's minds.

So how *interesting* that this is the cause that is blamed! Even though there is no plausible explanation for how it was done. The world isn't like a Sherlock Holmes story, where once you eliminate all the possibilities, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truth. Mostly because it's not usually possible to actually eliminate all the possiblities. If it's not A, B, C, D, or E, that doesn't automatically mean it's K. There's a great deal of alphabet that hasn't yet been checked, and that's completely ignoring previously undiscovered causes.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

This case study came into my e-mail inbox via a Google alert. I myself have premature ovarian failure -- of the idiopathic variety (I've participated in the clinical studies at the National Institutes of Health, where they rule out the known causes) -- and I run an on-line support group for women with POF/POI (premature ovarian insufficience, what's coming to be the preferred term at the NIH). I didn't even hit "forward" on this rubbish. The woo runs strong in the group as it is and I spend a lot of time trying to combat it (especially sordid is the woo that prevents proper treatment of this disorder in terms of preservation of bone mass, cardiovascular health, quality of life, and longevity; sadder is the woo that promises pregnancy to those most desperate for it). Eventually, someone's going to find this article and forward it; I'm glad to have a refutation.

PS: I came of age pre-Gardasil. But I have two young daughters (via adoption) and they will most certainly be receiving the Gardasil vaccine, unless something better comes along before they're slated to receive it.

Pharmacist-in-Exile,

Anyone being able to explain why one would like to get a diuretic into the brain – with or without polysorbate 80?

If you mean the loperamide and doxorubicin, I wondered that too. You might want to get loperamide into the brain as it's an opiate used to treat diarrhea that only lacks CNS effects because it doesn't cross the BBB. Doxorubicin blocks DNA replication and is used as a chemotherapy agent, so I suppose it could be used to treat brain cancers if you could get it across the BBB.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

While Dr. Little could not confirm that Gardasil caused the destruction of the girl’s reproductive system, she was able to rule out all other possible causes.

I bet she didn't rule out broccoli.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

@Krebiozen - or rain, or hail, or sunny days, or cell phone usage or the time of the day, or the time of the month, or genetic history, etc, etc, etc.....jeezzzzz

Calli Arcale: nice.

"While Dr. Little could not confirm that Gardasil caused the destruction of the girl’s reproductive system, she was able to rule out all other possible causes. The circumstantial evidence implicating Gardasil is strong."

Wow.....here's my testimonial then.

Two weeks ago I came down with a nasty cold. Having had the HPV injections myself back in 2009 and 2010. Since I haven't had any other medical work since then, the circumstantial evidence implementing Gardasil is strong.

So the Gardasil caused my cold?

I bet she didn’t rule out broccoli.

Ouch.

Because it hits so hard.

I hope broccoli doesn't cause problems for boys or my 2 yo is in trouble.

By Marry Me, Mindy (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Orac wrote:

"....Investigations were quite thorough, including a complete battery of tests related to reproductive function, including prolactin levels, androgen profile, FSH and LH levels, and many others. They even did a karyotype to check and make sure that the girl had two X chromosomes. Well, I shouldn’t say “even.” It’s part of the routine investigation....."

Yeah, but did the authors look for any of the many gene mutations reported to be responsible for 25 % of "idiopathic premature ovarian failure"...or are those genetic studies not permitted by the authors' religious beliefs?

http://jme.endocrinology-journals.org/content/45/6/405.full.pdf

Thanks, "reasonablehank"

I’ve speculated before why certain antivaccinationists hate Gardasil more than any other vaccine, and I think I’ve come up with a plausible explanation. Basically, the hatred of Gardasil is an unholy fusion of antivaccine beliefs with the fundamentalist religion so prevalent in the U.S....

While this is undoubtedly true, I think the alliance is more tactical from the perspective of the broad antivaccine perspective. In term of strategy, Gardasil threatens their core demographic, both current and going forward. The notion of a vaccine that is directly appealing to young women, I suspect, strikes terror into their marketing hearts.

@Calli

Oh, great. Now we're going to start seeing anti-vaccine claims that FluMist causes premature menopause. Probably due to the MSG, no doubt.

I can see it now. An anti-vaccine activist sees your comment, realizes the great gaping hole in their argument and, rather than coming to the sane conclusion that there is no connection, thinks, "Holy crap! How many other girls are going through menopause because of the untested [sic] vaccine schedule?"

Marry Me Mindy,

I hope broccoli doesn’t cause problems for boys or my 2 yo is in trouble.

According to Wikipedia It is full of 3,3'-diindolylmethane which is a potent modulator of the innate immune response system, so who knows what terrible autoimmune diseases it might be causing? They could be masked by the effects of other vegetables people are eating. Where are the long term trials of broccoli in combination with other vegetables? Where are the studies of broccoli eaters and non-broccoli eaters? The safety studies that do exist have probably been meddled with by Big Farmer.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Sorry, Orac, I couldn't resist this . . .

Turner syndrome, viral infections, inadequate gonadotropin secretion or action, and viral infections.

"You said viral infections twice."

"I like viral infections."

But, back on topic. . . I honestly can't understand how people can be this mindless about some things. How'd then even get a casual connection out of that series of events?

Mike, it's about them being wrong, or their heroes/idols being wrong. They have so much time and money invested in these cranks that to turn back now would be to admit their own massive failings and in their mind it's easier and better to just attack the other side, no matter how illogical their position and logical the other side's position may be. ex: mercury causing autism is proven false so they jump to the next metal, aluminum. If aluminum is proven to not cause autism then move to formaldehyde, if it's not formaldehyde, then it must be something else. Whatever they can do to cling to the underlying vaccine=bad belief.

@kruuth

Don't forget the tactic of waiting for enough time to pass that ideas have largely faded from public consciousness, then circle back to already discredited ideas, like mercury.

With regards to FluMist, etc.: I don't get why it's non sequitur to ask why there might be a prediliction for any side effects from Gardasil to be linked to the reproductive system; I'm thinking (as a lay person) that vaccine = weakened form of virus; since full strength virus is linked to disease in some part of the body, mightn't there be a tendency for side effects to be there too? Is there any tendency for known vaccines to have the side effects linked to systems targeted by the full strength vaccine?

(Questions meant fully out of curiosity - I'm 'pro-vaccine and my two daughters and son have all gotten their HPV vaccines).

I’m thinking (as a lay person) that vaccine = weakened form of virus

Gardasil isn't an attenuated vaccine.

Thanks - does the idea hold any water for other vaccines?

You've got it backwards--they didn't go from observations to conclusions but from a preferred conclusion to the hunt for damning observations. Rather than get the causal connection out of the series of events, the connection was ready and waiting in place a priori.

Thanks – does the idea hold any water for other vaccines?

Yes Steve. Live viral vaccines tend to have a higher rate of side effects. For example, OPV can revert to wild-type polio virus in ~1/million doses and cause paralytic polio in the recipient. MMR and varicella vaccines can cause encephalitis in again ~1/milion doses.

But pulling these so called adverse effects out of thin air when there is no biological plausibility is just rot.

By Science Mom (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Calli Arcale:
There is no reason to think Gardasil would be any more likely to cause ovarian failure than FluMist would be, and yet

I was thinking the same thing last night. The authors point the appendage of blame at the adjuvants in Gardasil... which of course are the same adjuvants found in other vaccines. In this case, however, they are expected to know that they are components in a vaguely reproduction-related vaccine, causing them to single out the ovaries to wreak their destructive potential.
Or else the authors are guilty of magical thinking...

she was able to rule out all other possible causes.
Clearly it is not possible to rule out all other possible causes, because people have been developing idiopathic early menopause long before Gardasil and no-one knows the causes.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Interestingly, much of the opposition to Gardasil may be fuelled by conservative beliefs ( see MMM's and others' comments) about girls'/ women's sexuality - as in " let's all pretend that this isn't really happening"..
thus, they get all upset in addition to their anti-vax fears

AND the idea of the vaccine for boys makes them even more disturbed because it reminds them that there are many ways to get infected - including from OTHER males ( probably less of an issue for same-sex female)..
I think that that factor plays into the mix as well.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

More seriously, I’m looking forward to Orac’s take on the latest from Lucija Tomljenovic and Christopher Shaw.

As noted on another thread, their Case 1 is presumably Ms. Jasmine Renata, the autopsy report matching in every respect. Case 2 is presumably Annabelle Morin of Quebec, who died in 2008; her parents are seeking evidence to sue Merck, which is how Shaw and Tomljenovic are examining her preserved brain samples.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Yeah, I thought I smelled a pro-natalist bias in there. I know for a fact I was certain at age 16 that I didn't want kids, and I know ~20% of women are similar, so losing your fertility early is hardly the tragedy of epic proportions that language makes it out to be. (More subtle anti-adoption bias in there, too; never mind that the 16 year old in question could hypothetically adopt children even if she wanted them, but somehow or other, these pur laine forced-birthers rarely if ever bring that up, because secretly they hate adoption too.)

Given that I don't want kids, and my periods are still nightmarish, sign me up for premature menopause (not even that premature at my age)... *sigh*

By Interrobang (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

I noticed that the full article lists the following conflicting interests:

None.

Seems like being on the board of an organization that has opposed Gardasil must have slipped her mind.

Interrobang: trust me, you can live without the hot flashes.

Ahem, having had experience with teenagers (my own and kids I counseled while a public health nurse/clinician), I pose this question to other commenters here.

Q-How do you know when a teenager is lying to you?

A-When their mouths are moving.

"There is no reason to think Gardasil would be any more likely to cause ovarian failure than FluMist would be, and yet "

Indeed.

It's not like the vaccine itself specifically has anything to do with the female reproductive system. It's a vaccine that protects against a virus that can cause cervical cancer (as well as other cancers) and is commonly transmitted sexually, but it's not like it is injected into the reproductive tract or targets or accumulates in the ovaries. As far as the ovaries are concerned, Gardasil itself is just another vaccine.

To associate Gardasil specifically and uniquely with ovarian failure would seem to require a fundamental misunderstanding of what the vaccine is, what it does, and how it works.

From such ignorance of near zero understanding of vaccines, one might assume that since Gardasil is used to prevent infection of a virus that can cause cancer in the female reproductive tract could cause problems in the reproductive tract.

By Karl Withakay (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Possible cause = hypothyroidism? I was hypothyroid as a teenager, myself. Obviously, there are so many other possible causes that it is very suspect that the anti-choice people come to this conclusion.

Gardasil is a very dangerous drug that should be banned. it is unnecessary for anyone to get it. It has caused a number of deaths and complications.

Gardasil causes such symtoms as seizures, strokes, dizziness, fatigue, weakness, headaches, stomach pains, muscle pain and weakness, joint pain, auto-immune problems, chest pains, hair loss, appetite loss, personality changes, insomnia, hand/leg tremors, arm/leg weakness, shortness of breath, heart problems, paralysis, itching, rashes, swelling, aching muscles, menstrual cycle changes, fainting, swollen lymph nodes, and DEATH!

Quite a nice little useless vaccine given out to little fornicators these days.

Bksea, I noticed that there are a couple of feedback options on the abstract. It looks like their conflict of interests should be brought to their attention (I don't have an account).

Sounds like a bunch of fetid dingo kidneys to me.

Copy of full paper here:
http://www.fli.org.au/wp-content/uploads/Dr-Little-Report.pdf

PS: They did check thyroid function - it was normal.

PPS: Here is a review of the genetic causes of premature ovarian failure. Many of these exist as part of a distinct phenotype/syndrome, but some are otherwise not obvious and would occur in apparently "healthy" women.
http://humupd.oxfordjournals.org/content/8/5/483.full.pdf

Did the authors of this case report exclude any of them as a cause?
No.
All they did was rule out Turner's syndrome and Fragile X.

I had a post here, but the moderator couldn't handle it so the shithead deleted it. A common commie occurrence that happens often these days. Put his type in the white house and we will live in a state of censorship like China.

Someone is trying to raise money

Someone also appears to be trying to groom a new gritty hipster look. (Actually, I think it works.)

"To be seated with Drs. Carmel and Andrew Wakefield for dinner, please purchase a $750 ticket."

*splorf*

I mean, it is better than Arranga's sad effort trying to pass off the notion that "patrons" were sending in $64,000 or whatever the multiplier was by way of a Paypal shopping cart. I wonder if Ed is actually on the outs with this development.

@ Narad:

You know, I saw his new coiffure in another photo recently. He doesn't look bad. For a master fraud.

Looks like a guy who has greying hair - and wants to look younger- so he touches up most of it BUT leaves a tiny bit so it doesn't look like a TOTAL, obvious dye job.

Clues to dye jobs/ cover-ups for the uninitiated: it looks too even- not a variety of shades, darker and lighter, like real hair- except for the touch of grey. I also think it's too dark for his skin tone.

-btw- there's nothing wrong with dying your hair- for men or women- HOWEVER in his case, it's another way of making himself attractive as he plays matinee idol to his ever admiring- mostly female- fans.
Con-men also wear nice suits.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

When I saw that photo, I immediately flashed back to the Wahl Stubble Device. Time will tell. As for hair coloring, I am firmly in the henna camp, although I have so far only really needed it recreationally. The one thing I won't accept is going yellowish rather than a proper white or gray.

There’s a FB page, too, FWIW

It's always worth a fresh link to Patrick "Tim" Bolen.

Ex-doctor Andy has an odd definition for "integrity." Perhaps it is closer to "delusional."

@ Chris:

Unfortunately, all the woo-meisters I survey speak similarly.
Welcome to "through the looking glass" world!

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

steve

With regards to FluMist, etc.: I don’t get why it’s non sequitur to ask why there might be a prediliction for any side effects from Gardasil to be linked to the reproductive system; I’m thinking (as a lay person) that vaccine = weakened form of virus; since full strength virus is linked to disease in some part of the body, mightn’t there be a tendency for side effects to be there too? Is there any tendency for known vaccines to have the side effects linked to systems targeted by the full strength vaccine?

To laypeople like ourselves, it seems to make sense, and that was sort of what I was getting at. It seems to make sense; cervical cancer + vaccine + ovaries. Thing is, the vaccine isn't actually targeted at the reproductive tract -- and believe it or not, neither is HPV. It's got a reputation for causing cervical cancer, but it causes a lot of other cancers too. And warts. So to fight it, targeting the cervix would make no sense. The vaccination is systemic; it is injected into the arm, just like the flu vaccine or TdaP, and it creates a systemic immunity to select strains of the virus. Local side effects are fairly common -- swelling and pain around the injection site, mainly. Systemic side effects are rare, and similar to those for other vaccines. Which really should be no surprise, because apart from the protein strand that its teaching the immune system to recognize, it's just like a lot of other vaccines. Side effects are going to be either localized to the injection site in the arm, or systemic, and will be similar to those associated with other vaccines. Ovarian failure has never, to my knowledge, been associated with any vaccine. And it's a little suspicious to me that of all the vaccines it gets associated with, it's this one. It's far too convenient and reeks of confirmation bias.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Dims is going overboard with the misogyny. Really if you want to troll you should be a little more subtle with the display of psychosis.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

Oh, man, this Bolen "legal analysis" is a riot. He's utterly doomed on point 1, because the material was not paywalled. Point 2 is largely an aimless bridge between the failed point 1 and the Snidely Whiplash "trap" revealed in point 3. Point 3 itself is incoherent as far as Bolen's contribution is concerned (no Timmy, the anti-SLAPP hasn't been reached in the first place).

What I curious about is whether anybody recognizes the text that he's quoting after his own babbling in point 3. I haven't gone over all of the Arranga-presented stuff, but it would seem that either (1) this has already been considered and is aimless to repeat in this context or (2) somebody has popped his cork early.

@ dingo 199:

The first link you provided to the full BMJ article "failed". Also see my link above to genetic causes of idiopathic premature ovarian failure, (full article not behind a pay wall).

http://jme.endocrinology-journals.org/content/45/5/257.full.pdf

Abstract

Premature ovarian failure (POF) is an ovarian defect characterized by the premature depletion of ovarian follicles before the age of 40 years, representing one major cause of female infertility. POF relevance is continuously growing because women tend to conceive ever more frequently in their thirties and forties. POF can present very early with a pubertal defect. More frequently, it is the end stage of an occult process (primary ovarian insufficiency, POI) affecting ∼1–2% of under-40 women. POI is a heterogeneous disease caused by a variety of mechanisms. Though the underlying cause remains unexplained in the majority of cases, various data indicate that POI has a strong genetic component. These data include the existence of several causal genetic defects in humans, experimental and natural models, as well as the frequent familiarity. The variable expressivity of POI defect in women of the same family may indicate that, in addition to some monogenic forms, POI may frequently be considered as a multifactorial defect resulting from the contribution of several predisposing alleles. The X chromosome-linked defects play a major role among the presently known causal defects. Here, we review the principal X-linked and autosomal genes involved in syndromic and nonsyndromic forms of POI with the wish that this list will soon become upgraded because of the discovery of novel contributing mechanisms. A better understanding of POI pathogenesis will indeed allow the construction of tests able to predict the age of menopause in women at higher risk of POI.

Fetid, putrid, dingo kidneys, indeed. Why would you only do a karotype to R/O Turner and Fragile X Syndromes, when genetic phenotypes have been identified?

Dims == Dims Head? Lol.

Alain

^ "What I am." And I had no idea that Orac wore a dress to the 7th-grade prom. In fact, it's the first I've heard of 7th-grade proms in the first place.

Shockingly, the image used for the "Academic Integrity" DB page is stolen (the photographer allows use but asks for credit.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

@ Narad: I went through the Discovery Deposition that was heavily redacted by Ed Arranga...three-quarters of the numbered pages were "missing". I think Timmy read the same heavily redacted Discovery Deposition.

speaking about discovery deposition, someone have a link to the full version? is it on Brian Deer's website?

Alain

@ lilady,

A thousand thanks :)

I don't spend enough time on his website.

Alain

Goddammit. The link still works.

Alain...You should try to make time to read all of Deer's articles...not just the Lancet-Wakefield "stuff". He's quite a journalist.

OT - But when is Alex Jones' Nuthouse ever OT at RI

Sandy is a weather modification project to help Obama win the election

http://www.infowars.com/could-hurricane-sandy-be-weather-modification-a…

Apparently the existence of a UN Treaty on Weather Weapons is proof that it is possible to manufacture a monster tropical storm.

And now I am off to bed to sleep off all the nonsense I just read

By Militant Agnostic (not verified) on 30 Oct 2012 #permalink

@ Militant Agnostic: The comments beneath Alex Jones latest conspiracy are a riot. Thanks for the laughs.

OK, Pattimmy's quote-squirt (vide Zune) from the closet, point 3, appears to merely be from Wakefield's supplemental response. It's hard to walk into a "trap" that has already passed. And upon repeated, eye-glazing reading, "Defendants Further Waived Their Special Appearances By Requiring A Briefing Schedule for the Chapter 27 Motion Prior to the Resolution of the Their Special Appearances" is starting to seem frankly hilarious.

There is no reconsideration of the trial court's fact-finding to be had, so one is still back to errors of law. Gillrie isn't going to get you there, as Texas has no demonstrable interest in assuming the case; as contrasted with Gillrie, Wakefield has no particular extant business interest. Same as it ever was, indeed.

@ lilady,

I lack organization; let me explain:

I had to drop a course (evaluating scientific evidence) because it was too much work and I couldn't dedicate the hours needed to the course.

Last week, with the help of one of my two best friends, I was able to do the task required to get my medical insurance card done (actually, I'm without medical insurance at the moment).

My psychiatrist put a request for me to have a social worker since august; not done yet and I have many issues that needs taken care off.

For the moment, I'm into survival mode. I put in enough effort to do my only course (psych 102 and I have a note taker), do my tasks (laundry, eating, reading and homework), learn calculus (thanks to Schaum's outline) and that's pretty much it. I used to be a lot more active but since my PTSD, I've been on a decline and I'm struggling.

What would work for me is to work on a single subject or two where I set the pace such as in my psych course and also, the research work that my mentor offer to me (beer brewing). Anymore than that and I start to suffer.

Well, it's a long detour from what I wanted to say but I will say that I have more than enough with my course (and I'm considering taking only a single course and a lab per semester despite taking a long time to graduate), a research project and my blog but rest assured that I put in a lot of quality time into these goals.

Regarding Brian Deer, I will peruse his articles from time to time but I can't make any commitment.

Alain

I am also, regarding legal antics, inclined to recall Pattimmy's frothing insanity when he was listed by Spamhaus and SPEWS. Acting like a nut on misc.health.alternative was one thing, but when one calls oneself to the attention of NANAE, it's time to brace for ruthless mockery, which I suspect in this case might well be available in time for Christmas delivery.

Beeing a vaccinologist I will die within a year after my last immunization with influenza vaccine - because its a vaccine against influenza infections and not a vaccinefor eternal life.
I try it since 20 years.

So each girl will die after her first Gardasil shot.
Those who are not vaccinated will also die, on average a liitle bit earlier due to cervical carcinoma or other carcionoms caused by HPV ( 6,11),16,18.

And since it was clearly shown, that thimerosal is not the cause of autism and that the thimerosal-free MMR vaccines does not cause autism, then it must be the adjuvans - according to the antivax movement. At the end they will claim that wfi (water for injection) is deadly, because it is the main ingredient in vaccines.

By wolfgangM (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

"While Dr. Little could not confirm that Gardasil caused the destruction of the girl’s reproductive system, she was able to rule out all other possible causes. "
She did not rule out global warming

sailor -- we could blame global warming. But we know it doesn't exist!

Or, we know it exists, but humans can't possibly be causing it, because the climate has always fluctuated!

Or, Al Gore!

Or, we know it exists, but it's beneficial!

Or, we know it exists, and humans are causing it, but, China!

Or, we know it exists, and humans are causing it, but we're already screwed!

Sorry, had to vent. The way in which people have been hornswoggled by an absolutely classic propaganda campaign is more than a little depressing.

By palindrom (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

@Grant & HDB

It's just a cutesy way of giving location, without being overly specific.

And yes, go gargle some potatoes and say it - you'll sound like a Dane in no time at all.

@ STEVE:

"I’m thinking (as a lay person) that vaccine = weakened form of virus"

Some vaccines are indeed weakened forms of the pathogens they protect against, but not all of them are. (check out the Wikipedia article on vaccines as a decent primer)

Many vaccines are killed forms of the pathogens or just contain key proteins/particles from the pathogen or proteins or particles that are similar enough to the pathogen to cause an immune response that conveys protection against the pathogen. (I use the word pathogen and not virus because there are vaccines against things other than viruses, such as the vaccine for the bacteria that causes whooping cough)

The Gardasil vaccine does not contain a weakened form of the virus, but contains virus like particles that resemble HPV virons. It does not contain live virus or dead virus, only virus-like particles, which cannot reproduce in the human body, and therefore cannot cause any infection.

By Karl Withakay (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

... therefore there is no reason to think that the Gardasil vaccine would have any specific or unique adverse effects on the female reproductive tract.

By Karl Withakay (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

@ Militant Agnostic;

Whether you realise it or not-
you stole my '... OT, but is ( describe detailed woo or a woo-meister's ridiculous action) ever TRULY OT @ RI?...'
See, it's got meter.
-btw- I'm flattered.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

@ Alain:

Interestingly enough, for the past decade or so, I've worked with students and potential students, many of whom are EFL ( ESL) or older students who have returned to university courses. They also frequently take the slower path to a degree.

You have to create a structure in order to make yourself spend more time with the course material- specific study times ( e.g. 3-5 pm daily); having a study partner or even someone to discuss the material with ( non-student); when you read a textbook or articles, make notes, underline major points; put the material into your own words; try to rehearse and recreate what you've read without notes- pretend you need to explain the material to someone who has never been exposed to it. Think how it relates to what you've learned previously. You may need to write up a schedule or calendar for yourself which you prominently display. I am a big fan of notes and calendars. Also tape recording.

If stress and anxiety are problems- and what student is immune to them?- learn to try to 'talk yourself down' from panic mode: you might ask yourself, " Am I over-reacting?"
People have different ways of relaxing including listening to music, going for a walk- you have to find some time for that.

Believe it or not, when studying social sciences myself, I often wound up at hipster watering holes with other students where we ate, drank and argued about whatever we were studying or working on at the time. Also most of my friends- then as now- were hilarious. That never hurts.

I have tons of related material that is based on my studies and personal experience. Just ask.

By Denice Walter (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

Karl:

… therefore there is no reason to think that the Gardasil vaccine would have any specific or unique adverse effects on the female reproductive tract.

And even if it was live HPV virus, there still would be no reason to expect special hazards for the reproductive tract, because that's not where it's being injected. HPV doesn't have some special affinity for the reproductive organs. It's just that if you're a woman and you catch it from a man during intercourse, well, that's where it's getting deposited.

By Calli Arcale (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

@Calli Arcale,

Thanks for that addition. I was so focused on supporting the idea that there's no reason to think the vaccine would have any specific or unique adverse effects on the female reproductive tract, that I skipped right past addressing the idea that even injecting live, full strength HPV virus into the arm would also not be expected to have any specific or unique adverse effects on the female reproductive tract.

The HPV virus itself does not specially target or accumulate in the ovaries or any other part of the female reproductive tract. It tends to cause problems pretty much wherever it ends up, and when it's sexually transmitted, that tends to be in or near the lower ends of the reproductive tract in either sex.

By Karl Withakay (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

Thanks Denice for the advices. I must say that I'm especially vulnerable to stress and the fall isn't a good period for me.

I'll be applying for a clinical trial for an existing medication to help peoples who have PTSD. I have an interview scheduled next week.

Alain

Actually if Sandy was a weather modification designed to help Obama win it seems lie it backfired., many displaced people now may not get tot vote. We know that the east coast is democrat., so that leaves the south and midwest red states to vote for Romney. If Sandy was created to help Obama win, the plan backfired.

@ Karl Withakay:

"The HPV virus itself does not specially target or accumulate in the ovaries or any other part of the female reproductive tract. It tends to cause problems pretty much wherever it ends up, and when it’s sexually transmitted, that tends to be in or near the lower ends of the reproductive tract in either sex."

Not so, if you engage in some *other* practices (in the privacy of your bedroom)...

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Prevention/HPV-vaccine

Not so, if you engage in some *other* practices (in the privacy of your bedroom)…

So if those other practices are in public, you're protected?
Asking for a friend.

By herr doktor bimler (not verified) on 31 Oct 2012 #permalink

lilady,

Perhaps my statement was a bit of an over generalization (and it did occur to me when composing my comment), but it was by no means an absolute statement. That was the reason for my use of the qualifying words "tends to be".

Your point does however, (in my opinion) provide additional support for the concept that HPV has no special affinity for the female reproductive tract.

By Karl Withakay (not verified) on 01 Nov 2012 #permalink

@Calli --
"There is no reason to think Gardasil would be any more likely to cause ovarian failure than FluMist would be..."

Don't give them any more ideas!

By OleanderTea (not verified) on 01 Nov 2012 #permalink

You know, five of the FBI Ten Most Wanted have green eyes. That's too much to be a coincidence. We need more investigation into whether green eyes give someone a criminal nature. Or maybe there's a more suceptible green-eyed group we need to look for.

By dedicated lurker (not verified) on 01 Nov 2012 #permalink

I have a neighbor who is convinced that Gardasil caused her daughter to develop an ovarian cyst because the cyst developed 2 weeks after her second immunization. After all, Gardasil fights a cancer "down there" Sigh, no amount of explanation (argument) could convince her otherwise.

The complaints against Gardasil have nothing to do with religion and everything to do with sick girls. My child was completely healthy till she had the shot. Within one hour she was sick and has not gotten well. Eighteen year old girls do not suddenly have unexplained fatigue, chronic pain, heart plipitations, shortness of breath, and hair loss. No doctor knows how to treat her. This condition was not gradual. It occurred directly after the shot. The cause is obvious.

By Linda Wickett (not verified) on 17 Nov 2012 #permalink

Linda Wickett,

Firstly, I prefer to separate what others think from your personal case as I think mixing the two tends to led to confused thinking, particularly as it can let emotion get the better of thing. (More on your personal case in a moment.)

In your first sentence, you wrote: “The complaints against Gardasil have nothing to do with religion and everything to do with sick girls.” There are people who oppose Gardasil with we might call “moral reasons” (for want of a better description). For these people, their moral reasons likely stem directly from their religious views. You and people you know may not think that way, but it seems very likely (if not clear) that some do.

Putting that aside, about your personal case. Before that, let me express my sympathies.

You wrote: “Eighteen year old girls do not suddenly have unexplained fatigue, chronic pain, heart plipitations, shortness of breath, and hair loss.”

Other can fill this in further, but my understanding is that on rare occasions they do and that one cause is rare heart heart conditions that don't show up until about that age.

It's tempting to attribute these to some other event but I think it's wiser to look to the wider range of things - it’d a pity to miss the real cause through plumping for an instinctive answer.

Here's some food for thought: even if this cause/effect proves wrong (jury still out, though her Doctor believes it to be), The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has received more than 18,700 reports of adverse side effects related to Gardasil since 2006. These reports include serious adverse effects including Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation, severe fatigue and weakness, heart problems, shortness of breath, chest pains and many more.

Here’s some food for thought: even if this cause/effect proves wrong (jury still out, though her Doctor believes it to be),

No, her doctor doesn't believe that Gardasil was the COD.

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has received more than 18,700 reports of adverse side effects related to Gardasil since 2006. These reports include serious adverse effects including Guilliane Barre, lupus, seizures, paralysis, blood clots, brain inflammation, severe fatigue and weakness, heart problems, shortness of breath, chest pains and many more.

I'm going to guess that Karen has never even read a VAERS entry let alone a fraction of the number she regurgitated from some crap website. But I will guess that Karen is easily impressed with the sheer number of entries rather than take a look herself and also how none of the CODs thus far have been found to be caused by Gardasil. You know Karen it's not as though teenage girls never got sick and died prior to Gardasil now is it?

By Science Mom (not verified) on 26 Nov 2012 #permalink

The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) has received more than 18,700 reports of adverse side effects related to Gardasil since 2006. These reports include serious adverse effects....

So why are you using this sleight-of-hand? A trivial search shows 1705 total reports in the "serious" category, which doesn't even establish actual existence, much less causation.

Karen S, what must you read and understand before using the VAERS database through its official site: http://vaers.hhs.gov/data/index ? Why does it have a specific question next to the button to enter the database?

And as for an example of what is included in the "serious" event category,

Information has been received from a physician concerning a 24 year old female pt with no known allergies or reportable medical history who on 10/6/06 was vaccinated IM with a 0.5ml dose of HPV. Several hours later, on 10/6/06 the pt called the office with complaints of swollen puffy eyes, some itching but no rash and blurry vision. The pt was seen in the office that evening on 10/6/06 and was given a dose of Benadryl and was sent home. The pt took a nap for the blurry vision and upon awakening the next morning the pt fully recovered. Blurry vision was considered to be disabling according to the physician since the pt was unable to perform her normal task. Additional information has been requested.

Karen, VAERS is just a single component of the whole vaccine safety monitoring system. Anyone who treats VAERS as if by itself it gave reliable information is either badly misled or, more likely, deliberately misleading themselves and others.

Yes, people submitted reports to VAERS claiming that fatigue/lupus/heart attacks/whatever came after Gardasil and therefore must be related to Gardasil. But by itself, these reports have no more meaning than parents in colonial Salem Village who said "Old Goody Harper gave my daughter a nasty look in the village square and within the week my daughter had fallen down with fits! Obviously Goody Harper's witchcraft is the cause!" If you disagree, then tell me why VAERS reports are automatically more accurate when they are based on the exact same logic: "that happened, then this happened, so obviously that caused this." And no, simply assembling 18,700 such reports does not guarantee that some or any of them represent a real cause-and-effect relationship; I guarantee you there have been far more than 18,700 people put to death for witchcraft over the centuries and I dare you to say that 18,700 reports mean some of them must really have been Satan-worshipping neighbor-hexing witches.

By Antaeus Feldspar (not verified) on 26 Nov 2012 #permalink

Narad quoting a VAERS report:

Several hours later, on 10/6/06 the pt called the office with complaints of swollen puffy eyes, some itching but no rash and blurry vision.

That happened to me! Of course it was early spring and the alder trees were shooting out pollen. The same thing that during my allergy tests covered a good section of my arm. I am very allergic to alder pollen. It is just part of my immune system being too strong and stupid which sometimes almost kills me.

Karen.
The Vaccine Safety Datalink project includes an active surveillance system called Rapid Cycle Analysis which monitors more than 8.8 million people annually, representing nearly 3% of the United States population. They have found no increase in adverse events associated with Gardasil:

In 2011, VSD active surveillance (called Rapid Cycle Analysis) looked at specific adverse events following more than 600,000 doses of Gardasil, such as Guillain–Barré Syndrome (GBS), stroke, VTE, appendicitis, seizures, syncope, allergic reactions, and anaphylaxis. No statistically significant increased risk for any of these adverse events was detected after vaccination.

By Krebiozen (not verified) on 26 Nov 2012 #permalink

Gardasil all HPV Vaccines

How does a vaccine work when acquired immunity has not been established
As in that is how vaccines work, Acquired immunity was seen and documented in man or animal and a vaccine was made that had this immunity in it ,

The Vaccine has an immunity in it, to work small pox cow pox chicken pox
ect
the vaccine for small pox and chicken pox has this immunity cell structure so the body can learn the immunity

HPV a Wart No NO no, a man or animal in history has not developed the immunity, never get anouther Wart {external, internal}

warts plantar what ever
their all a wart
laevern
November 29, 2012

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

they are lieing

No MSDS
nothing in government has the legal authority to make legal a product
with no msds
The product jumped through all the testing

Merck are lieing and pretending to be somehow that authority

Pharmacutical companys have not done this before
and then try to force mandate an untested vaccine
a vaccine that, science in making vaccines does not support Gardasil or any HPV Vaccines

Their is some pilot project i noticed

Terrorists
computer program
Animated computer program to look like people and
get them to say what they would like to say
News government
ect
To make Gardasil look legal
you have noticed
its a lot bigger
Criminal intelligences

Gardasil all HPV Vaccines

How does a vaccine work when acquired immunity has not been established
As in that is how vaccines work, Acquired immunity was seen and documented in man or animal and a vaccine was made that had this immunity in it ,

The Vaccine has an immunity in it, to work small pox cow pox chicken pox
ect
the vaccine for small pox and chicken pox has this immunity cell structure so the body can learn the immunity

HPV a Wart No NO no, a man or animal in history has not developed the immunity, never get anouther Wart {external, internal}

warts plantar what ever
their all a wart
laevern
November 29, 2012

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

they are lieing

No MSDS
nothing in government has the legal authority to make legal a product
with no msds
The product jumped through all the testing

Merck are lieing and pretending to be somehow that authority

Pharmacutical companys have not done this before
and then try to force mandate an untested vaccine
a vaccine that, science in making vaccines does not support Gardasil or any HPV Vaccines

Their is some pilot project i noticed

Terrorists
computer program
Animated computer program to look like people and
get them to say what they would like to say
News government
ect
To make Gardasil look legal
you have noticed

the BIG PICTURE
its a lot bigger
Criminal intelligences

MERCK and VIOXX merck was sued for wrong doing in putting VIOXX on the market

A History of wrong doing

HPV like the plague NO
To skip legal licensing and testing, the disease has to be population threat
MERCK can lie
Merck has a history of lieing with VIOXX
like merck studied how can i prevent pulling a drug of the market that is a threat ect ect ect

Gardasil all HPV Vaccines

How does a vaccine work when acquired immunity has not been established
As in that is how vaccines work, Acquired immunity was seen and documented in man or animal and a vaccine was made that had this immunity in it ,

The Vaccine has an immunity in it, to work small pox cow pox chicken pox
ect
the vaccine for small pox and chicken pox has this immunity cell structure so the body can learn the immunity

HPV a Wart No NO no, a man or animal in history has not developed the immunity, never get anouther Wart {external, internal}

warts plantar what ever
their all a wart
laevern
November 29, 2012

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

they are lieing

No MSDS
nothing in government has the legal authority to make legal a product
with no msds
The product jumped through all the testing

Merck are lieing and pretending to be somehow that authority

Pharmacutical companys have not done this before
and then try to force mandate an untested vaccine
a vaccine that, science in making vaccines does not support Gardasil or any HPV Vaccines

Their is some pilot project i noticed

Terrorists
computer program
Animated computer program to look like people and
get them to say what they would like to say
News government
ect
To make Gardasil look legal
you have noticed
its a lot bigger
Criminal intelligences