HPV Vaccines: Betrayal Of The Public Trust?Norma Erickson Excerpts from national news sources, March 18-22, 2013: Taxpayer funded social marketing campaigns? Look for ways to tell a better story to parents? Who are these people kidding? What happened to investigative journalism? What happened to fact-finding? What happened to fair and balanced journalism? Has no one considered the possibility that the 43.9% of parents refusing this particular vaccine might have some valid concerns? When will people realize there is a huge difference between increasingly concerned about the safety and increasingly aware of the potential risks? After all, this would not be the first time a prescription medication approved by the FDA as safe and effective turned out to be nothing of the sort. Will HPV vaccines be next? Medical Consumers Want to Know: The FDA granted Mercks HPV vaccine, Gardasil, fast track approval in June of 2006, despite the fact that this HPV vaccine failed to meet the FDA criteria for fast track approval.[3] FDA approval of GSKs HPV vaccine, Cervarix, followed shortly after in January 2007. According to The New York Times, the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended adding HPV vaccines to the immunization schedule in the U.S. despite the fact that 64% of the advisory committee members had potential conflicts of interest which were either never disclosed or left unresolved at the time they voted. 3% of the members actually voted on matters they had been barred from considering by ethics officers. News like this certainly does little to enhance the level of public trust. Is it possible for the FDA to objectively monitor the safety and efficacy of HPV vaccines? One has to wonder since Congress tightened the rules on outside consulting after similarly undisclosed conflicts of interest were discovered within advisory committees at the FDA. As if this is not enough, the United States Department of Health and Human Services, via the National Institutes of Health, Office of Technology Transfer receives royalties on each HPV vaccine sold worldwide. This happens because technologies used in the production of HPV vaccines were developed at NIH and subsequently patented by them. For three of the last five years, HPV vaccines based on recombinant papillomavirus capsid proteins have ranked #1 based on royalties from product sales.[4] Marketing Gardasil to the public under these circumstances is a typical case of unconstrained government self-dealing. The major patent holder (National Cancer Institute/NCI), the regulator (FDA) and the vaccination policy maker (CDC) are all divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). These self-dealings typically benefit some administrators, not the government or tax payers. For example, Dr. Julie Gerberding, as the Director of the CDC, approved the use of Gardasil for cervical cancer prevention as a public health policy is now the president of Mercks Vaccine division promoting the sales of Gardasil. How much revenue is generated for the NIH from international sales of HPV vaccines? In November 2010, Dr. Eric Suba submitted a Freedom of Information Request to the Office of Government Information Services to discover the amount. It seems the financial details of the partnership between the NIH, Merck and GlaxoSmithKline are exempt from disclosure. (Read the response he received here.) Apparently, transparency in government does not apply to the top 20 revenue producing patent(s) developed at taxpayer expense. Why is the public not allowed to share in celebrating the success of products they financed? Three Strikes for Gardasil? Why have none of these discoveries sparked a single investigation in any country? Why is no one concerned when genetically modified viral DNA fragments are found in vaccines that are reported to have no viral DNA? Why is no one worried about those viral DNA fragments being attached to aluminum (a known toxin) possibly creating a new chemical compound of unknown toxicity? Why are no red flags raised when those viral DNA fragments attached to aluminum acquire a non-B conformation something known to be associated with multiple debilitating diseases? Anyone with an ounce of common sense should demand to know why those charged with approval, recommendation and safety monitoring of these vaccines appear to be utterly unconcerned about the future health implications of any one of these discoveries, much less all three of them. What kind of expert advice is being given to YOUR government health officials? Israels Advisory Committee on Infectious Diseases and Inoculations held a teleconference on 30 January 2013, to discuss the proposed introduction of HPV vaccines into the countrys school inoculation program among other issues. The official transcript of that meeting, dated 11 February 2013, provides some interesting insights for medical consumers who question HPV vaccine safety. Ron Dagan, MD, is Professor of Pediatrics and Infectious Diseases at the Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Beer-Sheva, Israel, and Director of the Pediatric Infectious Disease Unit at the Soroka University Medical Center, also in Beer-Sheva. An active researcher and international lecturer, Dr. Dagans work focuses on new conjugate vaccines. His expert advice to Israels Advisory Committee regarding potential HPV vaccine implementation is as follows (translation provided-emphasis added): We are dealing with injections, some of which given in 3 [separate] doses, which are delivered to teenage girls. Many side effects are to be expected. During the week following the vaccine delivery of the injections many serious events which are not related/linked to the vaccination are expected: fainting, deaths and convulsions/fits. This needs to be taken into account. Even if it is not rational, if these events happen in class they may damage the general perception/status of the vaccinations. This is happening all over the world all the time. We have already dealt with a similar issue in relation to the delivery of MMT with TD and Polio and we have accepted the nurses proposal to split these between grades 1 and 2. The nurses are suitable to make recommendations to the committee in relation to this issue. In relation to the side effects, we need to be prepared in advance and not simply react after the fact. I propose we consult with the English representatives as to how theyve gone about this. We must prepare for the delivery of the new vaccine. The nurses need to know they are going about this in the way they are most comfortable with (/have the most control over/familiarity with). If this is an example of the expert advice vaccination programs are based on, its no wonder medical consumers are questioning HPV vaccine safety, efficacy and need. Many side effects are to be expected? Fainting, deaths, convulsions and fits occurring during the week following vaccination yet not related to the vaccine? Preparing in advance for side effects? Consulting with other countries to see how they handled the problem? Are countries around the world being offered similar expert advice? So, what will it take to solve the HPV vaccine uptake problem? Parental concerns about HPV vaccine safety are not going to go away in response to social media campaigns. Teaching medical professionals to tell a better story is not going to make parents change their mind about Gardasil, Cervarix, or any future HPV vaccine. Platitudes and unsubstantiated reassurances are no longer sufficient. The time has come for government health authorities to make HPV vaccine manufacturers prove their claims or pull their products from the market. Medical consumers want scientifically proven facts Safe, Affordable, Necessary and Effective nothing less is acceptable. [1] HPV vaccines and cancer prevention, science versus activism, Tomljenovic et al 2013 [2] WHO/ICO Information Centre on HPV and Cervical Cancer (HPV Information Centre). Human Papillomavirus and Related Cancers in World. Summary Report 2010. [3] Too fast or not too fast: the FDAs approval of Mercks HPV vaccine Gardasil. Tomljenovic/Shaw 2012 [4] Top 20 Commercially Successful Inventions, NIH [5] SaneVax to FDA: Recombinant HPV DNA found in multiple samples of Gardasil [6] Detection of human papillomavirus (HPV) L1 gene DNA possibly bound to particulate aluminum adjuvant in the HPV vaccine GardasilLee 2012 [7] Death after Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination: Causal or Coincidental? Tomljenovic/Shaw 2012 [8] Detection of human papillomavirus L1 gene DNA fragments in postmortem blood and spleen after Gardasil vaccinationA case reportLee 2012 [9] Death after Quadrivalent Human Papillomavirus (HPV) Vaccination: Causal or Coincidental? Tomljenovic/Shaw 2012 [10] Topological conformational changes of human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA bound to an insoluble aluminum saltA study by low temperature PCR, Lee 2013 [11] Gardasil: New Study Brings More Safety Questions to Light, Erickson 2013 [12] Non-B DNA conformations, mutagenesis, and disease, Wells 2007 [13] Non-B DNA Conformations, Genomic Rearrangements, and Human Disease, Bacolla/Wells 2013 Norma Erickson is the President of SaneVax, Inc. Please visit for the latest vaccine and health news. linkwithin_text=Related Articles: 