Serious Shit / Some History (to remind us all)

Gardasil… is this bad for your health after all?


We were preparing (over a period of time) to post our assessment and research on Gardasil.  Upon doing further research a few days ago, I ran across a blog that lays out the facts so well, it would be a huge challenge to bring any additional information to the playing field of discussion.  I’ve maintained when this vaccination first hit the scene, there was something very suspicious about the “experts’ breakthrough”.  If the HPV virus is the actual cause of cervical cancer and can be avoided when women limit their sexual partners and ALWAYS using a condom, then why wouldn’t women opt for that instead of a vaccination?  Isn’t that the advertising campaign? 

Every since the “Tuskegee Experiment”, where our government and health “experts” failed to treat a group of men with Syphillis between 1932-1972 (by the way, that’s 40 years of deception) here’s the link for that historical failure:(, so … Blah, blah, blah… I smell bullshit!  Instead, our government and health “officials” mis-lead these men and refused treatment that was garnered effective by 1940 (if I’m not mistaken).    I’d never trust our government to inject me with anything.  Period.  I’m a very healthy person (luckily)— I also refuse to get that flu shot every year, that is “recommended” for my health.   Do you smell that?  I do… it still smells like bullshit to me!

Why people are buying into this and potentially harming their young daughters is really beyond my comprehension.  So here’s the link to’s exceptional research on the subject.  Again, our goal at Why O’ Why is put out sound information, and we will always encourage you to do your own research.  The answers are actually out there for all of us to see.   Take care of each other and your bodies.

8 thoughts on “Gardasil… is this bad for your health after all?

  1. I’m no fan of Gardasil, but I’m also no fan of getting facts wrong.

    a) HPV does in fact cause almost all cases of cervical cancer

    b) just limiting your sexual partners doesn’t help–staying completely celibate would, but even that isn’t completely foolproof.

    c) condoms do not prevent transmission of HPV because it is spread skin to skin, although they will reduce the likelihood of transmission.

    • Hi John– thanks for stopping by and weighing in on the subject. I’ll try not offend you with my response. I do need to state that I stand behind my posting here and the link with the information that was supplied… so let me begin…

      to your a)– if HPV does “in fact” cause almost all cases of cervical cancer– where are your facts to support that? Speaking as a woman, I am very concerned about documentation behind your findings of that statement. There’s really no other way to respond to this without supported facts.

      to your b)– limiting sexual partners actual does reduce the chances for sexually transmitted diseases, whether HPV, HIV/AIDS or any other– celibacy/abstinence is the best course, (in my humble opinion) but we are living in a world now where our young children are more sexually advanced than before. I think that may be another discussion that I’ll address one day soon too. And finally…

      your c): with a condom that is correctly applied, you really can prevent most sexually trasmitted diseases– other than HIV/AIDS, as this virus is so miniscule, it could potentially pass from person to person even with a condom. And as for the choice of condoms, Trojans, gets a huge FAIL– even with additional lubricant such as K-Y Jelly… they tend to rip or shred. Lambskin is an absolute no-no as well. It states clearly on their packaging that those condoms do NOT protect against sexually transmitted diseases. I’m not sure of your reference to “skin to skin” for transmission. If that where the actual case– how do you explain the virus (HPV) reaching the cervix? I really (urgently) look forward to your sources on that, too.

      Loving the debate/dialogue here— I do look forward to all of your responses. Thank you so much for stopping by. We always encourage good, strong, fact-based debates here, I personally am looking forward to your reply. By the way… how did you find us on this subject? We are just getting starting are trying to fine-tune our marketing efforts. We’d appreciate your feedback on that as well. We want to reach as many people as we can. Thanks again, John– you are family to us! Stop by anytime!

  2. a)For facts, just read the document you reference as proving that the FDA knew that HPV does not cancer–it says this:
    “There are more than 100 types of HPVs. The test, the HC2 High-Risk HPV DNA Test, manufactured by Digene Corp., of Gaithersburg, Md., can identify 13 of the high-risk types associated with the development of cervical cancer. The HPV DNA test does not test for cancer, but for the HPV viruses that can cause cell changes in the cervix. If left untreated, these changes can eventually lead to cancer in some women.” I am not sure how the blogger misinterpreted this to prove a big cover-up.

    In fact, there are over 100 types of HPV, about 40 of which (as I recall) MAY cause cancer, some that cause genital warts and some that appear to just buzz off. Probably 95% of HPV infections, including the potentially cancer-causing ones, resolve themselves, which I think is where your blogging friends got confused(most infections are short-lived and not associated with cervical cancer” ). If an infection doesn’t resolve and becomes persistent, it can cause pre-cancerous lesions and eventually cancer.

    A healthy immune system is vital to shaking off HPV. If you smoke, for instance, you’re much more likely to get a persistent infection. All this info is readily available from a variety of sources. Now, I will say that cervical cancer is relatively rare in the US, despite Merck’s marketing, but pre-cancerous problems can be very unpleasant. Persistent HPV is not fun.

    b) the fewer partners you have the less chances you have of contracting HPV, yes; but unless you are completely celibate (in all ways) you’re not guaranteed anything. Even then, many cases have been documented in non-abused children.

    c) because HPV is so very contagious, it can spread rapidly from skin, er, not covered by a condom into the parts where the sun don’t shine. Look it up. I wouldn’t rely on a condom although it will help.

    The blog is right in that when Gardasil was in the approval stage, one of the areas of concern that was noted by researchers was that the vaccination appeared to “enhance” infections in already-infected women, leading, in fact, to a 44.6 (?) increase in pre-cancerous lesions. That is presumably why the FDA hasn’t approved it for older women yet, and if I were contemplating getting it and wasn’t a virgin, I’d get an HPV test first. The information, again, is readily available and has not been hidden away.

    I would not get Gardasil for my own daughter for a lot of reasons, none of which have to do with morality. However, if you’re going to be against something, you have to get the facts straight or you will undermine your credibility. There is a relatively sensible blog at that brings up a lot of areas of concern without being hysterical

    • Hi John– thanks for the follow up. Since i do agree with most of what you noted in this follow up, I won’t re-hash. Our goal for posting prilimary portions of their research, was to point out that the FDA does put out misleading information on drugs they deem safe for the public. I am also reminded of Fen-Fen when it was approved and distributed for the public. We found out how truly bad it was later, but it was too late for some who used this drug. There was a time when phamacutical companies did not advertise drugs, now it’s become mainstream, and the public can be used to generate big dollars. our government does have a track record of not protecting the general public and when you begin to follow the money (because that is ususally the culprit), you find that everyone is connected. While i do appreciate your point of view, i don’t think hysterical is the proper word– but if this post created that emotion for you, my apologies. Have a great day, John– stop by anytime!

  3. Goodness, I didn’t mean to imply that your blog was hysterical! My apologies. I was thinking of the many blogs I see that ARE very hysterical–there are a good many that take wild speculation as fact. As a pediatrician with a vested interest (my daughter is 10) I try to google gardasil at least once a week and see if anything new has come up that I haven’t heard about.

    I encourage my patients and their parents to look at both sides of every story and make their own decisions unless it is an emergency, so I need to keep up with any questions that could come up.

    With respect to the FDA, I don’t think that you’re being quite fair. They are not psychic. Often the side effects come out only after long use, and if they,say, decided to wait to approve a drug that cured cancer they would be criticized for that, too. I don’t think the info they have provided about HPV is at all misleading although I would have preferred them to delay recommending Gardasil for routine use.

    I don’t believe the fen-phen combo was ever approved (nor are a lot of drugs approved for what they are prescribed for) although several diet drugs have been approved and then taken off the market because of severe side effects. The FDA has certainly made mistakes, but as I said, they are not psychic and I do not believe that they are simply in league with drug companies. For the record, I do not approve of drug advertising, but I also think that patients should inform themselves far more than they do and question doctors more. If a doctor isn’t prepared to discuss it, you need a new one.

    Anyway, good luck with your blog, and I do hope that the book you are selling is successful.

    • Hi John… i didn’t actually think you’d respond after my last reply, but so glad you did as well as knowing you’re a Dr. too! maybe i have not fully illustrated all of the points with my personal reservations on gardisal, but this drug did strike an alarm in me. Maybe we can invite you to give your expertise on the subject (we are continuing to gather experts in their fields). And before if forget… thanks for correcting me on my quick mis-spell of fen-phen! You see… to me, this blog is about putting forth the best information we can find for the general public, while not misleading them at the same time. It is a slippery area of discussion, but I’ve always maintained that if we DO get our information wrong, someone WILL rise to the surface and point us in a better direction (with more facts). We’ve never professed to be experts, nor will we… we only want to get involved and do our part (without hysteria). I hope you will agree (on some level) that our government (FDA in this discussion/debate) has failed the general public from time to time. I have a friend that i went to school with, who is now a surgeon… so i do respect the medical field. this posting was not an attack on medical professionals who do care and want the best information that is available for the health/care of the general public.

      if my summation with a posting of this subject envoked that– not only do i want to apologize to you personally, but my general viewers. again, our goal is to expose our research/studies in areas that have actually shown deception from the very entities that are suppose to be; “for us and by us”. we will always encourage individuals to do their own research. we want to be a “pivot” (for lack of a better word), not the pendulum. having travelled far and wide, i now take pride in a little scrutinizing of our government and its’ appointed officials. Totally diggin’ that you’re coming back to visit us and even challengining us too. I welcome that from anyone who can point us in a better direction with any information we extend. A special “thanks”, Dr. John (I hope you won’t mind me referring to you in that name)– this has really been a great discussion. I’m a god mother of a few young girls, so I sincerely extend an offer to become one of our experts on this subject. We do have a gmail account so if you have an email where we can respond further, we look forward to your follow up. We really do want to put “our best foot forward with any information/content” on this blog. With respect and thanks, “Dr. John”– the “Why O’ Why?” family.

    • Hi! Well, I’m flattered that you’d want my input but I’m no expert. I utilized a template available through wordpress. If you’re serious about consultation, I do know a heck of a graphic artist who’s really good at building websites. I could put you in touch…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s