Gute Info-Sammlung über Pressemeldungen zur HPV-Impfung: HPV-Impfung ist MORD
Hunderte HPV-Impfopfer demonstrierten am 09.07.2018 in Dublin, als Prof. Ian Frazier, einer der Impfstoff-Entwickler, eine Rede hielt. Während der Demo wurden zwei Impfgeschädigte krank, zwei bekamen epileptische Anfälle und kamen ins Krankenhaus.
Die Mainstreammedien haben diese Demo mal weitgehend verschwiegen, wie meist bei impfkritschen Demos.
Dieser Beitrag auf der Facebook-Seite Impfkritik-Impffrei.
Zulassungsschwindel bei HPV-Impfstoff
“Wenn Sie die Illusion tiefer erforschen, und Sie feststellen, daß die FDA diesen HPV-Impfstoff ohne den vorgeschriebenen klinischen Nachweis zugelassen hat, dann fangen Sie an zu begreifen, daß es keine einzige Studie gibt, die beweist, daß der HPV-Impfstoff auch nur in einem einzigen Fall Gebärmutterhals-Krebs verhindert hat.”
– Sayer Ji, Vaccines Revealed
Keine valide Post-Market Surveillance möglich!
Die gefährliche HPV-Impfung
“Wenn eine Impfung nicht das Gehirn beeinflussen kann, wie kann sie dann bei so vielen Menschen Bewußtseinsbeeinträchtigungen verursachen, die sie sogar im Beipackzettel benennen müssen?”
– Mike Adams (“The Health Ranger”)
Studie: Wie hoch der Antikörper-Titer für einen Impfschutz sein muß, ist unbekannt!
Der Impfschutz der HPV-Impfung beruht auf dem überholten Modell aus dem 19. Jahrhundert von Antigen-Antikörper-Reaktionen. Man mißt einen AK-Titer und behauptet, das sei ein Impfschutz.
Genau so gut könnten Autohersteller einen Unfallschutz-Auto bewerben und behaupten, eine rote Lackierung schützte vor Unfällen. Und kaufen sich zig Experten und Studien, die dies belegen. Ein paar zerbeulte rote Autos werden als Zufall und Unfallversager wegerklärt. Und wenn, dann lag der Unfall nicht an der mangelnden Wirkung der roten Farbe, sondern am falschen Fahrverhalten des Autofahrers.
Bis jetzt kann auch niemand sagen, wie hoch der Titer, eine willkürliche Ersatz-Meßgröße, sein muß, damit das Impfgift wirkt und von Böse auf angeblich Gut umschlägt. So hat man Zeit gewonnen. Wenn doch ein Experte, den man nicht anderweitig ausbremsen konnte, das aufdeckt, dann behauptet man einfach, der Titerwert sei noch nicht hoch genug. Dann hat man wieder fünf Jahre Ruhe. Bis dahin haben sie sich neue Ausreden zusammengefälscht. Und weitere Milliarden verdient. Tausende weitere impfgeschädigte Töchter, die zu Hause mit Ganzkörper-Schmerzen im Bett jammern oder gelähmt im Rollstuhl sitzen, sieht keiner!
Foto: Springer Verlag, fair use.
Merck wurde in einem Gerichtsverfahren vorgeworfen, den HPV-Impfstoff durchgepeitscht zu haben. 85.000 gemeldete Impfschäden in der VigiAccess database sprechen eine deutliche Sprache.
Merck soll die Öffentlichkeit über Sicherheit und Wirksamkeit getäuscht haben, die Vorwürfe sind hier aufgelistet:
Merck Accused Of Deceiving Public With HPV Vaccine In Court Case
(Merck beschuldigt, die Öffentlichkeit vor Gericht getäuscht zu haben)
https://vaxxter.com/merck-accused-of-deceiving-public-with-hpv-vaccine-in-court-case/ (26.09.2019: offline)
Foto: Vaxxter, fair use.
Artikel hier als pdf: Merck Accused Of Deceiving Public With HPV Vaccine In Court Case – Vaxxter
Artikel hier re-blogged:
Merck Accused Of Deceiving Public With HPV Vaccine In Court Case
POSTED BY: VAXXTER STAFF 06/07/2018
The HPV vaccine continues to be one of the most controversial vaccines in history. Numerously reported side-effects stemming from the Gardasil shot have caused parents worldwide to clamor at the thought of giving it to their teenage children. New Jersey, in fact, is attempting to make the HPV vaccine mandatory, which tells you just about everything you need to know about how parents likely feel over the matter.
In 2018 already, there have been 85,329 reports of adverse reactions to the HPV vaccine, as reported by the VigiAccess database.
Now, Merck is being accused of “fast-tracking” the Gardasil vaccine, according to GreenMedInfo.
Back in 2016, a California family filed a complaint with the Superior Court of the State of California against Gardasil maker, Merck. They claim that their daughter received the Gardasil shot three times over the course of a year starting in 2010. The girl, over the next few years, would be diagnosed with POTS and later on, a small fiber neuropathy that affected her entire body.
Her family became convinced that their daughter’s health issues stemmed from the Gardasil shots she took in the years prior. The family has accused Merck of deceitful marketing practices and rushing the drug to market.
“Upon approval by the FDA of the Gardasil vaccine, Defendants Merck, Does 1 through 25, and each of them commenced and engaged in highly extensive, and aggressive marketing practices, which were designed primarily, if not solely, to increase the sales and profits from Gardasil. In doing so, Defendants Merck, Does 1 through 25, and each of them, in order to preclude any and all questions by consumers, patients and others, as to the effectiveness, safety and need for the administration of the Gardasil vaccination as well as the risks of serious adverse reaction related thereto, intentionally, wrongfully and deceitfully withheld, failed to provide and concealed from consumers, patients and others material facts and information with respect to the effectiveness, safety and need for the administration of the Gardasil vaccination, as well as the risks of serious adverse reaction related thereto and as in part hereafter set forth.” (own emphasis)
“Further, Defendants Merck and Does 1through 25 in its Marketing wrongfully and deceitfully failed to unambiguously inform those to whom the marketing was directed, of material facts and information which they knew or should have ascertained through their investigations and studies specific to risk/ benefit and quantitative risk assessments regarding and including, among other things, the following:
1. The five-year period that the Gardasil vaccine was then only known to be effective;
2. That Gardasil was effective only as to certain and not other strains of the HPV virus;
3. The Gardasil vaccine is not effective once an individual is infected with the HPV virus;
4. Other existing methods that are effective in avoiding HPV viral infections;
5. The minimal risk that even once the individual was infected with the HPV virus the infection would result in precancerous lesions;
6. The successfulness of exiting methods of diagnosing and treating HPV precancerous lesions;
7. The successfulness of exiting methods of diagnosing and treating any resulting cancer;
8. The nature as the consequences of serious adverse reactions to the HPV vaccine; and
9. Other items related and material to risk/benefit and quantitative risk assessments not now known and if required leave of Court will be requested to amend this complaint to set forth fully such item or items when ascertained
Such information was and is reasonably required by patients and consumers as well as others when considering and deciding whether or not under their individual and personal circumstances to be vaccinated with Gardasil.”
The judge agreed to a full day of discussions involving scientific experts to speak to the Gardasil vaccines chemistry. The plaintiff provided a number of expert analysis before the judge, much of which contrasts today’s HPV marketing pitch that asserts HPV causes cancer.
“There are approximately 130 strains of the HPV virus, of which only 15 to 18 strains are known to be associated with cervical cancer. The Gardasil vaccine provides protection against only 4 specific strains, namely HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18. Strains 16 and 18 are thought to be casually associated with 70 % of the worldwide HPV related cervical cancers. HPV 6 & 11 are associated with warts.
As stated, ninety-five (95%) percent of HPV infections are removed from the body by its own immune and related processes without medical or other consequences. Any abnormal cell growth associated with the remaining 5%, approximately 20% (1% of the total), if not identified and removed could be at risk of developing into cancerous cells in approximately 5 years which could progress to irreversible cancer in 15 to 30 years. The incidence of cervical cancer occurring in the United States is estimated to be 1.4 to 2.3 per 100,000. The risk of precancerous cells, due to the presence of the HPV 16 and 18 viruses, progressing to cervical cancer is estimated at 1.5 per 100,000. The actual incidence rate of serious adverse events after HPV vaccination is unknown.”
“Initially, qGardasil is not a treatment process and does not prevent cancer as marketed by Merck. Gardasil is a vaccine designed to increase the response of the Human Immune system to pathogens namely HPV viruses 6, 11, 16 & 18.”
“The foregoing is merely illustrative of the complex and extensive scientific factors involved in this litigation. Although the purpose of Science Day it to provide the Court with information as to the nature and extent of the complex scientific matters involved, it is necessary to connect these matters to a foundation rooted in the facts of the case before the Court, which may be construed as argument.
Scientific issues not addressed in this Brief, which are relevant to the safety, efficacy/effectiveness, need and risk/benefits of qGardasil include, without limitations, the following:
1. Fast tracking of the FDA approval process to a 6-month period when criteria for fast tracking were not met.
2. Five-year effectiveness of qGardasil as of 1/1/2011, now believed to be 8 years.
3. Use of end points which did not establish the effectiveness of qGardasil.
4. Effect on the clinical trial analysis of the removal of participants experiencing adverse and serious adverse events.
5. The effect of non – HPV 16 and 18 cancer producing strains on cervical cancer occurrence when HPV 16 and 18 are eliminated.
6. Lack of adequate pediatric clinical testing of the qGardasil regarding potential ovarian disorders/failures.
7. The effect of clinical testing and studies involving undeveloped countries on U.S. analysis.”
Merck’s response came up short in any way to counter the plaintiff’s scientific submissions.
“At Science Day, Merck intends to provide the Court with: (1) an overview of The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, and their impact on the present litigation; (2) background information about the development and approval of vaccines and, specifically, Gardasil, in the United States; and (3) a detailed review of the extensive safety data that established and has continually reaffirmed the safety profile of Gardasil.”
“Although plaintiff alleges a moving target of injuries and purportedly related symptoms, Merck’s Science Day presentations will address the three on which plaintiff currently seems most focused; autoimmune diseases, demyelinating diseases, and Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (“POTS”). A preview of the data concerning Gardasil and these conditions is set forth herein.”
But Merck’s main play in the matter was absolutely stunning. Rather than scientifically dispute the matter, the giant pharmaceutical company decided to slander and discredit an antivaccination site, SaneVax, to attempt to detach themselves from the submitted evidence showing Gardasil’s ill-effect potential and the lack of percentage chances that HPV causes cervical cancer.
This is hardly a scientific approach and only serves to discredit Merck.
—–
Siehe auch den verschwundenen, aber re-bloggedten Artikel: Athlete Confined To Wheelchair After Her Third Gardasil Vaccine Takes Merck To Court
Zusammenfassung der Klage von HPV-Impfopfer Jennifer Robi gegen Merck:
Helena Lobato: Merck in court over Gardasil
15.05.2019: Gardasil Vaccine on Trial: Attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Exposes Merck Corruption
Leonard Coldwell: Dr. HPV Vaccine Used as Population Control?
Siehe auch: Impfen und Bevölkerungskontrolle.
Schweden: Zunahme der Fälle von zervikalem Krebs unter den Geimpften mit HPV-Virus-Impfstoff
“In dieser Studie, die am 30. April 2018 veröffentlicht wurde, hat das Zentrum für die Prävention von Gebärmutterhalskrebs in Schweden in seinem Jahresbericht einen deutlichen Anstieg der Inzidenz des invasiven Dysplasie-Karzinoms festgestellt, insbesondere in den beiden Jahren 2014 und 2015. Ich habe die Daten nach Alter aufgeteilt, und zwar unter Verwendung der gleichen statistischen Datenbank des nationalen Gesundheitsrats, wie sie von den Autoren des oben genannten Berichts verwendet wird.
Die Zunahme der Inzidenz von Gebärmutterhalskrebs war bei Frauen im Alter von 20 bis 49 Jahren bedeutender, während bei Frauen über 50 Jahren kein offensichtlicher Anstieg beobachtet wurde. Die FDA hat in klinischen Studien, mit denen der HPV-Impfstoff zugelassen wurde, eine Zunahme an Zellveränderungen im Vergleich zu Placebo-Kontrollen festgestellt. Es wird darüber diskutiert, ob die HPV-Impfung eine Rolle bei der Erhöhung der Inzidenz von Gebärmutterhalskrebs spielen und ob sie zu einer Verhinderung der Gebärmutterhalskrebs-Erkrankung bei Frauen führen kann, die zuvor HPV ausgesetzt waren.
Es besteht ein zeitlicher Zusammenhang zwischen dem Beginn der Impfung und dem Anstieg der Inzidenz von Gebärmutterhalskrebs. Die HPV-Impfstoffe wurden in den Jahren 2006 und 2007 genehmigt, und die meisten Mädchen begannen 2012-2013 mit den HPV-Impfungen. Hier können sie die Studie herunterladen:
increased_incidence.pdf
Quelle: Davide Suraci, 21.05.2018.
Siehe auch: HPV-Impfschäden.