Wednesday, April 17, 2024

A Vaccine Developer Reveals: HPV Vaccine Doesn’t Work and Poses Major Risks

Date:

Dr. Diane Harper, a leading HPV vaccine developer, had come forward with startling information. According to Dr. Harper, HPV vaccines do not offer significant protection against cancer and pose serious risks to those who receive them.

Despite its widespread use, the HPV vaccine has been linked to a number of serious side effects, including:

  • Severe allergic reactions
  • Chronic pain
  • Guillain-Barré syndrome
  • Fertility issues

These risks are not to be taken lightly, especially when weighed against the limited benefits of the vaccine. As a parent, it is crucial to carefully consider these potential dangers before making a decision about your child’s health.

As always, Stay informed, stay proactive, and prioritize your well-being above all else is the best course of action when it comes to making decisions about vaccinations and overall health.

Dr. Diane Harper lead researcher development of human papillomavirus shots, Gardasil and Cervarix. 

Dr. Diane Harper, a researcher who helped develop the Gardasil and Cervarix HPV vaccines. It notes that she was originally quoted in a UK newspaper saying that the HPV vaccine may be more dangerous than the cervical cancer it aims to prevent. However, after this, she retracted her statement and claimed she never said that. The document explores whether Dr. Diane Harper may have been pressured by pharmaceutical companies like Merck to change her story, as they have intimidated researchers in the past. It provides multiple other quotes from previous years where Dr. Harper expressed concerns about the safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccines. This suggests her original quotes to the newspaper were actually consistent with her past views.

‘Gardasil and Cervarix don’t work, are dangerous, weren’t tested.

2009: Dr. Diane Harper, lead researcher Merck’s Gardasil clinical trials, practicing OB/GYN

Dr. Harper made a surprising announcement at the 4th International Public Conference on Vaccination at Reston, Virginia Oct. 2nd-4th, 2009.

Her speech was supposed to promote Gardasil and Cervarix shots, instead turned on her corporate bosses in a very public way. When questioned about the presentation, audience members remarked they came away feeling that the shots should not be used.

Dr. Harper explained 70% resolve themselves without treatment in a year, rises to well over 90% in two years.

Over 69,000 girls reported adverse side effects from Gardasil alone to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (V.A.E.R.S.)

Guillian Barré Syndrome (paralysis lasting for years, or permanently, sometimes eventually causing suffocation), lupus, seizures, blood clots, and brain inflammation.

8 in every 10 women who have been sexually active will have H.P.V. at some stage of their life. Normally there are no symptoms, 98% of cases it clears itself. But in those cases where it doesn’t, and isn’t treated, it can lead to pre-cancerous cells which may develop into cervical cancer.”  – Dr. Diane Harper

One must understand how the establishment’s word games are played to truly understand the meaning of the above quote, and one needs to understand its unique version of “science”. When they report that untreated cases “can” lead to something that “may” lead to cervical cancer, it really means that the relationship is merely a hypothetical conjecture that is profitable if people actually believe it. In other words, there is no demonstrated relationship between the condition being vaccinated for and the rare cancers that the vaccine might prevent, but it is marketed to do that nonetheless. 

There is no evidence that the shots can prevent any cancer. From the manufacturer’s own admissions, the shot only works on 4 strains out of 40 for a specific venereal disease that dies on its own in a relatively short period, so the chance of it helping an individual is about the same as the chance of them being struck by a meteorite. 

Why do nine-year-old girls need shots for extremely rare and symptom-less venereal diseases that the immune system usually kills anyway?’

The document provides evidence that pharmaceutical companies like Merck have intimidated or threatened researchers in the past. It mentions that Merck drew up a “hit list” of doctors they sought to neutralize and that internal emails from Merck employees revealed discussions about seeking out and destroying doctors. Additionally, it states that Merck threatened or intimidated at least eight clinical investigators. The document also refers to court testimony in which Merck’s behavior was discussed. These instances suggest a pattern of intimidation and threats by Merck against researchers.

Ref: https://www.naturalnews.com/027116_Merck_doctors_vaccines.html

Dr. Harper has expressed several concerns about HPV vaccines in various media sources. Some of these concerns include:

  1. Doubts about the efficacy of the vaccine in younger age groups, particularly preteens and girls under 16.
  2. Fear that the vaccine’s aggressive marketing and lobbying for mandatory vaccination could lead to a public health experiment with unknown long-term effects.
  3. Warnings about the lack of evidence on the long-term safety and effectiveness of the vaccine, especially in younger girls.
  4. Concerns about the potential side effects of the vaccine and the lack of post-marketing surveillance to ensure its safety, particularly for young girls.
  5. Doubts about the vaccine’s long-term protection and its actual benefit to public health, especially in the absence of data showing a reduction in cervical cancers.

These concerns reflect Dr. Harper’s reservations about the HPV vaccine’s safety, efficacy, and the potential risks associated with its widespread use, particularly in younger age groups.

The document suggests that Dr. Diane Harper may have been pressured or threatened to retract her original interview quotes warning about the HPV vaccine for a few possible reasons:

1. It notes that Merck, the manufacturer of the Gardasil HPV vaccine, has a history of intimidating and threatening doctors and researchers who question the safety or efficacy of their vaccines.

2. It says Dr. Harper would have likely been contacted by Merck’s lawyers and “threatening people” urging her to retract her interview after it went public.

3. Facing potential blacklisting from the pharmaceutical industry for not going along with their “falsehoods”, it would have been a “fearful situation” for Dr. Harper’s career and livelihood.

4. The document highlights a court case where Merck was found to have threatened or intimidated at least eight clinical researchers. 

Dr. Harper was a clinical researcher, so could have been threatened as well. 5. In general, the document implies Dr. Harper may have felt pressure to retract in order to protect her career and reputation, rather than face potential retaliation from Merck. However, it notes this is speculative and can’t be proven definitively. So in summary, the main suggestion is that Dr. Harper was pressured, coerced or threatened by Merck into retracting her quotes due to their history of such tactics against dissenting doctors and researchers. But the document acknowledges it can’t prove this conclusively.

The document provides context about Merck’s past behaviors that could relate to the situation with Dr. Harper. It mentions that Merck has a documented history of intimidating doctors and scientists, violating the law, and engaging in thuggish acts. It also refers to Merck setting up offshore bank accounts to avoid paying billions in U.S. taxes. Additionally, it highlights that Merck drew up a “hit list” of doctors they sought to neutralize and that internal emails from Merck employees revealed discussions about seeking out and destroying doctors. Furthermore, it states that Merck threatened or intimidated at least eight clinical investigators. These instances suggest a pattern of behavior by Merck that includes intimidation, threats, and unethical practices, which could be relevant to the situation with Dr. Harper.

Natural News: The news stories quoting Dr. Diane Harper (with links)

(Hurry, save off these web pages before Big Pharma intimidates these news outlets into removing these stories, too! Seriously. Somebody save these…)

May, 2008 – Gardasil Researcher Criticizes Moves to Make HPV Vaccine Mandatory
http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/3046

Dr. Harper, who has dedicated two decades of her career to research on HPV, told Florida TV station WFOR-TV that the rush to recommend and mandate the vaccination of very young girls “went too fast without any breaks.” Dr. Harper says that there has not been enough post-marketing surveillance of Gardasil to insure that it is free of side effects that could prove particularly dangerous to young girls. “We don’t know yet what’s going to happen when millions of doses of the vaccine have been given and to put in place a process that says you must have this vaccine, it means you must be part of a big public experiment. So we can’t do that until we have more data.” Dr. Harper said.

August, 2009 – CBS News – Gardasil Researcher Speaks Out
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/08/19/cbsnews_investigates/main5253431.shtml

Amid questions about the safety of the HPV vaccine Gardasil one of the lead researchers for the Merck drug is speaking out about its risks, benefits and aggressive marketing. 

Dr. Diane Harper says young girls and their parents should receive more complete warnings before receiving the vaccine to prevent cervical cancer. Dr. Harper helped design and carry out the Phase II and Phase III safety and effectiveness studies to get Gardasil approved, and authored many of the published, scholarly papers about it. She has been a paid speaker and consultant to Merck. It’s highly unusual for a researcher to publicly criticize a medicine or vaccine she helped get approved. 

Dr. Harper joins a number of consumer watchdogs, vaccine safety advocates, and parents who question the vaccine’s risk-versus-benefit profile. She says data available for Gardasil shows that it lasts five years; there is no data showing that it remains effective beyond five years.”

“If we vaccinate 11 year olds and the protection doesn’t last… We’ve put them at harm from side effects, small but real, for no benefit,” says Dr. Harper. “The benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers…”

She also says that enough serious side effects have been reported after Gardasil use that the vaccine could prove riskier than the cervical cancer it purports to prevent. Cervical cancer is usually entirely curable when detected early through normal Pap screenings.

March, 2009 – US News & World Report – Is Gardasil More Effective in Older Teens?
http://health.usnews.com/blogs/on-women/2009/03/30/is-gardasil-more-effective-in-older-teens.html

Harper told me then that the vaccine’s efficacy hadn’t been tested in anyone under age 16, and she wasn’t sure whether it even worked in preteens.

“I think there’s a strong possibility that Gardasil was the catalyst that set off the ALS [Lou Gehrig’s Disease],” Harper says. “It could have been the straw that broke the camel’s back in a child who was already predisposed to the condition.”

“I do think it’s wrong for physicians to tell parents that it’s 100 percent safe.” She also has previously spoken publicly about her impression that Merck was too aggressive in marketing the vaccine to preteens and in lobbying state legislators to make Gardasil mandatory for young girls.

May, 2007 – MedicalNewsToday – Efficacy Of HPV Vaccine Gardasil Among Women Previously Infected With HPV Lower Than Expected, Study Says
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/70581.php

“…neither physicians nor women should be lulled into a false sense of security” by the vaccine. “I don’t think this is the gun that is going to take cervical cancer off the map,” Harper said (quoted from Los Angeles Times, 5/10/2007)

March, 2007 – Alliance for Human Research Protection – HPV Vaccine Researcher Blasts Mandatory Marketing
http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/503/27/

Dr. Diane M. Harper, a lead researcher in the development of the humanpapilloma virus vaccine, who says giving the drug to 11-year-old girls “is a great big public health experiment.”

“It is silly to mandate vaccination of 11- to 12-year-old girls There also is not enough evidence gathered on side effects to know that safety is not an issue.”

All of her trials have been with subjects ages 15 to 25. “This vaccine has not been tested in little girls for efficacy. At 11, these girls don’t get cervical cancer – they won’t know for 25 years if they will get cervical cancer.”

Dr. Harper said, Merck was required to put together a database on the efficacy in children before Gardasil was approved. But instead, the company put together four study sites that “are not necessarily representative, and may not even have enough numbers to determine what they need to know.”

She said that vaccinating little girls now is not going to protect them later. “To mandate now is simply to Merck’s benefit, and only to Merck’s benefit,” she said.

Dr. Harper said, she’s been trying for months to convince major television and print media to listen to her and tell the facts about the usefulness and effectiveness of this vaccine. “But no one will print it,” she said.

August, 2008 – The Health Sciences Institute – Could the Gardasil vaccine actually help increase cervical cancer rates?
Ref: http://hsibaltimore.com/2008/08/27/could-the-gardasil-vaccine-actually-help-increase-cervical-cancer-rates/

Even though Dr. Harper believes in the vaccine, she does not think it should be mandated for young girls. She also told me about several concerns she has surrounding public perception of the vaccine, including this stunner: Dr. Harper is afraid that the way the vaccine is being presented could actually have the effect of increasing the rate of cervical cancer in the U.S.

Dr. Harper DID say the vaccines don’t work!

What’s obvious from all this is that the Sunday Express article is clearly consistent with the public statements Dr. Diane Harper made over the last several years:

• She has expressed concern that the vaccine may not work, stating, in effect, that it could have no effect on cervical cancer rates, especially in the short term.

• She has expressed concern that the way the vaccine is marketed may end up increasing cervical cancer rates in women.

• She has characterized the vaccines as an “experiment” on numerous occasions, even while pointing out the profit motive of the vaccine manufacturer.

• She has stated that the vaccine could have “set off” a serious neurological disorder known as ALS.

• She has stated that the vaccine has “no benefit” to public health, and yet it presents a very real risk of harming the public.

It should be clear at this point that the statements attributed to Dr. Harper by Sunday Expressare entirely consistent with Dr. Harper’s position in previous interviews found in numerous other publications.

Given this evidence, it seems extremely unlikely that the Sunday Express fabricated their story. And even if they did, it must have been carefully fabricated to seem 100% consistent with what Dr. Harper has already said about vaccine safety in the past. And that’s not exactly the same class of fabrication, is it? If you restate things that are already true, that’s quite different from engineering total falsehoods.

From all this, it’s clear that Dr. Harper is an informed, concerned researcher who isn’t buying Merck’s disease mongering nonsense. But a question still lingers: Did someone get to her?

Source: MICHIGAN MEDICINE- Image, Wikipedia, UMKC-Image, Thepeoplesvoice

Also Read:

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related articles

Medical errors and Vaccine injuries are just as deadly as any disease.

Are hospitals really as safe as we think they are? According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the...

Governor Signs Climate Engineering Ban Legislation Into Law

Tennessee Governor Bill Lee has now signed legislation into law that bans any form of climate engineering operations...

IMA vs Ramdev: Why what’s good or bad for the goose should be good or bad for the gander

Dr. (Prof) Amitav Banerjee, Epidemiologist Universal Health Organisation (UHO), Chairman Postdoctoral in epidemiology, who was a field epidemiologist for over...