Cynthia A. Janak
Talking about the HPV vaccine is now called fear mongering and morally indefensible
By Cynthia A. Janak
The more the media reports the more times I get to laugh at their statements. They have not and I do not think that they will ever study the reports like I have and many others have. They are not presenting the other side of this whole debate because that is what it has become a debate of vaccine safety.
Out of all the articles out there reporting on this I picked The Journal Gazette from Fort Wayne, Indiana mainly because it is right next door to the state I live in.
First off I want to agree with them on the first statement they made. "If Republican presidential candidates want to debate sexual health and hygiene, it would be nice if they displayed more collective knowledge..." Very true I wish they had more knowledge of the HPV vaccines. I would be willing to inform them on the facts and the science to back it all up if they would like to come to Illinois and book a conference room. They will have all the information to make an educated decision whether to pursue this issue in their platform. The issue would be vaccine and medical reform.
Paragraph 4 is really interesting to me because I have been researching this since February of 2007. I sure wish they would do some research before writing on a topic that they have little knowledge of in my opinion. Here is the quote.
"There is, however, a vaccine that is highly effective against the most dangerous HPV strains. Its main side effect — as you'd expect when sticking a needle into a preteen girl — is fainting. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that all girls should get it anyway."
Agreed, according to the documents presented to the FDA it would appear that it is effective. But In my articles of September 19, 2011, September 20, 2011, I have shown what I believe are fatal flaws in the documents presented to the FDA and that certain classes of young people are omitted from the clinical trial studies but the vaccines when approved are administered to that class anyway. So it is my opinion that the results are set to create a certain outcome because if a true population with all its medical flaws are used, I believe that the vaccine would not be approved or the study continued.
The other part of this that gets me is the reference to pre-teen girls. This is so chauvinistic and condescending that it makes me cringe. One of the things that we know from investigating the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Reporting System) reports is that it is noted in some that there is a serious drop in blood pressure reported. This would and could cause the fainting by the young people.
The fainting that is mentioned is called syncope. Here is a reference taken from the Merck website. To quote from the Merck Professional: Syncope is a sudden, brief loss of consciousness (LOC) with loss of postural tone followed by spontaneous revival. The patient is motionless and limp and usually has cool extremities, a weak pulse, and shallow breathing.
Near-syncope is light-headedness and a sense of an impending faint without LOC. It is usually classified and discussed with syncope because the causes are the same.
Seizures can cause sudden LOC but are not considered syncope. However, seizures must be considered in patients presenting for apparent syncope because history may be unclear or unavailable, and some seizures do not cause tonic-clonic convulsions. Furthermore, a brief (< 5 sec) seizure sometimes occurs with true syncope.
Diagnosis depends on a careful history, eyewitness account, or fortuitous examination during the event.
Key Points
I want you take note here to the last item which states: If a benign etiology is not clear, driving and use of machinery should be prohibited.
I have a question for you. Do doctors allow patients that have received the vaccination and had an experience like referenced above to drive their car? I believe that you would have to answer yes. I can say this because of conversations I have had with individuals over the years who have told me they "drove home."
Another question is how many young people have been in a car accident at any time after receiving the vaccination? We do not know that but it would be interesting to find out.
A little more about the science behind the vaccinations.
What they are supposed to do is create an immune response to the antigen in the vaccine. Now what if the person has allergies? This could mean that they just may have a hypersensitivity disorder of Type 1.
Type I: Type I reactions (immediate hypersensitivity) are IgE-mediated. Antigen binds to IgE (which is bound to tissue mast cells and blood basophils), triggering release of preformed mediators (eg, histamine, proteases, chemotactic factors) and synthesis of other mediators (eg, prostaglandins, leukotrienes, platelet-activating factor, cytokines). These mediators cause VASODILATION, increased capillary permeability, mucus hypersecretion, smooth muscle spasm, and tissue infiltration with eosinophils, type 2 helper T cells (TH2), and other inflammatory cells. Type I reactions underlie atopic disorders (eg, allergic asthma, rhinitis, conjunctivitis) and latex and some food allergies.
Now if a person is prone to this disorder via a family history of allergies then the following could hold true, it is my belief.
Pathophysiology
When allergen binds to IgE-sensitized mast cells and basophils, histamine is released from their intracellular granules. Mast cells are widely distributed but are most concentrated in skin, lungs, and GI mucosa; histamine facilitates inflammation and is the primary mediator of clinical atopy. Physical disruption of tissue and various substances (eg, tissue irritants, opioids, surface-active agents, complement components C3a and C5a) can trigger histamine release directly, independent of IgE.
Histamine causes the following:
Type IV: Type IV reactions (delayed hypersensitivity) are T cell — mediated. There are 4 subtypes based on the T-cell subpopulation involved:
I have spoken and communicated with many young women who did faint (syncope) after the vaccination. Upon further communications I was told by them that they have NEVER fainted when they received previous vaccinations. Do you believe that they all lied and that their parents lie about such a thing? I do not believe so.
Those that drove by themselves to the doctor's office were allowed to drive home after they recovered which is contrary to the recommendations above.
There is another fact that you do not know about the HPV vaccine and that is that the aluminum adjuvant formulated HPV VLP vaccine elicited a predominantly T helper type 2 response. Why is this important? Go back to Type I reactions above where it mentions the Th2. I am going to go back to the Merck Manual for this quote: ...and a TH2 response promotes IgE production and development of allergic disorders...
I am going to point out something with regards to allergies. This will also be taken from the Merck Manual. Then go back to the top under Pathophysiology.
Type I hypersensitivity reactions underlie all atopic and many allergic disorders.
The terms atopy and allergy are often used interchangeably but are different:
To go further with this line of thought, I am going to reference asthma because it is very common among our youth of today.
Asthma :
Genetic and environmental components may interact by determining the balance between T h 1 and T h 2 cell lineages. Infants may be born with a predisposition toward proallergic and proinflammatory T h 2 immune responses, characterized by growth and activation of eosinophils and IgE production.
Trends in developed countries toward smaller families with fewer children, cleaner indoor environments, and early use of vaccinations and antibiotics may deprive children of these T h 2-suppressing, tolerance-inducing exposures and may partly explain the continuous increase in asthma prevalence in developed countries (the hygiene hypothesis).
Now let me put this together for you. The HPV vaccine targets the Th2 immune response which in itself is pro-allergic and pro-inflammatory. In patients with asthma, T h 2 cells and other cell types — notably, eosinophils and mast cells, but also other CD4+ subtypes and neutrophils — form an extensive inflammatory infiltrate... The Th2 stimulates IgE immune response (another inflammatory) which activates histamine receptors (inflammatory) and eosinophils (more inflammation).
What could this mean in an infant? We are administering vaccines hours after birth.
Environmental factors:
Genetic and environmental components may interact by determining the balance between T h 1 and T h 2 cell lineages. Infants may be born with a predisposition toward proallergic and proinflammatory T h 2 immune responses, characterized by growth and activation of eosinophils and IgE production.
So these children have the potential to be predisposed at birth to this pro-inflammatory component. We administer a vaccine to their immature immune system. Which could hyper-stimulate the immune system therefore causing Th2, elevated IgE and eosinophils. From what I have read this sounds like the perfect cytokine storm.
Okay done with that dry scientific stuff from a lay person.
Further in the article this is said: A second objection to routine HPV vaccination concerns parental rights. Bachmann confused this issue by introducing anti-vaccine paranoia — one of the most direct and practical ways that a public official can undermine the health of his or her fellow citizens.
By this comment are you advocating that the parents have no right to protect their own child from what they may deem as unproven and possibly an unsafe vaccination? I have communicated with parents about that and many said that they would rather wait until the vaccine was around for a while to see the effects and if it works. That seems very reasonable to me of a conscientious parent.
The last comment that I am going to bring up in your article is just this: But the public health case for vaccination is similar for diseases spread by coughing...
One of the little known items is that vaccines, depending on type, after they are administered shed the virus via coughing or sneezing or other bodily fluids. That puts the public at risk for 21 days after administration of the vaccine. So in essence these people should quarantine themselves from the population for that time. That would lessen the possibility of an elderly or infant contracting the disease through shedding from a vaccinated person. It is also my opinion that those people should not be allowed to fly or be in a public place for that time for the safety of the public as a whole, vaccinated and unvaccinated.
Please, the next time you write an article like this one do some research first and present both sides of the issue.
I want to thank Merck for their excellent website. The information that is available is concise and very well referenced. Good job.
Interests: I am a board member of the Truth About Gardasil and have no other affiliations with any other group.
References were
http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1097753
Kinetics and isotype profile of antibody responses in rhesus macaques induced following vaccination with HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18 L1-virus-like particles formulated with or without Merck aluminum adjuvant
Vaccine and Biologics Research Merck Research Laboratories 466 Devon Park Dr. Wayne, PA 19087-8630 USA
Vaccine and Biologics Research Merck Research Laboratories West Point, PA 19486 USA
J Immune Based Ther Vaccines. 2005; 3: 2.
Published online 2005 April 20. doi: 10.1186/1476-8518-3-2
PMCID: PMC1097753
Copyright © 2005 Ruiz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
© Cynthia A. Janak
September 21, 2011
The more the media reports the more times I get to laugh at their statements. They have not and I do not think that they will ever study the reports like I have and many others have. They are not presenting the other side of this whole debate because that is what it has become a debate of vaccine safety.
Out of all the articles out there reporting on this I picked The Journal Gazette from Fort Wayne, Indiana mainly because it is right next door to the state I live in.
First off I want to agree with them on the first statement they made. "If Republican presidential candidates want to debate sexual health and hygiene, it would be nice if they displayed more collective knowledge..." Very true I wish they had more knowledge of the HPV vaccines. I would be willing to inform them on the facts and the science to back it all up if they would like to come to Illinois and book a conference room. They will have all the information to make an educated decision whether to pursue this issue in their platform. The issue would be vaccine and medical reform.
Paragraph 4 is really interesting to me because I have been researching this since February of 2007. I sure wish they would do some research before writing on a topic that they have little knowledge of in my opinion. Here is the quote.
"There is, however, a vaccine that is highly effective against the most dangerous HPV strains. Its main side effect — as you'd expect when sticking a needle into a preteen girl — is fainting. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that all girls should get it anyway."
Agreed, according to the documents presented to the FDA it would appear that it is effective. But In my articles of September 19, 2011, September 20, 2011, I have shown what I believe are fatal flaws in the documents presented to the FDA and that certain classes of young people are omitted from the clinical trial studies but the vaccines when approved are administered to that class anyway. So it is my opinion that the results are set to create a certain outcome because if a true population with all its medical flaws are used, I believe that the vaccine would not be approved or the study continued.
The other part of this that gets me is the reference to pre-teen girls. This is so chauvinistic and condescending that it makes me cringe. One of the things that we know from investigating the VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Reporting System) reports is that it is noted in some that there is a serious drop in blood pressure reported. This would and could cause the fainting by the young people.
The fainting that is mentioned is called syncope. Here is a reference taken from the Merck website. To quote from the Merck Professional: Syncope is a sudden, brief loss of consciousness (LOC) with loss of postural tone followed by spontaneous revival. The patient is motionless and limp and usually has cool extremities, a weak pulse, and shallow breathing.
Near-syncope is light-headedness and a sense of an impending faint without LOC. It is usually classified and discussed with syncope because the causes are the same.
Seizures can cause sudden LOC but are not considered syncope. However, seizures must be considered in patients presenting for apparent syncope because history may be unclear or unavailable, and some seizures do not cause tonic-clonic convulsions. Furthermore, a brief (< 5 sec) seizure sometimes occurs with true syncope.
Diagnosis depends on a careful history, eyewitness account, or fortuitous examination during the event.
Key Points
- Syncope results from global CNS dysfunction, usually from insufficient cerebral blood flow.
Most syncope results from benign causes. - If a benign etiology is not clear, driving and use of machinery should be prohibited until the etiology is determined and treated — the next manifestation of an unrecognized cardiac cause may be fatal.
Some less common causes involve cardiac arrhythmia or outflow obstruction and are serious or potentially fatal.
Vasovagal syncope usually has an apparent trigger, warning symptoms, and a few minutes of postrecovery symptoms.
Syncope from cardiac arrhythmias typically occurs abruptly and with quick recovery.
Seizures have a prolonged (eg, hours) recovery period.
I want you take note here to the last item which states: If a benign etiology is not clear, driving and use of machinery should be prohibited.
I have a question for you. Do doctors allow patients that have received the vaccination and had an experience like referenced above to drive their car? I believe that you would have to answer yes. I can say this because of conversations I have had with individuals over the years who have told me they "drove home."
Another question is how many young people have been in a car accident at any time after receiving the vaccination? We do not know that but it would be interesting to find out.
A little more about the science behind the vaccinations.
What they are supposed to do is create an immune response to the antigen in the vaccine. Now what if the person has allergies? This could mean that they just may have a hypersensitivity disorder of Type 1.
Type I: Type I reactions (immediate hypersensitivity) are IgE-mediated. Antigen binds to IgE (which is bound to tissue mast cells and blood basophils), triggering release of preformed mediators (eg, histamine, proteases, chemotactic factors) and synthesis of other mediators (eg, prostaglandins, leukotrienes, platelet-activating factor, cytokines). These mediators cause VASODILATION, increased capillary permeability, mucus hypersecretion, smooth muscle spasm, and tissue infiltration with eosinophils, type 2 helper T cells (TH2), and other inflammatory cells. Type I reactions underlie atopic disorders (eg, allergic asthma, rhinitis, conjunctivitis) and latex and some food allergies.
Now if a person is prone to this disorder via a family history of allergies then the following could hold true, it is my belief.
Pathophysiology
When allergen binds to IgE-sensitized mast cells and basophils, histamine is released from their intracellular granules. Mast cells are widely distributed but are most concentrated in skin, lungs, and GI mucosa; histamine facilitates inflammation and is the primary mediator of clinical atopy. Physical disruption of tissue and various substances (eg, tissue irritants, opioids, surface-active agents, complement components C3a and C5a) can trigger histamine release directly, independent of IgE.
Histamine causes the following:
- Local VASODILATION (causing erythema )
Increased capillary permeability and edema (producing a wheal)
Surrounding arteriolar VASODILATION mediated by neuronal reflex mechanisms (causing flare)
Stimulation of sensory nerves (causing itching)
Smooth muscle contraction in the airways (bronchoconstriction) and in the GI tract (increasing GI motility)
Increased salivary and bronchial gland secretions
Type IV: Type IV reactions (delayed hypersensitivity) are T cell — mediated. There are 4 subtypes based on the T-cell subpopulation involved:
- IVa: Type 1 helper T cells
- IVb: Type 2 helper T cells
- IVc: Cytotoxic T cells
- IVd: IL-8 — secreting T cells
I have spoken and communicated with many young women who did faint (syncope) after the vaccination. Upon further communications I was told by them that they have NEVER fainted when they received previous vaccinations. Do you believe that they all lied and that their parents lie about such a thing? I do not believe so.
Those that drove by themselves to the doctor's office were allowed to drive home after they recovered which is contrary to the recommendations above.
There is another fact that you do not know about the HPV vaccine and that is that the aluminum adjuvant formulated HPV VLP vaccine elicited a predominantly T helper type 2 response. Why is this important? Go back to Type I reactions above where it mentions the Th2. I am going to go back to the Merck Manual for this quote: ...and a TH2 response promotes IgE production and development of allergic disorders...
I am going to point out something with regards to allergies. This will also be taken from the Merck Manual. Then go back to the top under Pathophysiology.
Type I hypersensitivity reactions underlie all atopic and many allergic disorders.
The terms atopy and allergy are often used interchangeably but are different:
- Atopy is an exaggerated IgE-mediated immune response; all atopic disorders are type I hypersensitivity disorders.
- Allergy is any exaggerated immune response to a foreign antigen regardless of mechanism.
To go further with this line of thought, I am going to reference asthma because it is very common among our youth of today.
Asthma :
Genetic and environmental components may interact by determining the balance between T h 1 and T h 2 cell lineages. Infants may be born with a predisposition toward proallergic and proinflammatory T h 2 immune responses, characterized by growth and activation of eosinophils and IgE production.
Trends in developed countries toward smaller families with fewer children, cleaner indoor environments, and early use of vaccinations and antibiotics may deprive children of these T h 2-suppressing, tolerance-inducing exposures and may partly explain the continuous increase in asthma prevalence in developed countries (the hygiene hypothesis).
Now let me put this together for you. The HPV vaccine targets the Th2 immune response which in itself is pro-allergic and pro-inflammatory. In patients with asthma, T h 2 cells and other cell types — notably, eosinophils and mast cells, but also other CD4+ subtypes and neutrophils — form an extensive inflammatory infiltrate... The Th2 stimulates IgE immune response (another inflammatory) which activates histamine receptors (inflammatory) and eosinophils (more inflammation).
What could this mean in an infant? We are administering vaccines hours after birth.
Environmental factors:
Genetic and environmental components may interact by determining the balance between T h 1 and T h 2 cell lineages. Infants may be born with a predisposition toward proallergic and proinflammatory T h 2 immune responses, characterized by growth and activation of eosinophils and IgE production.
So these children have the potential to be predisposed at birth to this pro-inflammatory component. We administer a vaccine to their immature immune system. Which could hyper-stimulate the immune system therefore causing Th2, elevated IgE and eosinophils. From what I have read this sounds like the perfect cytokine storm.
Okay done with that dry scientific stuff from a lay person.
Further in the article this is said: A second objection to routine HPV vaccination concerns parental rights. Bachmann confused this issue by introducing anti-vaccine paranoia — one of the most direct and practical ways that a public official can undermine the health of his or her fellow citizens.
By this comment are you advocating that the parents have no right to protect their own child from what they may deem as unproven and possibly an unsafe vaccination? I have communicated with parents about that and many said that they would rather wait until the vaccine was around for a while to see the effects and if it works. That seems very reasonable to me of a conscientious parent.
The last comment that I am going to bring up in your article is just this: But the public health case for vaccination is similar for diseases spread by coughing...
One of the little known items is that vaccines, depending on type, after they are administered shed the virus via coughing or sneezing or other bodily fluids. That puts the public at risk for 21 days after administration of the vaccine. So in essence these people should quarantine themselves from the population for that time. That would lessen the possibility of an elderly or infant contracting the disease through shedding from a vaccinated person. It is also my opinion that those people should not be allowed to fly or be in a public place for that time for the safety of the public as a whole, vaccinated and unvaccinated.
Please, the next time you write an article like this one do some research first and present both sides of the issue.
I want to thank Merck for their excellent website. The information that is available is concise and very well referenced. Good job.
Interests: I am a board member of the Truth About Gardasil and have no other affiliations with any other group.
References were
http://www.merckmanuals.com/professional
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1097753
Kinetics and isotype profile of antibody responses in rhesus macaques induced following vaccination with HPV 6, 11, 16 and 18 L1-virus-like particles formulated with or without Merck aluminum adjuvant
Vaccine and Biologics Research Merck Research Laboratories 466 Devon Park Dr. Wayne, PA 19087-8630 USA
Vaccine and Biologics Research Merck Research Laboratories West Point, PA 19486 USA
J Immune Based Ther Vaccines. 2005; 3: 2.
Published online 2005 April 20. doi: 10.1186/1476-8518-3-2
PMCID: PMC1097753
Copyright © 2005 Ruiz et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
© Cynthia A. Janak
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
