Breaking Report: HPV Cancers Rising In Spite of Vaccination

Views 11681

Breaking Report: HPV Cancers Rising In Spite of Vaccination

A new study by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) reveals that, despite increasing uptake of human papillomavirus (HVP) vaccines, cancers linked to HPV rose in the past decade.

The report, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, was co-authored by researchers from the American Cancer Society (ACS), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Cancer Institute (NCI), and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR), and found that while overall cancer death rates in the U.S. continue to decline among both men and women over the past decade, incidence rates are actually increasing for HPV-associated oral, vulva and anal cancers.

As reported by Fierce Vaccines, this finding may "irk HPV vaccine makers Merck and GlaxoSmithKline," whose vaccines have been adopted and lauded by national and global health authorities as safe and effective, 'live saving' interventions.

Obviously, if the report is correct, and by 2010 as many as 48.7 percent of girls ages 13 through 17 had received at least one dose of the HPV vaccine, and 32 percent received all three recommended doses, we should expect to find a widespread decline in HPV-associated cancers if the vaccines actually work as advertised.

While HPV-associated diseases are multifactorial in etiology, with environmental exposures, co-infections, immune dysfunction, nutritional incompatibilities, excesses and deficiencies, and stress-related physiological factors playing key roles, the vaccine industry and their governmental extensions have largely opted for reductionism in their marketing, projecting the rhetorical view that HPV is the single most important, if not the only cause of HPV-associated conditions such as anal and cervical cancer.

All the more reason why this new study is so devastating to their aggressive marketing and PR campaigns, and why the subsequent rallying cry for greater HPV vaccine coverage as the solution to the vaccine's failure -- though extremely typical -- is all the more disturbing.

Recently, we covered the fatal flaws in HPV vaccine promotion in The HPV Vaccine Debate: Don't Ask, Don't Tell, wherein we discussed the expert testimony of HPV researcher Dr. Diane Harper on Katie Couric's controversial show dedicated to the topic, and the CDC's own admission that the HPV vaccines being used today have very limited effectiveness:

"According to the CDC's website, there are over 100 forms of HPV that have been identified thus far, with the vaccine only protecting (in theory) against four, namely, HPV types 6, 11, 16 and 18.[xiii]  Nor does vaccination speed the clearance of pre-existing HPV 16/18 infection, making Dr. Harper's point about the prevalence of HPV infection in those younger than 11 all the more poignant.[xiv] So, how effective can a 2-4 strain vaccine possibly be even if it works 100% of the time against them?"

The answer is of course not very effective. And nowhere is this more clearly evident than in the case of African-American girls and women...

Only two months ago, a groundbreaking but virtually unknown report on the National Library of Medicine's health information portal Medline Plus, revealed a disturbing fact about the HPV vaccine, and the institutionalized 'color blindness' in biomedicine today that is having significant adverse impacts on minority populations.  Researchers from Duke University found that although African-American women are twice as likely as Caucasian women to die from cervical cancer, HPV vaccines target strains of HPV that are far less likely to infect them, and are not found in the most concerning precancerous abnormalities. 

As reported by

"The study examined 280 Black women and 292 White women, all carrying varying HPV strains. Some had no signs of cancer, some showed mild signs of pre-cancer and a small percentage had advanced precancerous abnormalities. In the group with the most advanced signs of pre-cancer, White participants carried strains 16, 18, 33, 39, and 59, whereas Black participants carried strains 31, 35, 45, 56, 58, 66, and 68.

Currently, two vaccines on the market target four HPV strains considered most troublesome. Gardasil, which is produced by Merck and can be administered to anyone aged 9 through 26, protects against strains 16, 18, 6, and 11. Cervarix, by GlaxoSmithKline, is available only for girls and women and targets strains 16 and 18."

Could this explain why rates of cervical cancer actually increased in African-American populations, according to the new NCI report?

When a vaccine is being used that forces the immune system of black girls or women to produce antibodies and mobilize immune defenses against HPV strains that are not contributing to the pathogenesis of the presumed 'vaccine preventable' disease, not only does this waste valuable immune resources that would be useful elsewhere, but it focuses the immune system towards a non-existent threat and away from the real one. Obviously, vaccines that produce antibodies without antigen-antibody affinity are not only useless, but harmful. And this does not even account for the multiple, unintended, adverse effects of the other vaccine ingredients (e.g. adjuvants; biologicals) found within the shot.

Shouldn't these two studies confirm that at the very least, African-American populations should refrain from HPV vaccines until further evidence is provided that they are safe and effective? Is this not basic to the precautionary principle, especially when it comes to an unnecessary medical intervention? Shouldn't the burden of proof of safety and efficacy be upon those manufacturing, selling, regulating the product and not the exposed populations who increasingly are being told they have little to no choice in the matter?

For more information on HPV vaccination and HPV, visit our research sections on the topic:

Vaccination: HPV (Gardisil)

Human Papillomavirus HPV

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Key Research Topics

This website is for information purposes only. By providing the information contained herein we are not diagnosing, treating, curing, mitigating, or preventing any type of disease or medical condition. Before beginning any type of natural, integrative or conventional treatment regimen, it is advisable to seek the advice of a licensed healthcare professional.

© Copyright 2008-2024, Journal Articles copyright of original owners, MeSH copyright NLM.