We are a bit shaken up over the HPV Vaccination, sometimes called the HPV Jab. It supposedly immunises young women against sexually transmitted disease that can lead to genital warts and cervical cancer but is not yet proven. However, for a number of reasons, my wife and I "opted out" by checking the 'No' box on the consent form, and our 13 year old daughter also decided NOT to get the jab. We figured with both parents and daughter against the idea, the jabbing would pass us by. But then she went to school and some anonymous doctor jabbed her anyway.
We have no overt moral or spiritual issue with the immunization itself and, along with the FRC, we don't believe that the HPV immunisation necessarily leads to promiscuity. We do, however, have a problem with mandatory or coerced vaccination against the will of the child or the parents. But we were told we could "opt out" so we didn't give it much thought.
On the day, our 13 year old daughter, who by the way has Type-1 Diabetes, was taken aside from the other girls and told by the doctor that she was the only girl in her year who had handed in a consent form with a cross in the 'No' box. As they started to talk, and without being asked if she wanted it, the doctor jabbed her.
We have serious issues with this relatively untested and unproven drug Cervarix. Finding answers to basic questions like "How will it affect our Type-1 diabetic pre-adolescent daughter?" has proven impossible for us and I can only assume, unless the one of the 158 pre-adolescent [10-14 year] test candidates had Type-1 diabetes, that our daughter is now the gullible guinea pig who will test this product for the much larger international market.
On the internet we call that "beta testing", although we are talking about our daughter, not a new web application.
"Coerced vaccination is not justified because there is no public health emergency. Similarly, forcing an intervention over an adolescent's objections is not justified because it fails to respect the adolescent as a maturing individual." BMJ (British Medical Journal)
We shared our story with a social worker and he suggested reporting it to the police as a case of abuse. We went over to our school today to discuss it with them. The head teacher was shocked and apologetic and offered to talk to the NHS. Obviously the school is not to blame and has been kept in the dark.
The BMJ suggested that "the most controversial situation is when an adolescent seeks the vaccine without parental permission." But even more controversial is what happened to our child in Scotland, when the vaccination was given AGAINST the written permission of both the parents AND against the will of the adolescent, or in this case, the pre-adolescent.
The Government says that the vaccine will be offered to all girls in the selected age range but that parents will be given the opportunity to "opt out" if they do not want their child to receive the jabs. "It will be voluntary" the Telegraph reports, and yet the paragraph following states that "non-compliance" could undermine the project.
I guess we were "non-compliant"
but I like to think of it as "pro-choice".
I was thinking that maybe we could have prevented the abuse of our daughter by not sending in the consent form at all. But then we chatted with one of our kid's friends who also got jabbed, despite her not wanting it and despite her father refusing to sing the consent form. I guess we are not the only ones.
Can We Really Opt Out? The brochure given to the 12-13 year olds called "Arm Against Cervical Cancer" [download as PDF] promises that parents can "opt out". It reads:
"You may be given a consent form that your parents should sign giving permission for you to have the vaccination. It’s important that you return the signed form before your vaccination is due. If your parents are not sure that you should have the vaccination you should still return the form and speak to your nurse, doctor or other healthcare professional. Having the vaccination now will help protect you against the most common causes of cervical cancer for many years."
What does that mean, anyway? If your parents say 'No', then you should speak to the medical professionals to get a second opinion? Sounds like we were outranked by someone with a stethoscope around their neck!
But surely its illegal, even in this country, to ignore the parents consent when the 'young woman' involved has only just turned 13 years old?
So, from our experience with the first jab, this is how it looks to me:
- If your daughter refuses the vaccination, she is young and incapable of making the right decision so JAB HER ANYWAY. [So says Dr Frank on Yahoo Answers]
- If your parents refuse to permit the vaccination, they are old and too stupid to make the right decision so JAB HER ANYWAY.
- If both daughter and parents refuse the vaccination, JAB HER ANYWAY and hope that no one says anything.
Any way you look at it, our daughters are going to get jabbed unless they have the gumption to stand up for their right to choose for themselves. Or someone else stands up for them. Or we keep them out of school on the jabbing day.
The brochure suggests the side effects are " quite mild – usually just stinging and soreness in the arm that soon wears off. Hundreds of thousands of young women in the USA and other countries have already had their vaccinations. Studies have shown that the vaccination is very safe." But what the brochure doesnt tell you about those young women in the USA is that over 20 died and thousands of others now have serious permanent injuries.
After the jab, our daughter and 2 friends had immediate side effects, including a hot and cold flashes and dizziness, but they was told it was in their minds. Headaches have continued almost daily since the jab and a few days ago she had a very serious seizure during the night. We were just glad she was sleeping in our bed. She slept in our bed last night also, just in case another seizure happened, and she will probably sleep in our bed again tonight. And we dont really know if the seizure or headaches are related to the jab or rather to her diabetes. But we are still worried and information is scarce.
1. Do Your Own Research!
2. Find information websites that allow comments and stories of real people who are not paid to say only positive things about HPV vaccinations.
3. If you don't want your daughter jabbed, or if she doesnt want to get jabbed, don't send her to school on the day of jabbing because the permission form might not be worth the paper it is written on.
4. Make a copy of your consent form before your daughter hands it in and it disappears into space.
5. If your story is similar to ours, tell someone.
Read on to see some of the things I found about about this vaccination.
Having done a little research to see exactly what substance they shot into our daughter's arm, we are a little worried. And we have a feeling we are not the only ones. If you are looking for more information on the subject, this is what I have found so far:
The HPV immunization process is rolling out across England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. They are starting with Scottish 12-13 year old girls, like our daughter, and then working upwards over the next few years.
From what I have read, HPV stands for human papillomavirus which affects the skin and mucous membranes. There are about 130 types but about 30-40 HPV types are typically transmitted through sexual contact and some may cause genital warts. Persistent infection with "high-risk" HPV types may progress to lesions and cervical cancer. Wikipedia suggests the Cervarix vaccinations given in the UK protect against two types of HPV (16 and 18).
But there is no proven clinical evidence that it actually works and the side effects, if similar to Gardasil in USA, might be dangerous and even fatal.
It reminds me of the movie Idiocracy.
Attorney General: “Brawndo’s got what plants crave.”
Secretary of Energy: “Yeah, it’s got electrolytes.”
Joe: “What are electrolytes? Do you even know?”
Secretary of State: “It’s what they use to make Brawndo.”
Joe: “Yeah, but why do they use them to make Brawndo?”
Secretary of Defense: “‘Cause Brawndo’s got electrolytes.”
I agree with Alan Johnson of the Department of Health who said "prevention is always better than cure" but the vaccination is not the only way and it is not even the best way to prevent infection. The Cancer Society has said that "the vaccines don't prevent infection with all types of HPV" and the best form of prevention is either abstinence from sexual activity and/or a monogamous relationship with an uninfected individual. Why cant the medical authorities offer the possibility of abstinence or fidelity as a reasonable alternative to the vaccination? Why cant they even mention it in their publications? Its that "non-compliance"?
"Twenty girls died within a few days of receiving Gardasil, which has a similar make-up to Cervarix, although the deaths were dismissed as coincidence by the manufacturer, Merck." Why I won't let my girls have these cancer jabs
“This big push is making people crazy — thinking they’re bad moms if they don’t get their kids vaccinated,” Dr. Abby Lippman, McGill University, BlogDial: Sticking it to the kids
The Department of Health refused to reveal the cost of the vaccine, which it said was "commercially confidential" Telegraph
In the USA, HPV immunization is required of immigrants seeking a green card but not of citizens. But there are some public schools pushing for mandatory vaccination for their students. Gardasil is the drug of choice. The Family Research Council has an excellent resource page on HPV with a page of questions and answers. These three questions seemed most appropriate.
Q: How is genital HPV infection associated with cervical cancer?
A: Sexually transmitted HPV has been shown to be present in virtually all cases of cervical cancer and is the leading cause of cervical cancer. High risk HPV types 16 and 18 cause 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. [Human Papillomavirus: HPV Information for Clinicians, PDF, page 1]
Q: How can a person be best protected from acquiring genital HPV?
A: Limiting sexual activity to the context of one faithful and monogamous long-term relationship with an uninfected individual is the single most effective method of preventing HPV infection.
Q: Does FRC support mandatory HPV vaccination?
A: No. We feel that a mandate infringes on the right of parents to make decisions regarding their children's medical care. Since genital HPV is not spread by casual contact, but rather is a sexually transmitted infection, there is not sufficient public health justification to require vaccination for school attendance. It may also lead them to believe that the vaccine is the only available way to reduce the risk of cervical cancer, which is untrue.
Some links worth checking out
Pharmalot reports: A Catholic school banned the immunisation on its premises
Serious Health Concerns about the cervical cancer jab, Mail Online
Parents Refuse "Cervarix" cervical Cancer Jab, Trusted, MD
BBC article shows that Cervarix won over Gardasil in the UK.
The Times has a good article.
Vaccination of schoolgirls for HPV using Cervarix ® should be stopped. NOW
I have some questions:
Why are they jabbing our kids in the schools by anonymous medical teams when our family doctor, who we know and trust, could adminster or at least oversee the vaccinations?
Why use the schools when the school authorities are completely powerless and cant even tell us when the next jabbing will occur?
Why sign and submit a permission slip when the doctor is going to jab them anyway?
Why is the government and the NHS so insistent that everyone get jabbed with a relatively new and untested vaccine?
Has the vaccine ever been tested on young girls with Type-1 diabetes like my daughter and what were the results?
And most importantly, Are there any other parents out there who chose to "opt out", crossed the "No" box on their consent form, and yet watched their daughter come home from school rubbing her arm?
Found some errors in this post? Correct it yourself