I'd highly recommend reading "HPV Vaccine on Trial". It goes through this particular vaccine in great detail. The main points are:
1. Risk of cervical cancer is indeed very rare and best detected/avoided by pap smears. It's about a 1 in 40,000 lifetime risk. If you are the 1, however, yes, it's very bad.
2. Risk of injury from the vaccine are about 3%. This was established in the small placebo control group, which suffered no injuries, versus the vaccine group which suffered very serious injury, likely from the aluminum adjuvant. The risk of injury is so serious that after administration, medical providers ask girls to lie down on a mat for 30 minutes to prevent injury from fainting. The risk of catastrophic vaccine injury is significantly higher than 1 in 40K.
And the risk to boys is almost non-existent. Strange that this is being pushed, even mandated, on 13-year old boys, who do not have a cervix.
Thanks for your honest take, however. I enjoy reading it. I hope you will read Mary Holland's book before making this important decision.
A risk of injury from the vaccine being 3% means that of 100 people receiving the vaccine, 3 will be injured.
And how many people need to get the vaccine to prevent a single death from cervical cancer? Let's grab your figure of 40,000, although I'm sure it's higher because the vaccine has never been clinically proven to prevent death from cervical cancer, not a single time. But we'll generously assume that one person out of 40,000 was prevented from dying from it. However, if we gave all 40K the vaccine to prevent that one death, we have caused 1,200 injuries along the way.
To me, that is an unacceptable risk/benefit ratio.
Oh, it's absolutely much higher. VAERS is extremely under-reported. And the injuries I have heard about are absolutely not worth the risk.
It's a lot more like a 10,000-to-1 risk/benefit ratio, or maybe even a million to one, because, as I mentioned, there is ZERO evidence that a single death has been prevented by the vaccine. It is all speculative, based on the presumption that preventing some of the HPV infections (which are cleared by the immune system 99% of the time) will prevent cervical cancer deaths. The vaccine doesn't even claim to prevent infection by every potentially problematic strain of HPV.
It's bizarre that they convince people to take it.
I’m not advocating for it, but men get oral and throat cancer from HPV. I haven’t looked into this at all (no children, and I’m old), but you could make an argument that it makes more sense to vaccinate boys than girls since women are routinely screened for cervical cancer. I know two men in their 60’s who recently underwent cancer treatment for oral/throat cancer, one of which I know was linked to HPV. Both survived and seem to be cancer-free, FWIW.
Absolutely Judy. Oral/pharyngeal cancer is HPV. 40 years ago oral pharyngeal was related to oral tobacco use. Nothing new under the sun but as the internet expanded knowledge related to sexual practice HPV became the culprit, also with anal and penile cancer.
Yes, my father had it. He was "cancer free' too, but the radiation was so damaging that he died 14 years later after dealing with all of the damaging effects of radiation. It was definitely the cancer and ill-effects of the radiation that caused his death.
I did not vaccinate my 4 girls or my son for HPV, although boys can get throat cancer from HPV. I know of 2. However early on there were something like 80-100 girls who died from the HPV vaccine if I am remembering correctly. The way the internet is these days, it is hard to retrieve some of the information that used to be out there. Also you still need pap smears, which detect irregularities anyway, so...
It's definitely worthy of debate. But, I would point out that pap smears don't help you avoid hpv/cervical cancer. Diagnose it early, perhaps. The risk to boys is due to head and neck cancer, which is increasingly common....Michael Douglas, Val Kilmer, Eddie Van Halen, Jim Kelly are some notable people. My father had it and died from it after 14 years. Gruesome experience.
I'm at a loss for words. I wish I could put it into words, but the only word I can think of for all he wrote & explained is 'insanity'. Insanity that after all this time he is going to have something injected into his perfectly healthy 13 year old daughter. smh.
Hi Momfours - totally agree here! Wanted to post this article on the harms from vaccines. Hopefully Alex can see this and change his stance. Vaccines cause harm.
Alex wrote a lot of words explaining his side. Why don’t you start with his points and rebut them one by one? The obvious implication is that you can’t, or won’t. If you want to imply something else, you know how to do so.
it's not her fault you don't understand her opinion. she doesn't owe you a thousand word essay using small words to explain it to you.
alex can form his own opinion drawn from his critical thinking, she can form her own opinion drawn from her critical thinking, and you have your opinion - apparently drawn from alex's critical thinking.
If that’s your answer, then you don’t understand that my opinion has nothing to do with HPV, only with how useless a rebuttal is when it consists entirely of the one word “insanity”.
lmao, this isn't a court of law, and you are the judge of absolutely nothing here.
if there is an actual proxy to gauge the "usefulness" of a comment it's the like button. her comments have far more likes than yours do, which means her comments are significantly more "useful" than yours are by at least an order of magnitude.
And if it isn’t? I notice you haven’t tried to explain it either. Alex listed and explained all his points. He deserves at least as detailed an answer. That you refuse to, or cannot, tells me all I need to know about the two arguments.
You make a fair point that Alex deserves a detailed answer to his listed points. Please scroll down to my post that makes 7 detailed refutations to his 7 points. I'd be curious as to your thoughts after reading it.
It probably would be interesting and I thank you for responding to his points, but Substack doesn't make it easy to find one comment out of 227, or maybe I am just too new to it to know a better way than diving into all subthreads. And I have only a peripheral interest in the HPV vaccine itself. My annoyance was with another keyboard commando pandering to her followers instead of furthering a discussion.
The real insanity is how this country continues to put up with leftist agendas narratives and ideology, and all we do is sit there and say “this is terrible, these people are bad, why are we letting this happen“…
Because people are cowards whores and avoidants. And you folks are as bad as these despicable uncaring polluted sociopaths who are trying to cram down decayed destructive dying plans every F’ing moment of our lives.
That’s insanity, knowing better and doing nothing about it.
I’d say you people should be ashamed of yourselves, but I don’t think most people commenting here genuinely practice the concept of shame.
You make good arguments for this, but I would like to caution you that in 5 years, or 10, 20 years, your daughter may not appreciate that you did this. She can get this shot anytime. How about if you talk to her frankly about HPV, cervical cancer and all other STDs and keep an open line of communication going? I would hate for her to have the shot, then feel like she doesn't need to use condoms to protect against other diseases. Or if she does use condoms in the future, why the need for the vaccine, as well, especially at this young age? When she becomes sexually active, if you have been open and honest in educating her, then go get her on some type of birth control and get the vaccine at that time. It's not an emergency at this point.
Both my boys received the HPV vaccine. I wish I would have left it up to them, but it was really pushed on us. I don't know if they had side effects, because I never thought about this stuff until the covid debacle. Both of them had strange illnesses in their teenage years. Both had mumps (despite being vaccinated). One had mono. One had eczema and other skin problems. Both had chicken pox (despite being vaccinated). I have a LOT of questions about all of it.
Hormonal birth control is one of the worst things you can do to your daughter, please don’t put her on it! Dramatically increased suicidal risks and mood disorders among many other problems
one problem is that since it tricks women into thinking they are pregnant they tend to find mates that they find weak and non-threatening to their perceived vulnerable condition.
then when they get married and decide to have kids and leave the pill, they realize they are not sexually attracted their partner.
when i was in college (early 70's) the biology 101 professor came on stage in the lecture hall for the first class. i'll never forget it. she said "i was on the team that developed the birth control pill and i'm telling you- DON'T EVER TAKE IT. it tricks your body into thinking that it's always pregnant and that cannot be good!"
half the students in the class were men but still she felt it was important enough to say to everyone on the first day of class before she even told us her name.
we are going 3 times- to the homesteading event in may, the two days of truth event in june and then the Brownstone event in august. we might add one more. there's the Rogue Food event and 2 days with Dr Tom Cowan. when Jp was working in SF, i really wanted him to schedule a visit with Cowan but he couldn't manage it.
will we see you there for Brownstone? are you going to the meet up the night before?
we go a lot. it's our summer vacation spread out in 3 or 4 weekends a year. you should go to something there. we buy tickets early to get the early bird discounts and try to book their "tiny stay" off grid cabin. we couldn't get it for the Brownstone event but there's another small farm down the road and we secured lodging there.
we've been to Rogue Food twice (Thomas Massie was the keynote both times and Catherine Austin Fitts once), two days of truth once. never been to the homesteader event so that will be new.
they haven't listed the speakers for Brownstone yet but who cares, really? just being on Polyface's sacred ground is enough for me!
Alex, Please read Mary Holland's book "The HPV Vaccine on Trial" before you finalize this decision.
And recall that colloquially the HPV (never proven to cause cervical cancer at all) vaccine is often referred to as "Help Pay for Vioxx". Remember how Merck was heavily fined after killing upwards of 100,000 with that drug?
I just finished reading that NIH is rolling out the new VAERS system. The old system has shown to likely only show 10 t0 20% max of vaccine injuries. There was a major cover up with the HPV vaccine injuries. Consider waiting a few months to see what this new accurate system will show.
HPV is a virus that your immune system can take care of so MAKE CERTAIN YOUR DAUGHTER KNOWS SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING GOOD CARE OF HER IMMUNE SYSTEM. The HPV shot is NOT a good one. There are plenty of seriously injured young people who suffered because their parents thought the way you are thinking and THEY REGRET IT BUT CAN NEVER UNDO WHAT THEY DID TO THEIR CHILD.
It seems that you have overlooked the compelling evidence produced against these shots by (a) Malone, (b) Midwestern Doctor, (c) Steve Kirsch. Frankly, I don't see how you could trust any Pharma product or intervention given the fallout from Covid (which you documented better than most). From mouthwash to vaccines, from paracetemol to aspirine, from chemo-therapy to...... (sigh, do I need to go on?) it's all driven by making us (the entire population) more sick and more dependent on their products. There are NO exceptions, all of it is deadly crap....please take the red pill and protect your children....I implore you. If I had young children now, none of them would see a modern day physician unless someone would put a gun to my head......
You are dead wrong about all drugs. Many are Lifesavers. Antibiotics and steroids saved my life just recently when I was in respiratory failure and could easily have died.
Because before receiving antibiotics and a particular steroid I was in respiratory failure, afterwards I was able to breathe w/o supplemental oxygen. Therefore the logical conclusion is that the drugs reversed the condition. It's science, man.
I appreciate your candor, Alex, with your readers, even though you knew there would be backlash. It is wonderful to be able to have the medical freedom to decide whether or not you’ll be getting this vaccine for your minor child. I am thankful for this right in our country, something that has been challenged repeatedly, as our rights as parents have eroded and are currently being restored, albeit slowly.
I recommend that you read Vaccines, Amen by Aaron Siri if you have not already. He does specifically write about the HPV vaccine.
Years ago, I made the decision not to vaccinate my daughter. The office even tried to get my son vaccinated for HPV as well, during which they used underhanded tactics to persuade him, that I didn’t appreciate. He was well trained by me, so said no and promptly told me. I am happy with my decision, as both are well into their twenties now and healthy.
My sister had cervical cancer and although no cancer is a good cancer to get, along with cervical cancer being quite rare, if you take care of yourself and get regular yearly exams and Pap smears, it would most likely be caught early, and require relatively minor treatment in the scheme of things. I am not sure where you, Alex, have heard about cervical cancer as being particularly a bad one to get, as I have always thought the opposite. My sister had minor surgery to remove the cancer and has been cancer free for decades.
Being a parent is challenging especially in the current environment. My best to you and your family. We may not agree on this issue, and I respect and will defend your right to make this decision for your child.
You're right - cervical cancer is rarely fatal. Pap smears catch it early, treatment is almost always successful, and it's not a leading cause of death for women in the US.
I've read a lot of midwesterndoctor.com stuff and have noticed there are instances where MWD and Alex Berenson do not agree.
I personally would like to see a smackdown between MWD and Alex Berenson on some of the more clinically meaningful topics where they disagree. Either from MWD or from Alex Berenson or they could have a mano-y-mano Zoom. I volunteer to officiate.
Alex for God's sake, before you do something you may later regret, read the section on Gardasil in Aaron Siri's book "Vaccines Amen." You don't know the side effects because there was never a placebo group, the group the company claimed was a "placebo group" actually received 225 mcg or 450 mcg of Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate (AAHS). You're going to trust your daughter's health to a company that is that dishonest? And FWIW, I personally know two women, and the mother of a third, who were permanently damaged by that vaccine. The mother is a nurse and was very mainstream but it was clear as day to her that the vaccine destroyed her daughter's gut, she almost died and now has permanent gastric autoimmune issues. The two other women also have permanent autoimmune issues. The benefits are marginal at best, why on earth would you take such a risk with your daughter's health?
" The vaccine is significantly more effective when it is administered well before a person already has HPV — that is, well before she has begun having sex,
since almost everyone who has sex eventually gets HPV."
That's probably the dumbest thing he ever wrote. Really stupid.
You love your daughter. You want what's best for her. My experience as a parent has been that pediatricians persuade well through a parent's love/fear/protect pathways.
If rebellious enough to read ebm.bmj article "intended for medical healthcare professionals" about lack of independent studies investigating adverse side effects of HPV vaccine, one might consider protection in a different light.
My two cents. I worked in Health insurance when the HPV vaccine became popular. I had a few co workers ask my opinion knowing I was a Christian and assumed I would be anti vaxx.
I didn't have an opinion on it because my kids were to young for it at that time. As i looked into it, we decided that we weren't going to have our 3 girls get it. If they wanted to after they were 18, they were welcome to.
The medical director of the insurance company i worked for told us that the hpv vaccine was most effective for women who were going to have multiple partners. The risk of cancer goes up substantially with more sexual partners.
So, all my daughters now are married to their first serious boyfriend, if they slept around before, it they would have had to have been super creative as they were with us so much of the time. Also, my wife and I didn't sleep around either.
Last thing, one of my daughters is a medical assistant and her clinic suggested she take it. She hadn't researched it and just took dose #1 without questions. She had a major reaction to it and was in bed sick for two days. She elected not to have the subsequent shots.
I'm astonished to read your arguments for getting the vaccine.
The points you are countering are not the actual arguments for distrusting the vaccine's safety, efficacy, and necessity.
1) The fact that HPV is sexually transmitted disease means that it's preventable without a vaccine. More importantly, cervical cancer, even in the presence of HPV vaccination, can be avoided by finding and addressing chronic infection.
2) The efficacy data you cite as "unequivocal" (in your response to "but she's only 13") is anything but.
Efficacy has been consistently claimed by studies 10, 15, 20 years following introduction of the vaccine without considering several crucial factors:
a) cervical cancer can take SEVERAL decades to develop. So that by itself means that "efficacy studies" after only 10-15 years are suspect.
b) sexual activity across all age groups has steadily and significantly declined since the introduction of the vaccine. NONE of the studies supposedly finding vaccine efficacy considers this. And it's so obvious: if sexual activity has significantly declined, that by itself can explain a significant decline in STD's and their related sequelae.
c) improvements in diagnosing and treating HPV and related pre-cancerous conditions, have been implemented as well as improvements in reducing other susceptibilities to chronic HPV.
According to the American Cancer Society, any ONE of the following can double risk of ccervical cancer: multiple sexual partners, first pregnancy before age 17, drug or alcohol abuse, and diet low in fruits and vegetables.
Again, the significant decline in sexual activity across all age groups impacts the first two of those risk factors.
3) You made the same argument as in 2); you cite efficacy that the studies, when viewed closely, don't fully support. You might try reading HPV Vaccine on Trial, by Holland/Rosenberg/Iorio; the book goes into great detail about the flaws in the studies, with impeccable citations.
4) Of course you'd rather not have your child get cervical cancer. Nobody wants their child to have cervical cancer. But a vaccine whose worth is in question (if you'd bother to look closely at the real criticisms rather than the social media ones) is not necessarily the answer, at least, not according to the arguments you've marshaled.
5) The fact that women who are vaccinated still get cervical cancer does NOT mean that they were necessarily exposed to HPV before vaccination, and is NOT an argument for vaccination.
It's an argument for better diagnostic services; a yearly Pap smear would have caught those cases many years before they became cancerous, and a yearly blood test would catch chronic infections before pre-cancerous lesions even form.
It's also an argument for reducing the known susceptibilities listed above. You want your daughter to cut her risk in half? Tell her not to have multiple sexual partners. Tell her to avoid pregnancy. Heck, tell her to use condoms rather than the pill.
6) You obviously have not looked closely at the clinical trials, nor do you seem to be aware of the serious concerns they raise. None of the placebo groups in these trials were given a true inert placebo. Most were given an injection of the non-viral ingredients in the vaccine, including Merck's proprietary adjuvant AAHS.
Since the purpose of AAHS is to trigger a stronger immune reaction, any injection containing it can obviously not be considered a true placebo. Autoimmune reactions can take days to weeks to manifest, and often take months or even years to correctly diagnose.
The clinical trials don't show that the groups given the vaccine didn't have concerning adverse reactions. They show a similar RATE of adverse reactions between the vaccine group and the AAHS group.
So when you say that there's no hard data showing adverse reactions in the clinical trials, you also have to acknowledge that there is no hard data --given the immense flaws in the clinical trials' design -- showing safety. I think it's important for you and your wife to read Łucja Tomlienovic's excellent study of the basic problems as well as the ethical issues surrounding the Gardasil prelicensure trials: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11191454/
7) "Merck makes a lot of money from Gardasil." I care less about what they make from any given product, and more about what they are doing with their money.
Maybe take a closer look -- if you can -- at what Merck spends on marketing, lobbying, PACs, and funding various chairs and entire departments of people who make health care decisions for the masses.
About 12 or 13 years ago, I toured the journalism department at West Virginia University, and sat in on a couple of classes. The teacher proudly showed me their new Merck computer lab, with state-of-the-art Apple computers. Back then, Merck was listed as a corporate donor on their website. These days, though, it's much harder to track this kind of money.
Finally, I entirely agree with you: "Blaming vaccines for everything equals blaming vaccines for nothing. Pretending all vaccines are equally terrible is the same as pretending they’re all equally great."
I also do not want your daughter -- or anyone's daughter -- to get cervical cancer.
But I believe that looking at ALL the facts is so supremely important that I joined as a subscriber just so I could make this comment.
I hope you take it seriously and do more research. Your daughter deserves that.
Thanks for your fascinating reply, Alison. That's dedication, becoming a subscriber so you could write a comment. Intelligent comments like yours are educating me, one reason why I became a subscriber myself. I am learning so much from such thoughtful, informative comments.
This is a truly excellent comment and I love that you subcribed and commented because you felt so strongly about science, facts, Alex's readers, and -- most importantly -- his and all our daughters!
I'd highly recommend reading "HPV Vaccine on Trial". It goes through this particular vaccine in great detail. The main points are:
1. Risk of cervical cancer is indeed very rare and best detected/avoided by pap smears. It's about a 1 in 40,000 lifetime risk. If you are the 1, however, yes, it's very bad.
2. Risk of injury from the vaccine are about 3%. This was established in the small placebo control group, which suffered no injuries, versus the vaccine group which suffered very serious injury, likely from the aluminum adjuvant. The risk of injury is so serious that after administration, medical providers ask girls to lie down on a mat for 30 minutes to prevent injury from fainting. The risk of catastrophic vaccine injury is significantly higher than 1 in 40K.
And the risk to boys is almost non-existent. Strange that this is being pushed, even mandated, on 13-year old boys, who do not have a cervix.
Thanks for your honest take, however. I enjoy reading it. I hope you will read Mary Holland's book before making this important decision.
A risk of injury from the vaccine being 3% means that of 100 people receiving the vaccine, 3 will be injured.
And how many people need to get the vaccine to prevent a single death from cervical cancer? Let's grab your figure of 40,000, although I'm sure it's higher because the vaccine has never been clinically proven to prevent death from cervical cancer, not a single time. But we'll generously assume that one person out of 40,000 was prevented from dying from it. However, if we gave all 40K the vaccine to prevent that one death, we have caused 1,200 injuries along the way.
To me, that is an unacceptable risk/benefit ratio.
Alex, Alex, Alex do, the, math. 1,200 injuries for each possible benefit is ‘Fauci science’.
That’s the accepted “risk.” I think it’s actually much higher. We only recognized our daughter’s VI in hindsight.
Oh, it's absolutely much higher. VAERS is extremely under-reported. And the injuries I have heard about are absolutely not worth the risk.
It's a lot more like a 10,000-to-1 risk/benefit ratio, or maybe even a million to one, because, as I mentioned, there is ZERO evidence that a single death has been prevented by the vaccine. It is all speculative, based on the presumption that preventing some of the HPV infections (which are cleared by the immune system 99% of the time) will prevent cervical cancer deaths. The vaccine doesn't even claim to prevent infection by every potentially problematic strain of HPV.
It's bizarre that they convince people to take it.
No aluminum should be injected into anybody.
I’m not advocating for it, but men get oral and throat cancer from HPV. I haven’t looked into this at all (no children, and I’m old), but you could make an argument that it makes more sense to vaccinate boys than girls since women are routinely screened for cervical cancer. I know two men in their 60’s who recently underwent cancer treatment for oral/throat cancer, one of which I know was linked to HPV. Both survived and seem to be cancer-free, FWIW.
Absolutely Judy. Oral/pharyngeal cancer is HPV. 40 years ago oral pharyngeal was related to oral tobacco use. Nothing new under the sun but as the internet expanded knowledge related to sexual practice HPV became the culprit, also with anal and penile cancer.
Yes, my father had it. He was "cancer free' too, but the radiation was so damaging that he died 14 years later after dealing with all of the damaging effects of radiation. It was definitely the cancer and ill-effects of the radiation that caused his death.
I did not vaccinate my 4 girls or my son for HPV, although boys can get throat cancer from HPV. I know of 2. However early on there were something like 80-100 girls who died from the HPV vaccine if I am remembering correctly. The way the internet is these days, it is hard to retrieve some of the information that used to be out there. Also you still need pap smears, which detect irregularities anyway, so...
It's definitely worthy of debate. But, I would point out that pap smears don't help you avoid hpv/cervical cancer. Diagnose it early, perhaps. The risk to boys is due to head and neck cancer, which is increasingly common....Michael Douglas, Val Kilmer, Eddie Van Halen, Jim Kelly are some notable people. My father had it and died from it after 14 years. Gruesome experience.
I'd read what A Midwestern Doctor on the Forgotten Side of Medicine says about it. Obviously your decision.
Excellent recommendation, JW Writes, as AMD is a very reliable source.
Useless recommendation, since it includes no explanation, no reason.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-hpv-vaccine-disaster-was-a-test?utm_source=publication-search
https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/the-hpv-vaccine-disaster-was-a-blueprint?r=fi66r&utm_medium=ios
Insanity.
What's insane is calling it insanity without explanation.
I'm at a loss for words. I wish I could put it into words, but the only word I can think of for all he wrote & explained is 'insanity'. Insanity that after all this time he is going to have something injected into his perfectly healthy 13 year old daughter. smh.
Hi Momfours - totally agree here! Wanted to post this article on the harms from vaccines. Hopefully Alex can see this and change his stance. Vaccines cause harm.
Everyone knows this: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/the-complete-vaccine-harm-profile
Alex wrote a lot of words explaining his side. Why don’t you start with his points and rebut them one by one? The obvious implication is that you can’t, or won’t. If you want to imply something else, you know how to do so.
it's not her fault you don't understand her opinion. she doesn't owe you a thousand word essay using small words to explain it to you.
alex can form his own opinion drawn from his critical thinking, she can form her own opinion drawn from her critical thinking, and you have your opinion - apparently drawn from alex's critical thinking.
If that’s your answer, then you don’t understand that my opinion has nothing to do with HPV, only with how useless a rebuttal is when it consists entirely of the one word “insanity”.
lmao, this isn't a court of law, and you are the judge of absolutely nothing here.
if there is an actual proxy to gauge the "usefulness" of a comment it's the like button. her comments have far more likes than yours do, which means her comments are significantly more "useful" than yours are by at least an order of magnitude.
Sometimes a writer's point can be clear without a lot of explanation.
And if it isn’t? I notice you haven’t tried to explain it either. Alex listed and explained all his points. He deserves at least as detailed an answer. That you refuse to, or cannot, tells me all I need to know about the two arguments.
You make a fair point that Alex deserves a detailed answer to his listed points. Please scroll down to my post that makes 7 detailed refutations to his 7 points. I'd be curious as to your thoughts after reading it.
It probably would be interesting and I thank you for responding to his points, but Substack doesn't make it easy to find one comment out of 227, or maybe I am just too new to it to know a better way than diving into all subthreads. And I have only a peripheral interest in the HPV vaccine itself. My annoyance was with another keyboard commando pandering to her followers instead of furthering a discussion.
The real insanity is how this country continues to put up with leftist agendas narratives and ideology, and all we do is sit there and say “this is terrible, these people are bad, why are we letting this happen“…
Because people are cowards whores and avoidants. And you folks are as bad as these despicable uncaring polluted sociopaths who are trying to cram down decayed destructive dying plans every F’ing moment of our lives.
That’s insanity, knowing better and doing nothing about it.
I’d say you people should be ashamed of yourselves, but I don’t think most people commenting here genuinely practice the concept of shame.
You make good arguments for this, but I would like to caution you that in 5 years, or 10, 20 years, your daughter may not appreciate that you did this. She can get this shot anytime. How about if you talk to her frankly about HPV, cervical cancer and all other STDs and keep an open line of communication going? I would hate for her to have the shot, then feel like she doesn't need to use condoms to protect against other diseases. Or if she does use condoms in the future, why the need for the vaccine, as well, especially at this young age? When she becomes sexually active, if you have been open and honest in educating her, then go get her on some type of birth control and get the vaccine at that time. It's not an emergency at this point.
Both my boys received the HPV vaccine. I wish I would have left it up to them, but it was really pushed on us. I don't know if they had side effects, because I never thought about this stuff until the covid debacle. Both of them had strange illnesses in their teenage years. Both had mumps (despite being vaccinated). One had mono. One had eczema and other skin problems. Both had chicken pox (despite being vaccinated). I have a LOT of questions about all of it.
Hormonal birth control is one of the worst things you can do to your daughter, please don’t put her on it! Dramatically increased suicidal risks and mood disorders among many other problems
one problem is that since it tricks women into thinking they are pregnant they tend to find mates that they find weak and non-threatening to their perceived vulnerable condition.
then when they get married and decide to have kids and leave the pill, they realize they are not sexually attracted their partner.
Many such cases!
when i was in college (early 70's) the biology 101 professor came on stage in the lecture hall for the first class. i'll never forget it. she said "i was on the team that developed the birth control pill and i'm telling you- DON'T EVER TAKE IT. it tricks your body into thinking that it's always pregnant and that cannot be good!"
half the students in the class were men but still she felt it was important enough to say to everyone on the first day of class before she even told us her name.
i never forgot that and i never took the pill
Oh, that sounds wonderful, Carolyn! Wow! And you’re right about the speakers. We know they’ll be great! Nice chatting here on Substack!
Wow, Carolyn! Thanks for sharing this. Hey, are you going back to Polyface in August?
we are going 3 times- to the homesteading event in may, the two days of truth event in june and then the Brownstone event in august. we might add one more. there's the Rogue Food event and 2 days with Dr Tom Cowan. when Jp was working in SF, i really wanted him to schedule a visit with Cowan but he couldn't manage it.
will we see you there for Brownstone? are you going to the meet up the night before?
Not sure if going to the Brownstone event yet, but I would love to go again! Wow regarding all the Polyface events your going to--that's fantastic!
we go a lot. it's our summer vacation spread out in 3 or 4 weekends a year. you should go to something there. we buy tickets early to get the early bird discounts and try to book their "tiny stay" off grid cabin. we couldn't get it for the Brownstone event but there's another small farm down the road and we secured lodging there.
we've been to Rogue Food twice (Thomas Massie was the keynote both times and Catherine Austin Fitts once), two days of truth once. never been to the homesteader event so that will be new.
they haven't listed the speakers for Brownstone yet but who cares, really? just being on Polyface's sacred ground is enough for me!
BTW, we had 14 baby lambs on our NC farm!
I suppose abstinence is always best and hoping condoms don't break is a good second option.
Diaphragm; just put it in every night.
Alex, Please read Mary Holland's book "The HPV Vaccine on Trial" before you finalize this decision.
And recall that colloquially the HPV (never proven to cause cervical cancer at all) vaccine is often referred to as "Help Pay for Vioxx". Remember how Merck was heavily fined after killing upwards of 100,000 with that drug?
I just finished reading that NIH is rolling out the new VAERS system. The old system has shown to likely only show 10 t0 20% max of vaccine injuries. There was a major cover up with the HPV vaccine injuries. Consider waiting a few months to see what this new accurate system will show.
@Ally- Jeff Childers from Coffee and Covid (Substack) wrote about this topic just this morning. You should check it out.
Alex!!!!!! NOOO!!!!
HPV is a virus that your immune system can take care of so MAKE CERTAIN YOUR DAUGHTER KNOWS SHE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING GOOD CARE OF HER IMMUNE SYSTEM. The HPV shot is NOT a good one. There are plenty of seriously injured young people who suffered because their parents thought the way you are thinking and THEY REGRET IT BUT CAN NEVER UNDO WHAT THEY DID TO THEIR CHILD.
It seems that you have overlooked the compelling evidence produced against these shots by (a) Malone, (b) Midwestern Doctor, (c) Steve Kirsch. Frankly, I don't see how you could trust any Pharma product or intervention given the fallout from Covid (which you documented better than most). From mouthwash to vaccines, from paracetemol to aspirine, from chemo-therapy to...... (sigh, do I need to go on?) it's all driven by making us (the entire population) more sick and more dependent on their products. There are NO exceptions, all of it is deadly crap....please take the red pill and protect your children....I implore you. If I had young children now, none of them would see a modern day physician unless someone would put a gun to my head......
You are dead wrong about all drugs. Many are Lifesavers. Antibiotics and steroids saved my life just recently when I was in respiratory failure and could easily have died.
How do you for certain that it was the drugs and not your own innate immune system?
Because before receiving antibiotics and a particular steroid I was in respiratory failure, afterwards I was able to breathe w/o supplemental oxygen. Therefore the logical conclusion is that the drugs reversed the condition. It's science, man.
I appreciate your candor, Alex, with your readers, even though you knew there would be backlash. It is wonderful to be able to have the medical freedom to decide whether or not you’ll be getting this vaccine for your minor child. I am thankful for this right in our country, something that has been challenged repeatedly, as our rights as parents have eroded and are currently being restored, albeit slowly.
I recommend that you read Vaccines, Amen by Aaron Siri if you have not already. He does specifically write about the HPV vaccine.
Years ago, I made the decision not to vaccinate my daughter. The office even tried to get my son vaccinated for HPV as well, during which they used underhanded tactics to persuade him, that I didn’t appreciate. He was well trained by me, so said no and promptly told me. I am happy with my decision, as both are well into their twenties now and healthy.
My sister had cervical cancer and although no cancer is a good cancer to get, along with cervical cancer being quite rare, if you take care of yourself and get regular yearly exams and Pap smears, it would most likely be caught early, and require relatively minor treatment in the scheme of things. I am not sure where you, Alex, have heard about cervical cancer as being particularly a bad one to get, as I have always thought the opposite. My sister had minor surgery to remove the cancer and has been cancer free for decades.
Being a parent is challenging especially in the current environment. My best to you and your family. We may not agree on this issue, and I respect and will defend your right to make this decision for your child.
You're right - cervical cancer is rarely fatal. Pap smears catch it early, treatment is almost always successful, and it's not a leading cause of death for women in the US.
https://www.midwesterndoctor.com/p/the-hpv-vaccine-disaster-was-a-test?utm_source=publication-search
do you and your daughter a favor and read this first.
I've read a lot of midwesterndoctor.com stuff and have noticed there are instances where MWD and Alex Berenson do not agree.
I personally would like to see a smackdown between MWD and Alex Berenson on some of the more clinically meaningful topics where they disagree. Either from MWD or from Alex Berenson or they could have a mano-y-mano Zoom. I volunteer to officiate.
What say ye, Unreported Truthers?
Smack-down! Smack-down! Smack-down! Smack-down...
The MWD is conservative and a clinician . He is not an Alex.
And he is a she. Not that that matters.
How do you know that?? I wish we knew who he or she is.
Correct. And all the more reason for a smackdown.
Thanks for weighting in. If only we could get the two of them to weigh in. See what I did there?
Alex for God's sake, before you do something you may later regret, read the section on Gardasil in Aaron Siri's book "Vaccines Amen." You don't know the side effects because there was never a placebo group, the group the company claimed was a "placebo group" actually received 225 mcg or 450 mcg of Amorphous Aluminum Hydroxyphosphate Sulfate (AAHS). You're going to trust your daughter's health to a company that is that dishonest? And FWIW, I personally know two women, and the mother of a third, who were permanently damaged by that vaccine. The mother is a nurse and was very mainstream but it was clear as day to her that the vaccine destroyed her daughter's gut, she almost died and now has permanent gastric autoimmune issues. The two other women also have permanent autoimmune issues. The benefits are marginal at best, why on earth would you take such a risk with your daughter's health?
Autoimmune diseases affect EVERY.single.aspect of your life, forever.
Alex writes:
" The vaccine is significantly more effective when it is administered well before a person already has HPV — that is, well before she has begun having sex,
since almost everyone who has sex eventually gets HPV."
That's probably the dumbest thing he ever wrote. Really stupid.
I was thinking the same thing. Everyone who has sex gets HPV eventually? Source please Alex.
Yep, my wife has had sex 10 K+ times with no hint of HPV.
You love your daughter. You want what's best for her. My experience as a parent has been that pediatricians persuade well through a parent's love/fear/protect pathways.
If rebellious enough to read ebm.bmj article "intended for medical healthcare professionals" about lack of independent studies investigating adverse side effects of HPV vaccine, one might consider protection in a different light.
My two cents. I worked in Health insurance when the HPV vaccine became popular. I had a few co workers ask my opinion knowing I was a Christian and assumed I would be anti vaxx.
I didn't have an opinion on it because my kids were to young for it at that time. As i looked into it, we decided that we weren't going to have our 3 girls get it. If they wanted to after they were 18, they were welcome to.
The medical director of the insurance company i worked for told us that the hpv vaccine was most effective for women who were going to have multiple partners. The risk of cancer goes up substantially with more sexual partners.
So, all my daughters now are married to their first serious boyfriend, if they slept around before, it they would have had to have been super creative as they were with us so much of the time. Also, my wife and I didn't sleep around either.
Last thing, one of my daughters is a medical assistant and her clinic suggested she take it. She hadn't researched it and just took dose #1 without questions. She had a major reaction to it and was in bed sick for two days. She elected not to have the subsequent shots.
Fine...agree or disagree. Read the journals..accept the risk or not. We ALL agree on this: NO MANDATES EVER
I'm astonished to read your arguments for getting the vaccine.
The points you are countering are not the actual arguments for distrusting the vaccine's safety, efficacy, and necessity.
1) The fact that HPV is sexually transmitted disease means that it's preventable without a vaccine. More importantly, cervical cancer, even in the presence of HPV vaccination, can be avoided by finding and addressing chronic infection.
2) The efficacy data you cite as "unequivocal" (in your response to "but she's only 13") is anything but.
Efficacy has been consistently claimed by studies 10, 15, 20 years following introduction of the vaccine without considering several crucial factors:
a) cervical cancer can take SEVERAL decades to develop. So that by itself means that "efficacy studies" after only 10-15 years are suspect.
b) sexual activity across all age groups has steadily and significantly declined since the introduction of the vaccine. NONE of the studies supposedly finding vaccine efficacy considers this. And it's so obvious: if sexual activity has significantly declined, that by itself can explain a significant decline in STD's and their related sequelae.
c) improvements in diagnosing and treating HPV and related pre-cancerous conditions, have been implemented as well as improvements in reducing other susceptibilities to chronic HPV.
According to the American Cancer Society, any ONE of the following can double risk of ccervical cancer: multiple sexual partners, first pregnancy before age 17, drug or alcohol abuse, and diet low in fruits and vegetables.
Again, the significant decline in sexual activity across all age groups impacts the first two of those risk factors.
3) You made the same argument as in 2); you cite efficacy that the studies, when viewed closely, don't fully support. You might try reading HPV Vaccine on Trial, by Holland/Rosenberg/Iorio; the book goes into great detail about the flaws in the studies, with impeccable citations.
4) Of course you'd rather not have your child get cervical cancer. Nobody wants their child to have cervical cancer. But a vaccine whose worth is in question (if you'd bother to look closely at the real criticisms rather than the social media ones) is not necessarily the answer, at least, not according to the arguments you've marshaled.
5) The fact that women who are vaccinated still get cervical cancer does NOT mean that they were necessarily exposed to HPV before vaccination, and is NOT an argument for vaccination.
It's an argument for better diagnostic services; a yearly Pap smear would have caught those cases many years before they became cancerous, and a yearly blood test would catch chronic infections before pre-cancerous lesions even form.
It's also an argument for reducing the known susceptibilities listed above. You want your daughter to cut her risk in half? Tell her not to have multiple sexual partners. Tell her to avoid pregnancy. Heck, tell her to use condoms rather than the pill.
6) You obviously have not looked closely at the clinical trials, nor do you seem to be aware of the serious concerns they raise. None of the placebo groups in these trials were given a true inert placebo. Most were given an injection of the non-viral ingredients in the vaccine, including Merck's proprietary adjuvant AAHS.
Since the purpose of AAHS is to trigger a stronger immune reaction, any injection containing it can obviously not be considered a true placebo. Autoimmune reactions can take days to weeks to manifest, and often take months or even years to correctly diagnose.
The clinical trials don't show that the groups given the vaccine didn't have concerning adverse reactions. They show a similar RATE of adverse reactions between the vaccine group and the AAHS group.
So when you say that there's no hard data showing adverse reactions in the clinical trials, you also have to acknowledge that there is no hard data --given the immense flaws in the clinical trials' design -- showing safety. I think it's important for you and your wife to read Łucja Tomlienovic's excellent study of the basic problems as well as the ethical issues surrounding the Gardasil prelicensure trials: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11191454/
7) "Merck makes a lot of money from Gardasil." I care less about what they make from any given product, and more about what they are doing with their money.
Maybe take a closer look -- if you can -- at what Merck spends on marketing, lobbying, PACs, and funding various chairs and entire departments of people who make health care decisions for the masses.
About 12 or 13 years ago, I toured the journalism department at West Virginia University, and sat in on a couple of classes. The teacher proudly showed me their new Merck computer lab, with state-of-the-art Apple computers. Back then, Merck was listed as a corporate donor on their website. These days, though, it's much harder to track this kind of money.
Finally, I entirely agree with you: "Blaming vaccines for everything equals blaming vaccines for nothing. Pretending all vaccines are equally terrible is the same as pretending they’re all equally great."
I also do not want your daughter -- or anyone's daughter -- to get cervical cancer.
But I believe that looking at ALL the facts is so supremely important that I joined as a subscriber just so I could make this comment.
I hope you take it seriously and do more research. Your daughter deserves that.
Thanks for your fascinating reply, Alison. That's dedication, becoming a subscriber so you could write a comment. Intelligent comments like yours are educating me, one reason why I became a subscriber myself. I am learning so much from such thoughtful, informative comments.
This is a truly excellent comment and I love that you subcribed and commented because you felt so strongly about science, facts, Alex's readers, and -- most importantly -- his and all our daughters!