alt Hacker NewsDeath risk was already low in many places.
Over a period of 30 years, approximately 400 women died of the disease under age 25 in the USA. [1] So many women's deaths were reported to VAERS in relationship to the HPV vaccination that it exceeded the death rate of the disease itself in the United States after approval. In the safety systems setup in 1986 in exchange for immunity for the vaccine manufacturers, the death rate from the HPV vaccine itself exceeds the death rates of cervical cancer, and that says nothing about the tens of thousands of other adverse events.
Dr. Harper was responsible for the phase 2 and phase 3 safety and effectiveness studies and made a speech and said she was making it so she could "clear her conscience so she could sleep at night" On October 2, 2009 in Reston Virginia at the 4th International Conference on Vaccination.
She specifically said that the vaccination was unlikely to have any effect upon the rate of cervical cancer in the United States. If it would not reduce in the United States, why would it reduce it elsewhere? Most reportage since that time frame relates to total cancer cancers and treats the injections as risk free.
The approved vaccination received approval for 4 strains out of more than 40 known.
And while studies are retracted related to fertility -- the hard data from fertility services providers is not. Gravidity (the number of times one is pregnant) is about halved for the HPV vaccinated vs the unvaccinated.
There have also been large scale studies indicating the same, but when politics retracts something, many believe that one should ignore that document. The raw gravidity counts on the other hand, are a observable fact. The vaccinated patients were even older, which makes it even worse, because those are older women who have had more time to be pregnant. [2]
Gravidity is a fact. So is cutting it by half via HPV correlation Read link two. Look at those gravidity numbers for vaccinated women and unvaccinated women. HPV vaccination may not be caused by eugenics but it is certainly correlated with it.
1. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2827212
2. https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(23)00478-8/full...
To be clarify for everyone: both of the cited articles argue in favor of HPV vaccination. I assumed they would be arguing against since the comment is arguing against, but that is not the case.
In particular, you've mistaken the result of the second study.
> The vaccinated patients were even older, which makes it even worse, because those are older women who have had more time to be pregnant.
^ this is incorrect. Indeed according to the study, the vaccinated patients are younger (33.1) than the unvaccinated patients (37.4), which could easily explain the difference in gravidity. The authors do not report having controlled for age when computing the gravidity effect.
Note also that the entire study was conducted with a population of patients seeking fertility care, so the study can't support the general claim "gravidity is halved for the HPV vaccinated" even were the significance level to survive age-controlling statistics (which it likely would not).