The benefits from this vaccine seem to be radically outweighed by the potential consequences:
The BMJ has published the case report of a healthy 16-year-old Australian girl whose womanhood appears to have been stolen by Gardasil vaccinations. She has been thrust into full-fledged menopause, her ovaries irrevocably shut down, before becoming a woman. The authors, Deirdre Therese Little and Harvey Rodrick Grenville Ward1, draw direct attention to the fact that, though the girl has been thoroughly examined and tested, there is no known explanation other than the series of three Gardasil vaccinations she had.
Making matters worse is that there may be many other such cases, but most are likely masked by the routine treatment of irregular or scanty menstruation with oral contraceptives. Indeed, it’s only because this girl refused them that the truth of her situation was unmasked. Just how many other girls have lost their chance at motherhood, but don’t know because their condition is masked?
The authors noted that, although the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) of Australia provides data on the histology of rat testes and epididymides in the Australian Public Assessment Report for Human Papillomavirus Quadrivalent Vaccine*, no information is provided for rat ovaries. They sent a Freedom of Information request for “documented rat ovarian histology post-quadrivalent* HPV vaccination that may have been performed by the sponsor and forwarded to the TGA”.
Considering the fact that dozens of people died as a result of this vaccine, it should be treated the exact same way a faulty vehicle line is treated: recall. The vaccine-manufacturer, Merck, should recall the vaccine pending further investigation into this very serious issue. If Toyota, Ford, and Honda all do vehicle recalls for simple things like broken windshield wipers, malfunctioning brake-pedals, or damaged windows, then vaccine companies should follow suit. Arguably, they should be even more strident in it since so many people take vaccines that were purported to be good for our health. Those harmed by it should be given compensation. This is the way American companies do it when one of their products damages it’s customer, so why should Merck be any different? Why are they granted immunity from civil liability, but Toyota is not?
Patriotism, Inc. 