HPV cervical cancer vaccine Cervarix side effects?
'Government advertising claims and "facts" circulated for over a year were false and misleading'
says Grace Filby. 'The public are owed an apology.'
Arm yourself for life? No, that is not right.
The top photo shows a bus on its way to Merstham in 2009, waiting at the Reigate School bus stop.
We now know that Surrey Primary Care Trust's Cervarix advert headline claim was misleading and untrue, and the public have not been informed officially.
Many girls may feel that they were deceived by the whole HPV vaccine advertising strategy of the NHS, especially those who were injured and maimed during these 3 years the government's programme has been running. more>
During August and September 2009 the Primary Care Trust in Surrey (and others including West Sussex) placed advertisements for the HPV Cervarix vaccine programme on local buses with the questionable headline claim "Arm yourself for life". My photographs taken in Reigate illustrate this. In Brighton, East Sussex there were adverts on the backs of toilet doors in cinemas. The previous year, other large adverts had been placed by the NHS in the national press e.g. The Guardian Body & Soul, 13 September 2008 showing three young girls baring their arms with the slogan "Armed for life".
It has now been established via the Advertising Standards Authority that this claim was misleading and untrue. Apart from admitting that serious side effects do happen occasionally, the Patient Information Leaflet clearly states that the duration of protection is currently unknown, and the vaccine can give only limited protection. It has taken the best part of a year to discover that the Advertising Standards Authority upheld a complaint against West Sussex Primary Care Trust for displaying the same adverts. The letter, dated 28 January 2010 was addressed to a journalist and copied to MP Nick Gibb. The Investigations Executive Simon Mockler asked them to keep the contents of the letter confidential since this is their policy, yet it is in the public interest to be told the truth about risks and benefits of a new medicine aimed at children. Mr Mockler has informed me that basic information including the advertiser's name and where the ad appeared was published on the website at http://www.asa.org.uk/Complaints-and-ASA-action/Adjudications/Advanced-Search.aspx?Start=03/03/2010&End=03/03/2010#results.
He added: 'You will need to click on the tab headed “informally resolved complaints”. The page also lists the number of complainants – one in this case.)'
The basic information makes no reference to the HPV vaccine campaign.
To quote a blogger's archive as far back as September 2008, "The hasty use of this vaccine for mass vaccination is ill considered, and amounts to a vast and needless experiment on our youth, principally for the commercial benefit of GSK."
I have since located several places online through Westminster Primary Care Trust where they are still using the offending claim "Arm Yourself For Life" and other misleading statements. I have therefore made a formal complaint - December 2010.
Quote from Health Minister Anne Milton, ref: 2010/11/Filby/rhg
"The advertising of medicines is currently regulated by the Medicines (Advertising) Regulations 1994 (SI 1994/1932 as amended) rathr than the 1968 provision mentioned by Ms Filby. It remains an offence to issue an advertisement for a medicine that is misleading."
There is no doubt that false information was being circulated for over a year, which originated from the Dept of Health, as proved by my FOI question online at whatdotheyknow.com and documented in my Still Life presentation. The apology letter from Minister Dawn Primarolo to me of June 2009 confirms this. It is evidence that neither she nor her departmental staff did their due diligence to check the basic facts and figures about risks and side effects. Minister Anne Milton's letter of 3 December 2010 continues to describe this as an "accidental error" and fails to acknowledge that the false information was still being circulated via the internet and in print, many months later. The printed false information was also given to all the members of JCVI, on which they based their discussions and decisions, and I suspect, without the errors ever being brought to their attention.
There is no doubt that there have been serious side effects, no matter what MHRA customer enquiries have stated. There is a quote on the MHRA site dating back to the time when Natalie Morton died - see http://www.relax-well.co.uk/HPV.html#LOGIC - the "majority" of side effects being mild. Turn that around and it shows that a minority are, indeed, serious. What else would we expect with vaccines and pharmaceutical products?
The official DoH leaflets 2010 circulated to families of 12 year old girls in the UK describe the side effects of Cervarix as "quite mild". If young girls are being led to believe that the ONLY side effects are QUITE MILD and that more serious side effects are "EXTREMELY RARE" and "THE NURSES KNOW HOW TO DEAL WITH THEM" then clearly the government propaganda is still misleading and untrue, to the point of dishonesty.
Quote: "It was not unexpected that such events would be reported as most vaccines can cause these."
Editor of Drug Safety Update, Vigilance & Risk Management of Medicines, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
So, all the civil servants, the medical staff and the politicians who have instituted this vastly expensive HPV vaccine programme, have therefore anticipated these thousands of side effects, including serious and long-term side effects, from day 1. They have all been accomplices in causing that bodily harm to innocent young girls. Shame on them for such recklessness and disregard for the consequences.
13 Sept. 2010: HPV vaccine - aluminium toxin and silica antidote 5:11 mins
Grace Filby explains that HPV cervical cancer vaccines contain aluminium - a nerve poison. Some girls are getting serious side effects. Scientists at Keele University have shown that silica-rich mineral water is a natural antidote. Parents are writing in to say that their girls are now getting better as a result of drinking silica-rich mineral water e.g. Volvic for a few weeks.
UK HPV Vaccine programme errors + antidote to aluminium toxin:
Pictures from an online presentation by Grace Filby BA(Hons) Cert Ed FRSA questioning the UK govt's HPV vaccine programme statistics about side effects e.g. arthralgia (joint pain) amongst school girls aged 12 upwards. Government minister Dawn Primarolo sent a letter of apology for the mistakes. Eventually the official online documents were altered but no reprints were issued.
See Still_Life pdf for details about the antidote to aluminium toxin - silica-rich mineral waters.
The Independent newspaper reports - Andrew Witty, Chief Executive of GSK - 2010 Salary £928,880
Bonus £2 million
2010 total £3.13 million
2009 total £1.78 million
Glaxo Smith Kline is the manufacturer of Cervarix HPV vaccine.
MHRA: "no evidence to suggest that the vaccine carries any long-term side effects".
Grace Filby asks the MHRA to reconsider based on new evidence 28.7.10
Thank you for your belated reply upholding that: "The MHRA has reviewed all reported side effects related to Cervarix and concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that the vaccine carries any long-term side effects."
You finish by saying that any emerging evidence relating to possible risks associated with the vaccine would be carefully reviewed and, if appropriate, regulatory action would be taken.
May I remind you of the Exley scientific paper that I sent to your colleague Jenny Wong last year (attached again) and you were party to this correspondence, also attached. This indeed was emerging evidence from Keele University, a highly regarded and independent source. Published in 2008/9, the paper by Exley et al gave a clear scientific warning about the risks of mass vaccination programmes such as HPV. It is authored by a team of international academics who have done the scientific research on aluminium, its biological effects on life and its chemical antidote silica (to be precise, orthosilicic acid), whereas I must respectfully point out that the MHRA and the Government's independent advisory commission has not.
The concluding point is that as many as 1 in 100 are hypersensitive to aluminium. I maintain that this subset of British schoolgirls and their families cannot just be 'brushed under the carpet', year after year. They have a right to know about this call for caution before they subject themselves to a course of 3 vaccinations at age just 12 when they are still children. It is very simple to check in advance whether someone is hypersensitive to aluminium.
Here is the summary:
"Macrophagic myofasciitis and chronic fatigue syndrome are severely disabling conditions which may be caused by adverse reactions to aluminium-containing adjuvants in vaccines. While a little is known of disease aetiology both conditions are characterised by an aberrant immune response, have a number of prominent symptoms in common and are coincident in many individuals. Herein, we have described a case of vaccine-associated chronic fatigue syndrome and macrophagic myofasciitis in an individual demonstrating aluminium overload. This is the first report linking the latter with either of these two conditions and the possibility is considered that the coincident aluminium overload contributed significantly to the severity of these conditions in this individual. This case has highlighted potential dangers associated with aluminium-containing adjuvants and we have elucidated a possible mechanism whereby vaccination involving aluminium-containing adjuvants could trigger the cascade of immunological events..." 2008 Elsevier Ltd.
Note that this was about to be published just after a WHO statement dated October 2008 "At present there is no evidence of a health risk from aluminium-containing vaccines or any justification for changing current vaccination practices." (my italics)
Unfortunately your colleague Jenny Wong neglected to mention in her email sent Friday September 04, 2009 2:16pm the next, crucial statement from the WHO that "The Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) suggests more research is required to determine if there are links between macrophagic myofasciitis (MMF) and aluminum-containing vaccines." The current correct web reference is http://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/topics/aluminium/statement_112002/en/index.html. You would find that they actually add to the mounting evidence suggesting aluminium is causing harm and it may not be merely a coincidence.
Whereas I had forwarded this additional Exley research to the MHRA in September 2009, evidently the significance and its value have still not got through to all personnel at the MHRA yet, nor to the Government's independent expert advisory Commission on Human Medicines (CHM).
The third document I am attaching (Exley Chapter Al and Med.pdf) contains a comment that is also worth drawing to your attention again:
See page 4:"We need to ensure that we are not hoodwinked into equating a lack of information about a subject area with a lack of interest or importance of that area. This remains a successful ploy of those with a vested interest in maintaining a high level of ignorance of human exposure to aluminium." (my italics)
Please would you ensure that this emerging evidence is carefully reviewed so that the appropriate regulatory action can now be taken.
Subject: RE: Cervarix evidence of long-term side effects
Dear Ms Filby,
Thank you for your e-mail regarding the safety of Cervarix vaccine. Please accept my apologies for the delay in replying to you.
[5 lines redacted - GF]
CFS/ME is not an uncommon condition which can occur naturally amongst adolescents and rates are greater in females than in males. With such widespread usage of Cervarix vaccine in adolescent girls (more than 4.5 million doses in the UK so far), it is inevitable that medical conditions such as these will occur not long after vaccination and be suspected as side effects even if the vaccine played no role. However, newly occurring or previously undiagnosed underlying illness may be an alternative cause.
The MHRA has conducted an analysis of CFS and chronic fatigue-like conditions following HPV vaccine. This indicates that more than 100 new cases of CFS would have been expected to occur amongst girls vaccinated so far regardless of vaccination, with many more cases of chronic fatigue-like syndrome. The fact that less than 15 such cases have been reported so far, even accounting for under-reporting, does not suggest that the vaccine is causing these conditions.
It remains the case that we are aware of no confirmed evidence that the vaccine carries long term risks, including CFS/ME. This conclusion was endorsed by the Government's independent expert advisory Commission on Human Medicines (CHM).
I would like to reassure you that, as with all vaccines and medicines, the MHRA keeps the safety of HPV vaccine under close and continual review. Any emerging evidence relating to possible risks associated with the vaccine would be carefully reviewed and, if appropriate, regulatory action would be taken.
I hope this reply is helpful.
Tony Chohan Pharmacovigilance Service Desk Officer Vigilance & Risk Management of Medicines Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency Room 15-244, Market Towers, 1 Nine Elms Lane, London. SW8 5NQ Direct Line: 020 7084 3730 Email: Tony.Chohan@mhra.gsi.gov.uk
Thank you for your email regarding the cancer vaccine. I'm afraid that I don't agree with you. I think it is right to undertake a vaccination programme against HPV. It will drastically reduce the second most common sexually transmitted infection in the UK but it will be voluntary, requiring parental consent prior to the injection being administered [my italics - parental consent is no longer required- GF].
From: Grace Filby [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: 24 September 2008 16:47 To: Norman Lamb; LANSLEY, Andrew Subject: Cancer vaccine Importance: High
Dear Mr Lamb and Mr Lansley,
I have been in contact with you both before about health matters, and today I am writing to you both with a suggestion, hoping you can help to call a halt to the mass-injection of cancer vaccine into the young female population of this country.
Today, Wednesday 24, we have the news that a Catholic School in Manchester has acted and refused the vaccinations on their school premises. In the official letter sent out by the governing body (syndicated by their local newspapers), they were pointing out that the staff had noticed the absences immediately after the jabs were given in the pilot study there. Unless they have changed the system since my teaching career, they would have had a whole collection of letters from the parents giving the reasons for these absences and these would be kept in the files.
I do suggest that this sort of documented evidence - already in existence and computerised, would be very useful if properly put together and analysed statistically, (and independently of the NHS, the Dept of Health, the MHRA and the manufacturers), thereby satisfying the pupils' and parents' need for accurate information about the risks involved. [my italics - GF]
I also reiterate my call to halt the vaccination programme for the time being, at least. In the meantime, perhaps there will soon be many more school governing bodies that will think for themselves, follow the example and genuinely show their care and concern for the health and wellbeing of all their pupils.
You may note the text comments and video response posted by a mother in the USA. Her message is very sincere too - highly informative and extremely moving to hear of her daughter's pain. It is at least some consolation that the daughter is now feeling a bit better through very careful nurturing, good nutrition and organic food. She is only 11 years old.
Grace Filby commented on 08 September 2010 but NHS Choices removed it.
HPV vaccines contain aluminium - a neurotoxin, proven harmful and deadly to aquatic life e.g. salmon in rivers. Aluminium has been used in vaccines for many years, just based on an assumption that it was safe although never tested.
New scientific studies at Keele University link aluminium with human medical conditions including chronic fatigue syndrome CFS/ME. Although they don’t receive funding or much publicity, they published a paper in 2008, stating that a cautionary approach would be necessary with mass vaccination programmes like this HPV one, since as many as 1 in 100 people may be hypersensitive to it.
Some girls I know of in the UK were so seriously ill after their HPV Cervarix vaccinations in 2008 and 2009 that they were hospitalised for months and now disabled, so families have combined together for a legal case. Medical updates are not reported in the press although politicians and officials are aware. The other HPV vaccine, Gardasil as used in the USA and now for girls in Ireland, is being linked with 1000s of side effects and injuries, visits to hospital emergency depts and scores of deaths. I simply do not believe the official stance that these injuries and deaths to previously healthy young girls were a coincidence.
To repeat, aluminium is a neurotoxin - a nerve poison - so what is the excuse for injecting it directly into the flesh of young girls? In 2008 I found that the original UK DoH 'fact'sheets vastly understated statistics about side effects so nobody could make an informed decision in the first place. The figures were played down by 10x -100x. It is no wonder doctors, nurses and the public naively believed that HPV vaccines were safe. The apology letter from ex-Minister Dawn Primarolo is evidence that neither she nor her departmental staff did their due diligence to check facts and figures about risks and side effects before “selling” this programme to the British public in 2008.
Grace Filby commented on 08 September 2010 but NHS Choices removed it.
In answer to enjee's question, 06 August 2010,
"but they haven't said what the ingredients are! I want to know what's in it before my daughter has it - especially if there is mercury or aluminium in it."
I hope NHS Choices will allow me to say here that - yes, it is a fact, stated on the manufacturers' patient information leaflets: HPV vaccines do contain aluminium. It is a neurotoxin, proven harmful and deadly to aquatic life e.g. salmon in rivers. Aluminium has been used in vaccines for many years, just based on an assumption that it was safe although never tested. New scientific studies at Keele University link aluminium with human medical conditions including chronic fatigue syndrome CFS/ME. Although they don’t receive funding or much publicity, they published a paper in 2008, stating that a cautionary approach would be necessary with mass vaccination programmes like this HPV one, since as many as 1 in 100 people may be hypersensitive to aluminium.
I find it hard to believe the official stance worldwide that injuries and deaths to previously healthy young girls after HPV vaccinations were a coincidence. To repeat, aluminium is a neurotoxin - a nerve poison - so what is the excuse for injecting it directly into the flesh of young girls? There is concern about the effect it is having on young girls' fertility - no tests were done.... I can offer no advice, only information.
In 2008 I found that the original UK DoH 'fact'sheets vastly understated statistics about side effects so nobody could make an informed decision in the first place. The figures were played down by 10x -100x. This was admitted to me officially via the Freedom of Information Act.
See http://www.relax-well.co.uk/HPV.html for independent evidence-based research.
1. There are natural anti-virals for the regression of HPV infections and cervical lesions.
2. The chemicals - official "Irritants" are entering the environment unchecked, but toxic to aquatic organisms
3. Excessive mortality was reported with dog and rat studies; Hair and claw tests not done? Lack of scientific rigour; Faecal elimination omitted twice in conclusions. Unethical?
4. There was a 1 in 35 likelihood of a girl reporting a Serious Adverse Event. There are unexplored pregnancy and fertility issues.
5. Reported Serious Adverse Events were MAGICALLY reduced from 882 to 27.
6. The 5 human fatalities could have been caused by the vaccine - danger of car crashes from seizures and fatigue.
Also the females in the clinical trials all had to be healthy; no clinical trials were done on people with pre-existing medical conditions.
I think it is a shame that these points have not been considered by the politicians and medical advisers who authorised it as a mass-vaccination programme for our young girls. It is not too late for the next academic year-group to be alerted and informed.
Grace Filby commented on 9th September 2010: but NHS Choices removed it.
I fail to see why your page heading is still "Why HPV vaccination is necessary" when your information contains a list of all the things the vaccine doesn't do, and advocates condoms anyway, and explains that the immune system can usually get rid of HPV infections without it causing harm. I expect clean water has something to do with it.
The last bit is a puzzle:
"In 99% of cases, cervical cancer results from a history of infection with high risk types of HPV.
If you are infected with a high risk type of HPV, you will have no symptoms."
So where was any proof of a history of infection?
Many people do not accept that the vaccine is "necessary" - unavoidable, inevitable, pre-destined or even enforced - when the human race survived all this time without it, and did not have to suffer any of the chemical side effects or pressure from big business until recently.
Grace Filby commented on 09 September 2010but NHS Choices removed it.
This NHS Choices page currently states that available evidence does not suggest that the vaccine caused the condition - well, the available evidence may not actually prove it but it certainly does suggest it to me. Even amongst the comments posted on these NHS Choices pages there is documented evidence directly from teenage girls who have been harmed and even disabled from this Cervarix vaccine. People can read it for themselves and make up their own minds whether it suggests the vaccine caused the condition.
There are other girls hospitalised - too ill to post comments probably - and the MHRA should be well aware of this by now.
I think it is no coincidence when scientists have shown that aluminium (as in this vaccine) can do a lot of harm to some people.
Grace Filby commented on 10 September 2010but NHS Choices removed it.
Reading the published comments on this page I find it very sad that girls are suffering such horrible side effects without being informed of the risks and yet the school nurses have just brushed them aside.
The official leaflets currently being circulated to the families of 12 year old girls in the UK describe the side effects of Cervarix as "quite mild". If young girls are being led to believe that the only side effects are quite mild and that more serious side effects are "extremely rare" and "the nurses know how to deal with them" then clearly the information is false and misleading.
I agree with Mr and Mrs Martin 4 June 2009 that parents are NOT being given the full balanced facts. There is evidence through a Freedom of Information reply and even an official letter dated 3 June 2009.
How appalling that one parent was moved to write "this injection has ruined my daughter's life".
Grace Filby said on 20 September 2010
This is a reply to Kait F.
You could print out this webpage and ask your mum to read it?
Also mention that this website is called "Your health, your choices", and the general principle of the Cervarix programme is that it is voluntary. I have it in writing directly from the current Secretary of State for Health, Andrew Lansley, 2 years ago that it would be voluntary. I think, legally, the decision is up to you.
Well done for doing your own research on the side effects beforehand.
The NHS leaflets just say that side effects are "quite mild" but that is not what people are commenting here.
Grace Filby said on 22 September 2010but NHS Choices removed it.
Bry057, regarding the proper facts and figures, the printed batch of 50,000 NHS booklets in 2008 states some incomplete facts and wrong figures about side effects. The Dept of Health admitted it in a Freedom of Information reply but they did not let people know until the following year. The printed figures were 10x to 100x lower than the actual ones so they were very misleading about safety and caution.
Now the small leaflets being given out in schools just say that side effects are "quite mild".
Several people have brought it to the attention of their MPs and mentioned the Medicines Act 1968 Section 93, because it is an offence to give false and misleading information about medicines.
Grace Filby said on 22 November 2010but NHS Choices removed it.
Why doesn't this page issue a caution if the person to be vaccinated has a severe infection with a high temperature? It states in the Patient Information Leaflet that it might be necessary to postpone the vaccination until recovery.
Also the PIL admits that there is insufficient data concerning the use of Cervarix during pregnancy, and if you look at the reported adverse events you will find spontaneous abortions (miscarriages) and reproductive system disorders amongst other things. People are saying it is reducing fertility and cutting the population that way. Actually, without any ongoing research being done, how will we know for sure?
One more point - the clinical trials excluded anyone with an existing medical condition so that might be another reason for caution, and this is backed up by the new EMC Medicine Guide, September '10. It now alerts people because of medicine interactions - even complementary preparations and vitamins. I do think that not enough research has been done yet. It would be better not to inflict harm, wouldn't it when the MHRA have admitted to me that many vaccines can cause long term and serious side effects?
Their wording was "it was not unexpected that such events would be reported as most vaccines can cause these". Ref: 10.11.2010 by email from the editor of Drug Safety Update, MHRA.
Dear Ms Filby,
Re: The MHRA definition of a serious reaction
Thank you for your recent correspondence dated 19/10/2009.
I can confirm that the MHRA definition of a serious reaction is two fold and relates to whether a reaction term is considered serious according to our medical dictionary and also if the reporter considers the Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) report to be serious due to the following criteria:
Have resulted in, or prolonged, hospitalisation
Examples of serious reactions include arrhythmias, anaphylaxis and renal dysfunction.
Please note that in contrast a severe reaction is one that might not be life-threatening or disabling but can seriously affect an individual patient. For example, headaches are not normally considered serious in nature, but may be very severe.
I hope that this information is useful to you.
Saira Mahmood Pharmacovigilance Scientist Vigilance and Risk Management of Medicines
Cc: Jenny Wong, Pharmacovigilance Risk Management Group
CERVARIX – THE SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION
Report summary from Grace Filby BA(Hons) Cert Ed FRSA
handed to Mark Simmonds MP, now Ex-Shadow Health Minister for Vaccines July 09
There are natural anti-virals for the regression of HPV infections and cervical lesions. (p2)
The chemicals – official ‘Irritants’ – are entering the environment unchecked, but toxic to aquatic organisms. (p3)
No risk assessment. (p6-7)
Excessive mortality reported with dog and rat studies. (p5)
Hair and claw tests not done? Lack of scientific rigour.
Faecal elimination omitted twice in conclusions. Unethical?
1 in 35 likelihood of a girl reporting a Serious Adverse Event. (p15)
Unexplored pregnancy issues.
Reported SAEs MAGICALLY reduced from 882 to 27. (p16)
The 5 human fatalities could have been caused by the vaccine – danger of car crashes from seizures and fatigue. (p22)
Sensitivity tests need to be carried out before any vaccination – a kinesiologist can do this. (p.27)
Freedom of Information Officer confirms 50,000 faulty HPV jab leaflets
9 June 2009
Dear Ms Filby,
Thank you for your email of 19 May requesting, under the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act, information relating to the revision of the factsheet entitled Beating Cervical Cancer: The Facts. Your email has been passed to me for reply.
You have raised a number of questions, which I have answered in turn.
• Please could you let me know the print run figures and dates for the original document ‘Beating cervical cancer - the facts’, reference number 288939_HPV_Factsheet.pdf.
The Department printed 50,000 copies in May 2008 of the HPV factsheet, The human papillomavirus: The virus, the diseases and the new HPV vaccine. These were distributed during the summer to Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and GPs in support of the HPV immunisation campaign starting in September 2008. The factsheet and other materials were also published at www.immunisation.nhs.uk.
• If any of them were recalled, how many?
No recall took place. The printed factsheets had been widely distributed before the revised version was produced, and a recall would have been extremely difficult.
• Please would you also inform me of the date of any print runs which have included the revised safety information, as per my FOI question dated 1st October 08 which pointed out the error in the statistics.
Under current policy, factsheets are web-only after the initial distribution and therefore there have been no reprints. The revised factsheet was published at: www.immunisation.nhs.uk. We understand that most of the target audience uses web-based information as a primary source.
• Could you also let me know whether an Erratum/Corrigendum message was ever sent out to make the safety information clear and accurate? If so, please inform me of the date, the wording and the number of copies sent out.
No erratum slips were printed or distributed to PCTs and GPs.
You may be interested to learn that there were 600,000 girls and young women in the first cohorts eligible for HPV immunisation from September 2008. The accelerated catch-up programme has now made the vaccine available to greater numbers from April 2009, and this programme is supported by online resources.
I hope this reply is helpful.
If you have any queries about this email, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to:
Head of the Freedom of Information Team
Department of Health
Ex-Minister of State for Health Primarolo apologises for 'accident'
From the Rt Hon Dawn Primarolo MP, now Ex-Minister of State for Public Health: received 6.6.09.
This letter was written on the Ex-Minister's penultimate day in office in the Department of Health. She transferred to a post as
Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families[!!! - GF]
Dear Ms. Filby
Thank you for your email of 14 May about the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programme.
I am sorry that there was an accidental [careless, blatant, huge - GF] error [plural, please - there were lots - GF] in a publication last year [claiming to be factual] about the HPV vaccine against cervical cancer. As soon as this was known, [and thank you, Ms. Grace Filby, for pointing it out publicly and promptly - GF] the Department corrected the error and published a revised [online only] version of the HPV factsheet, The human papillomavirus vaccine: The virus, the diseases and the new HPV vaccine, in November 2008. [The Department should admit that it failed to inform anyone about this in writing until June/July 2009 though, nor did it recall the 50,000 incorrect printed copies - GF]. The original version of the HPV factsheet was removed from the website www.immunisation.nhs.uk at the same time. [No Dawn, actually it wasn't, and it was all over the place on different NHS websites- GF]
You mention [mention? - no Dawn dear - I point out - GF] your concern that the original version of the factsheet is still available on the Department's website. As this appears not to be the case, [wrong there, Dawn - don't you have a whole team of staff who could have found them easily on Google, like I did] I would appreciate if you could forward details of the web address concerned, so that we can ensure that there is no misunderstanding. [...thinks ...and the Department won't pay you anything for your time and trouble, or expertise, nor will it acknowledge receipt or say thank you, even if you reply straight away on a weekend while I swan off to a new job as a Children's Minister of State ha ha]
The HPV vaccine is a major breakthrough in public health, and the first vaccine that can directly prevent cancer [no, 2 or 4 types of HPV]. It would be a travesty [wrong word, Dawn - Freudian slip?] if women were denied the potential that it offers because of scaremongering and supposition. [Who is doing the scaremongering, Dawn? - Surely not the drugs manfacturers and the NHS adverts?] The weight of evidence shows that the vaccine is safe, effective and capable of saving thousands of lives in the years [decades] ahead. [and who cares about serious side effects in young girls anyway? It will take 9 years to save one life; 28 years to save 650 lives on a one off basis and 75 yrs to save these lives annually - would you like to know the costs? GF]
I believe that we should support and celebrate the saving of women's lives by vaccination against a preventable illness. [Not at the cost of inevitable serious side effects to young girls from the vaccine, Dawn - did you not even think of the consequences? You show me one woman whose life has been saved by this vaccine and then you can celebrate - meanwhile there is a heck of a lot of long term nursing and caring to be done as a direct result of this government programme - GF].
I hope this clarifies the Government's position on this matter. [Yes, it indicates to me that the Government doesn't care much about side effects, correcting mistakes, good English, Maths, public opinion or cost - GF]
Faulty jab leaflets on Government website still online
Reply: 6th June 2009
Dear Ms Primarolo
Thank you for your letter of 3rd June and your apology about the accidental error in the HPV factsheet. I had first identified and reported this via your FOI officer on 1st October 2008.
You state that the original version was removed at the time of publishing the revised version in November.
It appears that you have been given incorrect information for which you may not be aware.
However it is your responsibility to have knowledge of the true facts. It is now obvious that your department are not relaying the true facts to the general public, including me, when I had already pointed out the original error in the figures and then the fact that the old versions were still online in May. They are still online today, on various NHS websites. I am therefore forwarding details of the web addresses concerned as you request, so that the Department can ensure there is no misunderstanding.
Please find the following files attached:
Google search engine results 6.6.09
Email confirmation 6.6.09 - HPV VACCINE ERROR document still online today!
PDF file downloaded 6.6.09 from www.immunisation.nhs.uk
Screen photographs x 4, 6.6.09
As you know, there are girls around the country, including Surrey and here in Reigate, who have been off school for many weeks and months, directly following their vaccinations. They and their families are suffering greatly as a result, yet it is plainly evident now that they were supplied with unclear and inaccurate information from your department, right from the start, and very little effort was made to put things right.
I leave it to you to reconsider your views about a travesty, but I do look forward to receiving your further comments regarding the Government's position on this matter and your personal belief about supporting or celebrating this vaccine programme.
I've replied to yet another HPV vaccine online government propaganda announcement as follows:
No, the vaccination uptake does not need to increase further.
It is an exaggeration to say that it is crucial that the girls have these injections. The NHS staff have instructions to ensure that the programme is carried out but that is not the same thing as saying it is crucial for medical reasons.
There are various reasons why every girl needs to consider the pros and cons for herself.
First, there is a risk with any vaccine. This is why Cervarix is listed for the compensation payments scheme.
Secondly, I can assure you from my FOI question last October, that the NHS leaflet "Beating Cervical Cancer - the facts" has a major error in it on p.13 on the question of safety figures. I do not know if the current printed copies have been corrected, but certainly the old, incorrect wording was still accessible online on 14th May - the day after Dawn Primarolo's speech in reply to my MP Crispin Blunt's debate. Here in Reigate there is a girl who has been increasingly crippled by the 3 injections and now the only help on offer is from private holistic therapy - osteopathy and homeopathy - fortunately, free of charge.
Thirdly, it is important to point out that there are other ways of preventing the spread of HPV viruses. These include the word No, the use of condoms, male circumcision, careful hygiene, clean clothes and bedsheets (and sunlight kills bacteria and viruses) - and of course, good nutrition, exercise and rest for a strong immune system.
There are also certain circumstances when it is best to avoid being vaccinated. This might be if you have an existing medical condition, if your immune system is under stress - perhaps an infection that is already being treated with antibiotics.
In these vaccines there are chemical preservatives which are not naturally found in the body. With the HPV vaccine there is aluminium - in flu vaccines there is Thimerosal and in MMR vaccines there is Neomycin. All of these are rather toxic to living cells and there is strong scientific evidence that they have synergistic effects when added together...! With teenage hormones adding to the complex chemical mix, it is not difficult to follow that nerve cells are completely destroyed in lab culture experiments.
When there are other ways of preventing and treating HPV infections and anyway, the public have not been given the true facts and figures, maybe our girls would rather not believe everything word for word that they are told by the govt. campaign.
I can supply you with the links to the online FOI evidence on request. Remember, there are other, gentler and more natural ways of preventing and fighting infections.
Q: Is there a drug to counteract the side effects of the vaccine Cervarix?
Some, or most of the negative side effects of the vaccine may be reversed by the actual vaccine in homeopathic potency, but adjunctive homeopathic treatment may be required as well - this information is from an associate who is a qualified and experienced homeopath.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 quotations about Guillain-Barré Syndrome and vaccines
"Guillain Barre Syndrome (GBS) naturally occurs in the population and is usually thought to be caused by a preceding infectious illness. There is no good evidence to suggest that Cervarix vaccine can cause the condition. It is important to note that the child's neurologist has been quoted as saying that "with complete certainty she is demonstrating no pathological reaction to her vaccination". The MHRA is closely monitoring the safety of Cervarix vaccine and our analysis of the expected background frequency of GBS indicates that this case does not exceed the number expected to have occurred anyway in the absence of vaccination".
Media Relations Manager, Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)
'The exact mechanisms that cause the conditions aren't clear, but about 60 per cent of those affected will have had a throat or intestinal infection, flu or MAJOR STRESS within the previous two weeks.'
'there was an unexpected increase — by a factor of four to eight — in the number of cases of the Guillain–Barré syndrome after a government-sponsored mass-inoculation program in which 45 million adults in the United States received VACCINE'
'does he not even know the known symptoms of poisoning of some of the VACCINE ingredients. Tween 80 and borax have effects of poisoning such as this' ... 'I could think of no better advert for parents to question vaccine safety'.
'When new medicines come on to the market, we have only limited information about their safety. The new medicine will have been tested in clinical trials. However, these trials generally involve only small numbers of patients who take the medicine for a relatively short period of time, and there are strict conditions for the inclusion of patients in such trials.
This means that the patients in whom the medicines are tested may not be fully representative of the patients who will use the medicine when it is marketed. In addition, it is not until large numbers of patients have taken a drug that we can detect side effects which are rare or which appear after long-term use.
Close monitoring of new medicines once they are being more widely used in the general population enables us to identify such side effects and take appropriate action.'
News alert: 16 October 2008
by Grace Filby
A newspaper heading that the HPV vaccine is "essential" may be an exaggeration.
The human race has always been protected with nutrients such as Lycopene (in tomatoes), well-known Folic Acid and other vitamins essential for life, all found in a wide variety of fresh fruit and vegetables. There is plenty of strong scientific evidence that they prevent cervical cancer.
As for the viruses that cause warts, it may be a timely reminder that natural sunlight generally eradicates viruses, bacteria and moulds - on skin, clothes and bedding, and in the air. The added benefit of sunlight is that it builds up our reserves of vitamin D which has a profound effect on our immune systems, whereas indoor lifestyles, cigarette smoke and the contraceptive pill may make HPV-induced cancers more likely in later life.
As the Director of Public Health and the Head of Schools and Learning rightly pointed out in a letter to all Surrey's Head Teachers and Boards of Governors back in February, "we cannot entirely rule out the possibility that some girls could experience extremely rare vaccine adverse events". It is as well to be aware that, as of 3rd October, HPV was added to the Vaccine Payments Scheme. The amount payable is £120,000 'to ease the present and future burden of the vaccine-damaged person and their family'.
I hope that the Surrey schools’ decision to help with the campaign was not swayed by the statement that the vaccine is given as part of a schools based programme in other countries including the USA and Australia. In fact, the brand chosen by the UK is not the same one that is used in the USA or Australian schools. The American FDA has not approved it yet. Both manufacturers are working on some long term safety studies.
Tomatoes: a rich source of protective lycopene
Teenagers do not like the thought of injections, let alone the thought of possible side effects, genital warts or cervical cancer. Perhaps the information about vitamins - the real essentials - will now encourage them to eat a healthy diet with plenty of fruit and vegetables instead of fizzy drinks and doughnuts. The information about sunlight might even encourage them to air their beds and spend some time out of doors every day.
There will always be people who want mass-vaccination campaigns but there are others who do not consider them all a 'must have', and prefer natural ways of protecting their family's health.
For anyone who is taking part in the Government's Year 8 Cervarix HPV programme, please would you advise your readers that the Department of Health's Green Book and the training slides for health professionals now state that the third dose should be at least six months after the first dose - not sooner than that.
There is one more point to make. I understand that aluminium adjuvants have not been rigorously studied for long-term safety. Although this common metal is very useful and has been added to vaccines for decades, aluminium has no known function in living cells. Will we find in years to come that there is neurological damage and symptoms associated with Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, or bone damage etc.? Isn't it better to be safe than sorry?
News alert: 19 October 2008
by Grace Filby
Parents and young girls are being directed to public information sites and leaflets about the HPV vaccines. Please be aware that some of the ‘facts’ may not be entirely accurate, up to date or accessible as yet.
For example, in England, since May 2008 the official published information about the safety of the HPV vaccines: “Beating Cervical Cancer – the Facts” stated that “other mild side effects . . . were reported in less than one in 1000 people”.
In contrast, the GSK Patient Information Leaflet for Cervarix describes these side effects as “very common”, “common” etc. These descriptions with numerical figures are also confirmed in the Green Book for UK healthcare professionals (updated Sept.08).
I queried this anomaly in the factsheet with the Dept of Health on 1st October 2008.
Their FOI reply confirmed the error in the official factsheet:
”The human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) factsheet was drafted to cover both HPV vaccines, and was printed before the selection of the HPV vaccine for use in the UK. The advance printing was necessary to ensure that information materials would be distributed to allow sufficient time for local planning. However, officials are grateful that you have pointed out this error. The factsheet has been amended on the website and the Department will ensure that the next reprint of the HPV factsheet contains the correct information for Cervarix.”
However, the Welsh version of the same key factsheet “Beating Cervical Cancer – the Facts” published July 2008, did not contain the error.
Both factsheets state that “As with all vaccines, its safety will continue to be monitored after it has been introduced into the national immunisation programme.” In other words, the long term safety studies were still taking place and the results were not yet known.
Aluminium: no known function in living cells
The factsheets continued: “HPV vaccine does not contain thiomersal”. In fact, the vaccine contains aluminium/aluminum. This chemical element has no known function in healthy living cells but is linked with Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and is identified as a neurotoxin.
The Dept. of Health provided me with this further information about vaccine damage:
”Between 1 January 2003 and 6 October 2008, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is aware of 163 UK spontaneous suspected ADR reports of anaphylaxis and related reaction terms associated with vaccines through the Yellow Card Scheme. MHRA is also aware of 73 suspected ADR reports for vaccines with a fatal outcome for the same period.”
2.27min: Grace Filby reading a letter to the LIFE newspaper, published 25.9.08
2.16 min: Grace Filby talking about her idea to check aluminium sensitivity first, published 1st November 2008
1:22min Gardasil Bodycount - Ireland
From the latest HPV vaccine statistics, Grace Filby predicts how many 12 year old girls in Ireland will be rushed to the hospital Emergency Room each year after their Gardasil shots. From 2010, up to 30,000 girls aged 12 in Ireland will be mass-vaccinated with Gardasil - the HPV4 cervical cancer vaccine. How many are likely to have severe reactions that result in a visit to an Irish hospital Emergency Room? This video shows the maths - nearly 1 in 1000 = 27 girls each year.
2:52 min Cervarix - no thanx Grace Filby looks at an article called "Cranberries OR Cervarix?" from Jan/Feb 2009 The Mother magazine. It includes info on cervical cancer, psychoneuroimmunology, ingredients in Cervarix, metaphysics, treatment of warts, prevention, resources and sources.
"Please note, there are no long term studies on the safety of Cervarix. Subjects are only studied for 30 days."
The author also points out that one side effect of vaccines is infertility and says that the cervical cancer programme is a war against our daughters and a tragic assault.