Vaccination program failed thus RIVM. Young girls against cervical cancer vaccination is not recommended by Association recognised because of serious side effects investigated and Critically not Puncturing and risks. RIVM admits: vaccination program failed. Article update 20 March 2012
Update July 2, 2009: added message that we already placed 28 August 2008 which also in England was warned that the vaccine has still not complied with the requirements of safety. See last article below.
april 4, 2009: RIVM admits that of young girls against HPV vaccination programme and indirectly against developing cervical cancer viris failed. And that seems just as well if you last year's criticism of Dutch Association against Critical poking and supplemental book of Désirée Röver reads: HPV vaccines as a ' deus ex vagina ' is starting today in the bookstore : CERVICAL CANCER
HPV vaccines as a ' deus ex vagina '
by Désirée Röver--medical research journalist
With a foreword by Dr. H.C. Moolenburgh
2 april 2008: Source: press release of Puncturing: Nederlandse Vereniging Kritisch
The NVKP we received this press release that we place as a reaction to the proposal here unchanged from the Health Council to all girls of 12 years voluntarily vaccinated against HPV virus that almost always the cause of cervical cancer. Personally I fear of the serious arguments of the NVKP and wonder why the Health Council here actually not talking about. Vaccinate us seemed a good idea but if you read best what it can come look to side effects than you will be cautious.
Vaccinate young girls:
one big health experiment
The Dutch Association Prick (NVKP) is Critically against the advice of the Health Council of Minister Klink to VWS already on the twelfth year to vaccinate girls against infection with the human papillomavirus (HPV) that in old age would cause cervical cancer. The Health Council today released from this opinion. Pregnant in the opinion are the various uncertain factors of the vaccine. How long it works is unknown, or the vaccine is effective in young girls should still be verified, or is unknown, there are repeating vaccinations necessary what the effect is of the vaccine on other HPV viruses should be examined. The same applies for now still unknown side effects might be.
The NVKP last month, the Health Council has administration of the vaccine to young girls with clamp dissuasion. The meaning and effects of administration at a very young age are barely explored, so that young girls are exposed to unnecessary risks on the term. In the vaccine are substances such as aluminium and Sodium Borate for which it has been scientifically demonstrated that they can damage the brain cells.Reports of reactions to the vaccine from abroad pointing in any case already on preventing serious neurological damage. The effect on the brain of young girls will now go prove long-term.
The audience to which the vaccine is tested women aged 16 to 26 years. Condition for the administration of the vaccine should be that the women be examined first by a simple HPV test for any presence of the virus. This advice is given by Prof. Dr. Diane Harper. As Director of the Gynaecological Cancer Prevention Center at the University of Dartmouth (N.H.) she was commissioned by the pharmaceutical industry, the international study of the effectiveness of the vaccine. She has shown that the efficacy of the vaccine would be useless if there is already an infection is present.
In a published interview with Prof. Harper on March 14 in the American newspaper FW Daily News speaks they are in sharp words uttered against the vaccination of very young girls. She points out that research into the effectiveness in this target group and the possible long-term harmful effects entirely missing. Giving the vaccine to eight young girls she is one major health experiment.
According to Prof. Harper would be the outcome of the administration of the vaccine to young girls on term even an increase of cervical cancer can cause.
The Health Council admits that with the expansion of the vaccination with HPV vaccine health profit in Netherlands will be already a functioning low because we have screening programme. Early detection of precancerous cervical cancer gives a survival rate of nearly 100%. The NVKP therefore advocates more active participation in the preliminary stages of cervical cancer screening on this to stimulate and to start already at the age of 25 instead of 30 years. By the research to expand with the HPV test can be booked at a reduced cost and large health gains without the risk of serious side effects!
For further info: NVKP, Martin de Munck Tel. 071-5170168
28 August 2008: source: Meds cape and ANP
Yesterday, Dutch Minister Klink asks the vaccination programme against specialists
cervical cancer in young girls. Because their idea is too little research done into the effects in the longer term. This echoing many other specialists worldwide who did the same call. See below an article from Meds cape of last month.
Caution Urged On Large-scale HPV Vaccination Programs
Zosia Chustecka
Meds cape Medical News 2008. © 2008 Meds cape
August 20, 2008 — " There is good reason to be cautious about introducing large-scale vaccination programs " with the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, because many essential questions are still unanswered. This is the conclusion of Charlotte Haug, MD, PhD, from the
Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association, writing in an editorial in Oslo, in the August 21 issue of the
New England Journal of Medicine.
" The real impact of HPV vaccination on cervical cancer will not be observable for decades, " Dr. Haug comments, but there has been pressure on policy makers worldwide to introduce the HPV vaccine in national or statewide vaccination programs.
Two HPV vaccines are marketed worldwide — the United States and Australia use Gardasil (Merck & co.), while the United Kingdom recently announced that it has chosen Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline). A major target of these vaccination programs is girls between 12 and 13 years old, as the vaccine is most effective before the onset of sexual activity.
However, Dr. Haug questions how policy makers can make rational choices about the introduction of medical " interventions that might do good in the future but for which evidence is insufficient, especially since we will not know for many years whether the intervention will work or — in the worst case — do harm? "
Cost-Effectiveness Estimated in a Mathematical Model
The editorial accompanies a study published in thesame issue of the journal on the health and economic implications of HPV vaccination in the United States by Jane Kim, PhD, and Sue Goldie, MD, from the Harvard School of Public Health, in Boston, Massachusetts. They use a mathematical model to calculate cost-effectiveness of vaccination in a country where there is already an established cervical cancer – screening program.
The study concludes that vaccination is expected to be economically attractive if high coverage can be achieved in the primary target group of 12-year-old girls and if the vaccine-induced immunity is lifelong. But adding a catch-up program for older girls and women is not cost-effective.
However, these conclusions are based on a mathematical model that makes many assumptions, and these are quite optimistic, Dr. Haug comments " ". " Whether these assumptions are reasonable is exactly what needs to be tested in trials and follow-up studies, " she maintains.
Dr. Haug discusses several of the assumptions on which the model is based in some detail, pointing out that in many cases there are very little data.
One of the main assumptions is that the effects of vaccination will be lifelong (ie, there will be no need for a booster). But 1 of the main questions still unanswered is how long the protection conferred by the vaccine will last. The researchers themselves point out that if protection wanes after 10 years, vaccination becomes much less cost-effective and screening becomes more effective than catch-up programs. One of the key investigators involved in the HPV vaccine clinical trials, Diane Harper, MD, from Dartmouth Medical School, in Hanover, New Hampshire, has said that the evidence so far suggest that protection lasts for 5 years after vaccination, but there are no longer-term data, as previously reported by Meds cape Oncology.
Another assumption is that the vaccine has the same effect on preadolescent girls as on older women. However, Dr. Haug points out, the only trials that have been carried out on preadolescent girls measured only immune responses, and the trials with clinical end points were conducted in 16-to 24-year-olds.
In their model, the researchers also presume that other strains of the HPV virus, which are not targeted by the vaccine, will not take over. However, there is already some evidence suggesting that this may happen, Dr. Haug says. Published reports or precancerous cervical lesions show an increasing trend trials caused by HPV or other than those targeted by the vaccine serotypes (HPV-16 and HPV-18). So far, the results have not been statistically significant, but the numbers involved have been small. If clinical trials ongoing, accumulating data over the next few years will likely show whether this is a true trend, "she says.
In addition, the model was that vaccinated women will continue to attend screening programs for cervical cancer and that the vaccine will not affect natural immunity against HPV, Dr. Haug comments. Again, these are assumptions, and it remains to be seen whether they are correct.
In view of all the questions that remain to be answered, Dr. Haug urges more research into HPV vaccination. " We should concentrate on finding more solid answers through research rather than base consequential decisions on yet-unproven assumptions and costly ", she concludes.
No conflicts of interests were reported.
N Engl J Med. 2008; 359: 821-832, 861-862.
