Tag: misinformation

Has Gardasil Really Eliminated Cervical Cancer in Australia?

Why do some folks think that Gardasil hasn’t eliminated cervical cancer in Australia yet?

“New research from Cancer Council NSW, being presented this week at the International Papilloma Virus Conference (IPVC 2018) in Sydney and published in The Lancet Public Health, has shown that if vaccination and screening coverage are maintained at their current rates, cervical cancer is likely to be eliminated as a public health issue within 20 years.

The new research predicts that cervical cancer rates will drop to less than 6 in 100,000 by 2022 – meaning that it will soon be considered a rare cancer. Rates will continue to drop further, dropping below 4 in 100,000 by 2035. These findings indicate that Australia is on-track to be the first country in the world to eliminate cervical cancer by successfully implementing a combined approach to vaccination and screening.”

Australia set to eliminate cervical cancer by 2035

Maybe it is because Gardasil really hasn’t yet eliminated cervical cancer in Australia…

Has Gardasil Really Eliminated Cervical Cancer in Australia?

Wait, so why is anyone trying to say that something that hasn’t happened yet isn’t true?

Is Bobby Kennedy trying to get in the way of work to eliminate cervical cancer?
Who is Dr. Robert Reichert?

Perhaps “Dr. Reichert” just misspoke and did say that Australia had already eliminated cervical cancer instead of that they were on their way to eliminating cervical cancer

It is true, after all. Australia is really on their way to eliminating cervical cancer thanks to the HPV vaccine!

What about all of the slides and tables that Bobby Kennedy included with his post?

Does Slide 1 really show a terrifying increased risk of cervical cancer?

Anti-vax folks like to misrepresent the results of this study.
Anti-vax folks like to misrepresent the results of this study.

Of course not.

It actually shows how thoroughly vaccines are tested before they are approved!

In this case, they were evaluating “the potential of Gardasil to enhance cervical disease in subjects who had evidence of persistent infection with vaccine-relevant HPV types prior to vaccination.”

And although Bobby Kennedy is claiming that is what they found, the women in the Gardasil group (6.5%) were much more likely to have a Pap test with HSIL (high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion) as those in the placebo group (3.7%) at the start of the trial! That’s before they were vaccinated and that’s why they were more likely to have cervical cancer. Remember, the HPV vaccines prevent cervical cancer. They do not treat cervical cancer.

Bobby Kennedy left this out, but during these trials, when they looked at other subgroups, they “did not raise a concern about enhancement of cervical disease due to HPV.”

And Bobby Kennedy‘s other slides?

In Slide 2, just after telling you to look at the vaccine insert, he claims that “nearly half of all women have had prior exposure to HPV – with 38% being exposed before age 10.”

Is that in the vaccine insert?

Nope, it comes from a small study he found, Genital HPV in Children and Adolescents: Does Sexual Activity Make a Difference?, which says that “sexual activity was associated with increased risk for genital high-risk HPV infection.”

Most studies find that prepubertal girls are negative for HPV.
Most studies find that prepubertal girls are negative for HPV.

Surprisingly, the study did find that some girls somehow had exposure to HPV even though they were not sexually active and some, even while they were prepubertal.

“The finding of asymptomatic HPV DNA in children, and correlation with live virus, infectivity, or disease is unclear.”

Jayasinghe et al on Genital warts in children: what do they mean?

Again, Bobby Kennedy leaves out the fact that almost all other studies have found that prepubertal kids and those who are not sexually active are negative for HPV.

And Bobby Kennedy‘s other slides?

The UK doesn't have vaccine mandates and rates of stage II or worse cancers were lower than ever.
The UK doesn’t have vaccine mandates and rates of stage II or worse cancers were lower than ever.

Did rates of cervical cancer increase “in the vaccinated group (20-24)” just after the start of a school vaccination campaign?

“Screening from age 20 yrs, rather than from age 25 yrs, would not prevent any more cancers from spreading beyond the cervix (stage II or worse) by age 27 yrs. The substantial increase in stage I cervical cancers in 24 and 25 year old women, corresponds to changes whereby a high proportion of women are now screened for the first time between ages 24.5 and 25.5 yrs. Previously some of these early stage screen detected cancers would have been prevented by treatment of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia following earlier screening and a few would have been screen-detected later – at age 26 or 27 yrs. Others may be slow-growing cancers, some of which could be argued to be over-diagnosed.”

Castanon et al on Is the recent increase in cervical cancer in women aged 20–24 years in England a cause for concern?

It kind of did, but only in the lowest grades and because they changed the ages for when these women were screened!

“Reassuringly no increase in stage II or worse cancers was observed in women under age 27 yrs. In fact, numbers of stage II or worse cancers diagnosed at age 24.5–25.0 yrs in 2014 are lower than in any other year since 2007.”

Castanon et al on Is the recent increase in cervical cancer in women aged 20–24 years in England a cause for concern?

And that’s not all they found!

Wait, Bobby Kennedy doesn’t mention that rates of cervical cancer are getting lower since 2007…

“Amidst these changes HPV vaccination was introduced in 2008 for girls aged 12–13 with catch-up for those aged 14–18.”

Castanon et al on Is the recent increase in cervical cancer in women aged 20–24 years in England a cause for concern?

What else happened since 2007?

That’s right. That’s about when we started vaccinating girls with the HPV vaccine.

A vaccine that has been very well studied since to see it’s effects on cervical cancer, including a large meta-analysis of 65 studies in 14 countries.

“More than 10 years have elapsed since human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination was implemented. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of the population-level impact of vaccinating girls and women against human papillomavirus on HPV infections, anogenital wart diagnoses, and cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2+ (CIN2+) to summarise the most recent evidence about the effectiveness of HPV vaccines in real-world settings and to quantify the impact of multiple age-cohort vaccination.”

Brisson et al on Population-level impact and herd effects following the introduction of human papillomavirus vaccination programmes: updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

What did they find?

They found “compelling evidence of the substantial impact of HPV vaccination programmes on HPV infections and CIN2+ among girls and women, and on anogenital warts diagnoses among girls, women, boys, and men.”

“In countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada there has been dramatic reduction in HPV related infections and diseases, while in countries with very low coverage there has been very little impact.”

Marc Brisson on HPV vaccine: high coverage could eradicate cervical cancer within decades, say researchers

HPV vaccines are safe and effective and they prevent cancer!

Why are some folks still trying to scare parents away from vaccinating and protecting their kids with these necessary vaccines?

More on Gardasil Eliminating Cervical Cancer in Australia

About That 4 Billion Dollars Taxpayers Have Paid for Vaccine Injuries…

Why do some folks think that taxpayers have paid 4 billion dollars in vaccine injuries and deaths?

Anti-vax protestors at the Neptune statute in Virginia with misinformation on the 4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries..
How many doses of vaccines have been given during the time that the $4 billion was paid out? How many lives were saved because they didn’t get polio, measles, and Hib, etc.?

Oh, these folks…

About That 4 Billion Dollars Taxpayers Have Paid for Vaccine Injuries…

So, is it true?

Have taxpayers paid 4 billion dollars for vaccine injuries and deaths, like their signs say?

Nope.

For one thing, these anti-vax protestors are mixing together a couple of separate anti-vaccine talking points that are used to scare parents away from vaccinating and protecting their kids.

  1. While the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 did set up a $0.75 vaccine excise tax to fund the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund, it is the vaccine manufacturers who pay the tax.
  2. And billions and billions of doses of vaccines (over 3.5 billion just since 2006) have been given since 1989, the time since the $4,060,857,713.42 has been paid by the Vaccine Court. The payment has been for 6,355 compensated claims over those thirty years, most of which are for vaccine injuries, not deaths. Fewer than 10% of Vaccine Court cases are for vaccine deaths.

Does that matter?

Now up to 4 billion dollars for vaccines injuries, the payout is after billions and billions of vaccines have been given.
That’s about 1 compensated claim, the majority of which are settled, in about 775 thousand doses. So not quite 1 in a million…

It does if you consider that many more kids would die if we didn’t routinely vaccinate and protect our kids!

“Analyses showed that routine childhood immunization among members of the 2009 US birth cohort will prevent ∼42 000 early deaths and 20 million cases of disease, with net savings of $13.5 billion in direct costs and $68.8 billion in total societal costs, respectively.”

Zhou et al on Economic Evaluation of the Routine Childhood Immunization Program in the United States, 2009

And it would be far more costly if we returned to an era when epidemics of vaccine preventable diseases became routine.

Too bad I can’t fit all of that on a sign…

More on Vaccine Court Payouts

Misinformation About Measles Outbreaks in Texas

Like everywhere else, measles has been on the rise in Texas. And like everywhere else, we have also seen a rise in misinformation about measles and measles outbreaks in Texas.

Why do these folks push misinformation about measles?
Why do these folks push misinformation about measles? #JustAsking

Only three were unvaccinated? Is that true?

Misinformation About Measles Outbreaks in Texas

Actually, when you look at the official statistics, you find that there were only three cases that were known to be fully vaccinated!

Only three of the cases were known to be fully vaccinated and protected against measles!
Only three of the cases were known to be fully vaccinated!

While it is true that only three were known to be fully unvaccinated, there are another five people with unknown status who might also be fully unvaccinated.

And then there are those who are partially vaccinated, with just one dose of MMR. As most folks know, two doses of MMR provide the best protection against measles. Six more of the cases are known to have had just one dose of MMR and another four had an unknown number of doses, so could have been partially vaccinated.

And again, there are the five with unknown status. While it is possible that they were fully vaccinated, or had one dose, it is also very likely that they were unvaccinated.

What can we say for sure?

The claim that “Only THREE out of the twenty-one cases were unvaccinated individuals” in the Texas measles outbreaks isn’t true.

You could just as easily say that “Only THREE out of the twenty-one cases were known to be fully vaccinated individuals.” And at least that statement would be truthful, as it includes the caveat that you are only talking about those with known immunization status…

Were any of the cases in children attending school with an exemption?

At least nine of the cases were in children, but there haven’t been any media reports of outbreaks or exposures in schools, so I am guessing not.

That’s lucky!

Some schools in Texas have very high rates of vaccine exemptions and a case of measles could lead to a big outbreak.

More on the Measles Outbreaks in Texas

Are Reported Pertussis Cases up by 114% Since 1967?

We know that we are seeing more pertussis cases these days.

Although the last few years have been better, 2012 was an especially bad year, with at least 48,277 cases and tragically, at least 4 deaths.

Are Reported Pertussis Cases up by 114% Since 1967?

How does that compare to the the pre-vaccine era?

Cases are still well below what they were in the pre-vaccine era, before we were routinely using DPT and DTaP vaccines.

Reported cases of pertussis are still down from the prevaccine era and there are far fewer deaths, from 37 deaths in 1967 to 6 in 2015.
Reported cases of pertussis are still down from the prevaccine era and there are far fewer deaths, from 37 deaths in 1967 to 6 in 2015.

What about the idea that pertussis cases are up 114% since 1967?

While that may be true, the first thing you should ask yourself when looking at Lauren Novelli’s little graph, is why did she choose 1967?

Reported Pertussis Cases Are Down Since the Pre-Vaccine Era

We did start using a new vaccine in 1967, but it was the measles vaccine, not the DPT vaccine. Vaccines against diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus had been available for some time and were used more routinely beginning in the 1950s.

And that explains the drop in pertussis cases from just over 120,000 in 1950 to about 40,000 in 1959.

More importantly, even as pertussis cases are increasing again, we aren’t seeing as many people dying from pertussis.

In 2018, there were 13,439 reported pertussis cases and 10 deaths.
In 2018, there were 13,439 reported pertussis cases and 10 deaths.

Is that because of better hygiene, sanitation, and nutrition?

No.

We had those in most of the United States in the 1950s and 60s. The big change is that even though the current pertussis vaccine might not be perfect, having issues with waning immunity, it can still protect you from severe disease.

Vaccinating against pertussis is far from useless and there is absolutely no evidence of dormant bacteria carriers being triggered into becoming active infections.

This is pure propaganda, but you should expect no less from someone who describes themselves as an intuitive nurse and sells CBD oil.

More on Reported Pertussis Cases