Is the Gardasil vaccine really safe?

I got my first shot of this in December and am due for my second shot on Tuesday. Now I'm having doubts

When I had my first they said it was virtually useless anyway since I could have already been exposed to HPV and I've been having pain at the site of where I had the shot anyway.

Yes it is! And if it were up to me every woman and child would be getting one.

I have been wondering the same thing. I have an 18 year old daughter . I have been debating whether or not I should get it for her.

Even if I were young enough to get this vaccine, I would not. I was worried from the beginning about the "newness" of it and the fact that it only prevents infection a few strains of HPV and only a few of those are known to cause cervical cancer.

I work in "Women and Child" and every single doctor that comes through our area is a fan of the vaccine. We covered it in an education session and based on what I heard, I'm a fan of it too. I wish it had been available when I was a child.

If you have the option of protecting your child against HPV and ultimately cervical cancer, why would you have to think about it?! I would think as a parent you would do what you could to protect your child, and this vaccine does that.

I've had cervical cancer (in 1972). Would I take this new vaccine if I could go back? NO! IMO there isn't enough research done on new drugs before they are given to the general population. I personally think we are over-prescribed by doctors. When I saw the number of pills my mom was taking per day it freaked me out! Certainly some drugs have their uses, but we have gone way too far and I think in the long term we are going to be doing more damage than good. Doctors need to find other ways to treat our issues rather than prescribing more drugs.

IMHO No ... I checked out the study results from the testing phase and GASPED..

I would not get it even I could, the government was doing it for free for a while but I don't know anyone who got it or for their daughter, just doesn't seem safe to me.

Well its too late now, ive already had my course of 3 injections completed maybe 8 months ago, ive been fine.

iirc, they've tried pushing it for boys and men too (haven't checked the link yet). Why is it approved, why do doctors push for it? Why are they wanting to treat boys too? $$$$

I have yet to sit in my GP's waiting room and not see some drug rep walk in to sell their company's newest drugs as the greatest thing ever. Doctors even get pulled in/bribed.


Haven't had the vaccine and don't intend to get it - I don't even consider flu shots safe due to my health issues so I wouldn't touch this one with a 10 foot pole.

It is safe? No way would I take it, or want anyone I cared about taking 3 rounds of that. I am the person that doesn't like being a human lab rat with my one and only shot at having a long life. The past makes me thinks this way, seeing "accidents" that have been approved then people get seriously sick or other bad things happen as a direct result. I still won't even do lasik surgery Too new IMO.
Many vaccines have cells from sick animals, human fetus tissue, viruses, heavy metals, formaldehyde, chemical propellants, antibiotics, and other foreign matter that is injected directly into our blood stream. I did some research on this HPV vaccination. Is it worth it for this vaccination? No. Why do I think that? Other than the fact that people are actually DYING from this vaccination, here is what helped me come this conclusion below.

Science has proven that cervical cancer is caused by HPV. There are many strands strands of HPV, the types that cause cervical cancer (high risk) are not the types that cause warts (low risk). 80% or more of men and women are infected with HPV at sometime in their lives. Most don't even know they have it, it isn't in routine STD testing, and doesn't have outward signs that they are infected. Men are mostly unaffected from HPV. Only a small number of those women infected go on to have issues with it, overwhelmingly most female bodies take care of the infection on their own. If someone has autoimmune issues, a vaccination is not in their favor to begin with IMO.

In the US, cervical cancer has the highest rates of living of all cancers. It isn't a common cancer in the US, a person's chance of getting it is very rare. These two facts are mainly because regular pap smears catch a number of things, including cervical cancer way before it becomes cancer.
Cervical cancer is a very slow growing cancer over many years. Many times, it never does progress to cancer, but the pap detects abnormalities on the cervix so the doctors can keep a close eye on it in whatever way is needed. Doctors are able to rate the abnormalities and take a biopsy if needed. Most of the time any problems are monitored and disappear on their own. As said earlier, the overwhelming majority of people do not have issues with HPV and cervical cancer.

In the event the HPV infection does not clear up in a certain amount of time, but still isn't cancer (and very well may never will be cancer but many doctors would rather treat it proactively than continue to wait), there are several options that a doctor can take to help clear up the HPV infection that aren't very intrusive and have little, if any, down time, certainly nothing like chemotherapy or radiation. Most of the time those procedures take care of the HPV. If not, they can be repeated. Then the person is closely monitored with frequent pap smears. Most of the women treated once for any abnormally of the cervix don't have more issues.

It is way more important to get routine pap smears and be aware of cervical cancer and HPV risk factors (for instance, if you smoke you are more likely to have problems with infections, also if you are sexually active with many partners or from a young age, etc.) rather than get a vaccination that has harmed many of the people who have taken it, even taking their lives. And this vaccination doesn't include many HPV strands, taking the vaccination is taking a huge risk as even if it worked as it was suppose to work, it still doesn't offer full protection. And the chances of getting cervical cancer are so low to begin with anyway. The risks outweigh the benefits of getting a needle 3 times full of all the toxic things found in the shot. I believe it has rat poison it in and well as aluminum and some other stuff.
The shots haven't been approved for older women or males.

Here are some links for more information on the dangers of this particular vaccination:
http://www.businesswire.com/multimed...429/en/1709995
http://www.naturalnews.com/025411.html
http://www.naturalnews.com/024872.html

I'm ringing up in the morning and cancelling my 2nd injection - I don't like the statistics and will just get lectured by the lady again about if I feel guilty for exposing myself to the virus at such a young age

I had it too, in 1993. I had to have a hysterectomy. I hadn't had kids yet, so it was devestating to me.

I'm torn about the vaccine. Like you, I'm skeptical of it's safety. Like so many other drugs, I don't know if the benefits are greater than the risk.

Ladies, whatever you decide, please do your research and think carefully about this.

The chances may be higher than you think. 2 of us in this thread have had it.

There is a lot of good info in your post, but getting paps is not as much of a safety net that we are led to believe. The technicians reading the slides are many times overworked. They miss things.

My doctor told me that the abnormal cells were probably missed through my last 3 paps. It is a slow growing cancer, but still deadly. I thank God it was caught.

My suggestion is to have the pap smear sent to 2 different labs. You will have to pay the 2nd lab out of pocket, but it is worth it.

My experience was much different than yours. Mine was caught through pap testing in 1972 and successfully treated cryogenically . I went on to have 2 pregnancies - a miscarriage (probably pretty normal as the result of taking birth control pills for many years) and then a wonderful, easy pregnancy for our daughter. Sometimes it really comes down to how good your doctor and/or lab are as to whether it may be missed.

I personally think the risks of the vaccine are worse than the chance of missing the signs so I would not take it nor would I want my daughter to take the vaccine.

You could be right. I think it's a tough decision. I agree 100% about the lab and the doctor.

I agree. I will not vaccinate my daughter.

You would force people to get this?

You wouldn't force me.

The doctors touting this shot are probably getting huge kick backs from the drug maker. I don't trust any drug this new.

I don't believe the drug does what they say it does.

If you had it treated cryogenically, you did not have cancer. Cancer is treated different than abnormalities and "dysplasia". You had some cells on your cervix that were of concern, high level concern, probably a lesion. You had what doctors call "pre-cancer" back in the day. However, they changed that term to dysplasia, since in many women it never turns to cancer at all, in many it goes away.
If you truly had cancer, you would not have had cryosurgery. Cryosurgery probably removed your lesion or the cells of concern and your immune system kicked in normally and took care of any infections if you have had clear Paps since. This is what happens to most people who have cryosurgery.
If you really had cancer, even at the very earliest stage, the very least you would have had is a cone, which would help you keep your fertility but remove the cancer. That is the only stage if you really had cancer that has your fertility in mind. Even LEEP is more serious than cryosurgery. Cryosurgery is the easiest way to deal with a lesion or other signs of high dysplasia, although some offices and doctors will do cryosurgery for intermediate grade too.

I am sorry for your experience Frequent paps are a good safety net. Yes, they are not perfect. But they have helped so much since they have become routine part of a woman's care. And they have helped doctors treat preventatively if needed before it ever has a chance to progress (if or if it does not go on to become cancer, they take care of it all anyway). And before they do that they take a biopsy and actually look at the cervix, since paps are just a tool, actual biopsies tell the doctor much more information. Since the cancer is slow growing if you have paps and exams frequently that helps greatly.

Two different labs is a good idea. The more paps the better. But paps are uncomfortable, and many women don't have good insurance, and some just don't want to go regardless. My own mother didn't have a pap for 11 years. Thank goodness everything was fine when she finally decided to go.
It is rare when looking at statistics alone. I didn't make that up. Lots of research is trying to pin point exactly why of SO many people (the majority of males and females who are sexually active) infected by the HPV virus do not go on to have any problems at all and why small numbers do. That is where the risk factors come in. It is probably immune system based, which is genetic.

I know the statistics very well and stand by my above posts. I am so sorry you went through that and am in NO way trying to minimize your personal and traumatic experience I really feel for you and what you went through. But glad there are tools in place to screen and help you still be with us today.
On a personal note, that scares me so much, so much can go wrong if you want to have children. In our relationship we were going to wait to start a family and we have waited for years, but knowing all I know about reproductive health and all the things that can go wrong since a woman's body is so complex, we are done waiting. My mother had endometriosis (sp?) and so did two people related to me.

I AM glad there are tests that many times do work. Don't worry. I didn't think you were trying to minimize my experience at all. (BTW, it was a long time ago and I'm fine with it now and very thankful to be alive) I'm glad to hear that statistics show that cervical cancer is rare. Perhaps I know of more cases because once you experience something you pay more attention when you hear of someone else with the same experience. I know a LOT of women who have had treatment for pre cancerous cells. I am not putting down the technology. Fortunately, the last time I saw a bad report in the news about labs was several years ago. Hopefully they have improved.

I don't know all the medical jargon you refer to but my doctor was/is the leading cancer specialist in this type of cancer in Toronto and he told me I definitely had cervical cancer. Women come from all over North America to see this doctor so I can only assume he knew what he was talking about so when he sat me down and told me straight out that I had cancer of the cervix I believed him. I had to have pap tests every 2 months for a year and then every 4 months for another 2 years and then yearly from that time onward.

My family doctor now tells me they do not do pap tests on women who have had a hysterectomy so I no longer get annual pap tests and haven't for a number of years now.

Thanks for more information. Your experience is the opposite of the medical literature on HPV and cervical cancer that I been exposed to. I have never heard of the cryosurgery being done for actual cancer. A simple google search can help you understand the terms, as well as this book: http://www.abnormalpapsmears.com/
It is an inexpensive book, but very good, can be found at the library too. I highly recommend you read it and everyone read it actually, it is written by doctor experts in the field and easy to read.

Dysplasia high and intermediate grades for cryosurgery are not uncommon, sometimes on low grades but never for real cancer according to many gynecologist specialists. You got lucky. Very lucky.
I am so glad you have been fine on all the follow-ups.

If you have had experiences like high grade dysplasia, HPV, and or even cancer (which I am not saying you didn't just so you know, only it doesn't make any sense to me based on the treatment selected for you and the current literature) I would take healthcare into your own hands. Not have a family doctor, I would only go to a gyno, and a specialist at that. But that is just me and healthcare in the US.
If you had a hysterectomy you don't have as much risk. But has that risk disappeared? That depends on many things, partial or full hysterectomy, your past history if there were any problems, you don't want to take any chances and would want to have clear results for 10 years before not having any more at all based on your past history. In rare cases, 1-7% of women will have HPV related problems move to their vagina or vulva in the absence of the cervix. Rare, but the chance is there.

Thank you I am still am so sorry for what you are have went through, I can't even imagine. I am glad you shared your experience and I for one am listening to what you say and take it very seriously.

And you are right, once you have something happen to you, you do pay closer attention to any with that experience or a similar experience. I think a big problem is atypical and abnormal cells aren't always "pre-cancerous", many go away on their own. Some are, some aren't, some go away, some don't. However, it is very hard to predict which ones do or don't, will or won't. That is why they changed the medical jargon not to say "pre-cancer" anymore but instead made other medical terms that are more accurate.

I hope those reading get annual paps. Most people with HPV do not ever have any issues. But there are some that do. If anyone reading is in one of the 6% or so to get back an abnormal pap, read all you can in books and online and become educated on what this means so you can become proactive in your health care.
Numbers are in your favor that it isn't a big deal especially if paps are regular but the pap should always be repeated just in case it is something serious, and ask for a microscope look of the cervix since that is recommended and isn't painful. Out of the cases that aren't error or isn't just an unclear sample or vaginal infection or some other thing (don't have sex a day or two before the pap), some of that percentage does have dysplasia (does not necessarily mean they have precancerous cells, but then again in some cases it does) that will be rated high or low grade and does need be graded even further and broken up into categories from their microscope along with the biopsy or two.

Even then it does not mean the cells are cancer or even pre-cancer and depending on the person as many times dysplasia can go away on its own as the immune system take care of it and because of that the doctor and patient can agree they can either be watched and closely monitored with frequent paps and microscope or they can be treated with cryosurgery (freezing of cells, take a few minutes,the easiest, least risky, does not pose any risk to those still wanting to have children), LEEP (more extensive than cryo, uses a loop electrosurgical, electronically charged, takes a few minutes, tissue is taken for pathology), or cone (more extensive and involved, removes more than a LEEP, takes out more of the cervix making it something to discuss if you want children in the future, can be done for carcinoma in situ). Each of these 3 procedures are 85-95% successful and that doesn't include other factors such as lifestyle changes that could help. And apart from the different dysplasias the chances that the biopsy comes back as real cancer are small thankfully, regular pap smears play an important part in that.