In order to be able to make a conscious choice, parents need ‘facts’. Figures should be easily accessible to anyone who wants to know. So we can estimate:
1. How big is the chance of contracting the disease
2. How big is the chance of dying or becoming (permanently) damaged due to the disease
3. How big is the risk of death or (permanent) damage due to the vaccine
We are going to take you through the above questions, regarding cervical cancer and the HPV-vaccine.
How big is the chance of contracting the disease, and how big is the chance of dying from the disease?
On the website of the RIVM (Dutch Government), we are informed about cervical cancer:
‘Each year about 600 women in the Netherlands get cervical cancer. Approximately 200 women per year die from this disease. The disease is deadly without treatment.’1
This refers to adult women, whilst the vaccine is given to young girls. But even for adult women, we do not need to worry.
The risk of dying of cervical cancer for adult women is 0,003%.
The death rate for cervical cancer is 200 women per year. If you compare that to a population of 7 million women (21 years and older), a simple calculation tells you that the chance of dying from cervical cancer for an adult woman is 0.003%. 2 (200 / 7,000,000 x 100% = 0.002857%)
Mortality rate from cervical cancer compared with the mortality rate from all other cancers in women
The Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) keeps track of the mortality figures of all forms of cancer every year. It is not easily accessible, but for the go-getter these numbers can be found. In the graph below we have compared the death rates for cervical cancer (blue bar left) against the death rates from all forms of cancer in women. (red bar right) The graph runs from 2010-2017, but for simplicity sake, let’s take only the rightmost bar (2017): The cervical cancer mortality was 200 in that year, and the mortality from all other cancers was just over 13,000.2
Are vaccines against cancer are a promising new market?
In practice, it has not yet been proven that the HPV vaccine has prevented one single case of cervical cancer (more about this later), there is a lot at stake.
At the moment there are ongoing studies for vaccines against bladder cancer, brain tumors, breast cancer, colon cancer, kidney cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, skin cancer, bone marrow cancer, pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer.3 Is it the intention that we will be vaccinated against this too? It seems unlikely that the pharmaceutical industry – once it has developed the next vaccine against cancer – would make no attempt to release it onto the market.
A ‘new era’ was announced with the HPV vaccine. The step from vaccinating against infectious diseases to vaccinating against cancer was a fact. And they must keep the pressure on, because if the public is already dropping out, the millions of dollars that are currently being invested in scientific research for the development of new cancer vaccines will not be earned back.
The risk of dying of cervical cancer for young girls is 0%
In the following graph the mortality from cervical cancer is compared with the mortality for all cancers in women in 2017, split by age. The number 200 starts with 6 women in the age group of 30-35 years. The problem that occurred when making this graph was that the blue bars were so small – in other words, the risk of cervical cancer is very low compared to other cancers – that they were not even visible on the graph. So we have added the numbers.
What is striking about this graph is of course that there is no mortality at all from cervical cancer before the age of 30-35. How is that possible?
‘There are more than 100 different types of human papillomavirus (HPV). 15 HPV types can cause cervical cancer. We call this high-risk human papillomavirus. The cervical screening test for the population, tests on all high-risk types.’ – RIVM 4
Later on in this article we will learn more about the cervical screening test (smear) that tests on all high risk types. For now the following is important to know:
* The presence of the HPV-virus is not the same as cervical cancer.
* Sooner or later 80% of the women contracts HPV-viruses and normally the body cleans it up without any notice.
* In rare cases the virus (presence) becomes an infection.
* The time that a neglected HPV infection needs to develop into cancer can be anything up to 20 years.5
Can one always hope?
The RIVM gives a hopeful indication that from 2023 we will be able to see that the vaccine works, but that is not certain at all.6 There are 15 types of HPV strands that are associated with cervical cancer, and there are only 2 strands in the vaccine.7
If the vaccine ‘works’ against the ‘most common causers’, HPV-16 and HPV-18, the question is what the other 13 virus types will do. And it is not unthinkable that if HPV-16 and HPV-18 are suppressed, other “strands” will become the main cause. In that case, only the name of the causing strand will change and the number of cervical cancer cases can remain the same or even, in the worst case, increase.
In Belgium they have already started to vaccinate girls with ‘Gardasil-9’, a vaccine containing HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58, because in Belgium apparently 9 (!!) types ‘are the most common types that cause cervical cancer.’8
The media and the difference between fantasy and reality
In the rosy world of the media, the repeated message is that the vaccine ‘protects’ girls. While the reality is that at most you could say that, if one gives Dutch girls a smear test, no HPV-16 and HPV-18 could be found.
If we stay with reality – the visible, verifiable now – the answer to the questions at the beginning of this article 1 and 2 is:
For 12-year-olds, the chance of getting cervical cancer is 0%. They can therefore no longer sustain permanent damage, let alone death. And as far as the future is concerned: at this moment we cannot say for certain which strands will be the main cause in 20 years time. We cannot even say for sure how long the vaccine is ‘effective’!
How long does the HPV-vaccine ‘work’ – does anyone know?
The girls are not protected, only when they become adult women over 20 – 50 years of age! Is that really true? The girls must first contract the virus, and then neglect it another twenty years (have a weak constitution, do not have smears, be heavy smokers or use certain medications etc.) And then perhaps after decades we can say that a number of women have been “saved”? Or not …
We can only say that IF the cause of the cancer is HPV-16, or HPV-18, because the vaccine ‘protects’ only against 2 of the 15 HPV viruses that – at the moment! – are associated with cervical cancer. And… IF the vaccine is still ‘working’ by then, of course.
How long does the HPV-vaccine work?
In answer to this question the RIVM gives the following answer:
‘The HPV vaccine works for a long time, but we do not know how long yet. That is because the vaccine has only been used since 2006. For people who have been vaccinated against HPV at that time, the vaccine still works and there is no need for an extra vaccination.’9 ~ RIVM
It is rather vague and it could be that the RIVM is mistaken. The reality is simple, and the RIVM should use these words, for example:
The duration of protection is not yet known because the vaccine has not been on the market long enough.
And if the RIVM were to provide real, realistic information, they might add:
We are looking for subjects. (For more information about the worldwide and scientifically used term ‘experiment’ and the term ‘guinea pig’ used by the population, go to the HPV page on www.stichtingvaccinvrij.nl/HPV)
Where is the science?
At this moment we have the following information regarding the duration of ‘efficacy’ (presence of antibodies HPV-16 and HPV-18):
The ‘pharmacotherapeutischkompas.nl – an informative government website for doctors – states:
‘Long-term data on the actual prevention of cervical cancer is still lacking. The efficacy of the HPV vaccine is optimal in girls and women who have not yet been infected with HPV types 16 and 18. It has been demonstrated that the duration of protection is up to 5 years and may even be 10 years. The need for booster doses has not been established.’10
It comes down to the following: we do not yet know whether the vaccinated girls will be protected by the vaccine when they are 40 years old.
The situation is really absurd: ‘The efficacy of the HPV vaccine is’ optimal ‘for girls and women who have not yet been infected.’ Does that mean that the antibody production is the highest for them? And if so, is it useful? Many girls have sexual contact from 16/17 years of age. But if those antibodies are no longer ‘effective’ after 10 years, so let’s say on their 30th, how ‘optimal’ is the protection in time when they need it (let’s say their 50th)?
Or is it not even about antibody production? Is it rather a slogan invented by the marketing department of the pharmaceutical industry? After all, the girls are vaccinated, so it sounds good that the vaccine protects girls ‘optimally’ even if a twelve-year-old does not need it. And the 40-year-old women are still offered a smear, so with a little good faith our advisors get away with this?
In the ‘LCI reports’ – the ‘guidelines and preparation plans’ that the government has drawn up for professionals:
‘The duration of protection is not yet known because the vaccine has not been on the market long enough.’
After 9 years, a high antibody titer with good effectiveness was still found against the vaccine types for both the quadrivalent (Gardasil®) and the bivalent vaccine’ (Cervarix®) (Ferris 2014, De Vicenzo 2014).
It is not communicated to doctors, let alone the public, but in the above study it is also stated:
‘Interpretation of the results of long-term efficacy studies for HPV-16 and HPV-18 vaccines can be confusing, due to the heterogeneity (disparity) of the studies. Different methods are used in the assessment of immunogenicity *, histopathological * and virological * final results and geometric problems (statistical power issues). Moreover, an immunological correlate of protection has not yet been established, and it is unknown whether higher antibody levels will really result in a longer duration of protection.’11
* To clarify: immunogenicity means: the capacity of a specific substance to induce an immune system response, histopathology is the microscopic study of disease processes in tissues, and virologically refers to viruses.
But do not be intimidated by the scientific denominations. In Dutch it says: They do not know it yet!
Again: the vaccine is still in an experimental stage.
To return to the answer of the RIVM to the question: ‘How long does the HPV vaccine work? If it becomes clear in the future that it is necessary, then it is not a problem for the RIVM ‘that an additional vaccine should be given for the persons who previously have been vaccinated’, but for the girls it is a problem. The vaccine has serious side effects.
Before we proceed to this, we are going to summarise the ‘efficacy’:
Firstly: there is no evidence that the vaccine is still ‘working’ by the time it could matter for a very small (risk) group of women.
Second: It is a likely expectation that ‘booster vaccinations’ will be required to protect a high-risk group of adult women against HPV. Please note – in let’s say 95% of the cases healthy women cleans up the HPV viruses themselves. And the following question arises: what is the need of ‘protecting’ generations of young girls?
Protecting girls or damage girls? – the side effects!
Let’s stay in the harsh reality of the moment. The side effects of the HPV vaccine are serious. And the side effects are not for adult women, but for young girls.
Vigiaccess is an institute that monitors the side effects of the HPV vaccine under the supervision of the World Health Organization. In July 2018 the number of reported cases is 84,425 worldwide.13 Please realise that this is a fraction of the total. It is estimated that only a few percent of the side effects are reported.14
In addition to the official figures, there are the unofficial testimonials on the internet. The stories of what countless young girls worldwide experience (directly) after vaccination are shared on the internet: epileptic seizures, unbearable pain in muscles and joints, chronic and extreme fatigue, early menopause (infertility) and more.
And there are now many scientific studies of graduate academics who support the stories of these girls. For example, the research of CMSRI, an independent scientific institute on the link between the HPV vaccine and the sudden, strongly increased infertility worldwide. More info: ‘Vaccine Boom, population bust – Study queries the link between HPV vaccine and soaring infertility’
To date, the disappointing reaction of the establishment is to downplay, ignore and / or deny this disturbing information.
The answer to question 3: The extent of the risk of death or (permanent) damage due to the vaccine cannot be answered. Unfortunately, we still have a long way to go.
Question 4 and 5
There are 2 questions that we would like to add to the aforementioned 3 questions:
4. How big is the chance that the vaccine will ‘protect’ a girl in 15-20 years- in the meantime an adult woman – against cervical cancer?
5. How big is the chance that the smear protects women against cervical cancer?
With common sense these questions, especially after reading all of the above, are fairly easy to answer, but let’s see how the RIVM and the media answer these questions by means of (calculated) figures.
The answer on question 4 according to the RIVM – the figures we do get:
That the RIVM has trouble with numbers can be seen from the following ‘sloppiness’
On the website of the RIVM: webpage ‘Frequently asked questions Cervical cancer’:
‘Every year about 700 women get cervical cancer.’ 15
And on the same site of the RIVM: ‘Cervical cancer’:
‘Every year around 600 women in the Netherlands get cervical cancer.’ 16
And at the same site of the RIVM there is another webpage ‘Population screening for cervical cancer’ that states:
‘Without the screening of cervical cancer, not 700 but about 1,300 women per year will get cervical cancer. With the renewed cervical cancer screening, 100 diagnoses of cervical cancer are prevented every year. And only about 600 women get cervical cancer every year.’17
So far we have discussed the present day situation. The future maybe even more confusing. Based on the fact that until the present day HVP-16 and HPV-18 (in the Netherlands) are the most common cause, RIVM has assumed that this will be exactly the same in 20 years – and made a calculation.
According to the newspaper ‘AD’ (25-06-18), the RIVM ‘fears’ 80 deaths a year due to ‘dramatic’ decline of vaccination. Oh no, there are ‘possibly’ 77 deaths according to the newspaper ‘Het Parool’ (25-06-18). And on the same day ‘dozens’ according to the television station NOS (25-06-18).18,19,20
We have reached a low point of information. Unproven future scenarios and unclear calculations are used in organised media campaigns to persuade citizens to get the shot. For more information about this, read our blog post: ‘Decreasing vaccination rate leads to manipulative media offensive’
Answer to question 5 – how big is the chance that the ‘smear’ protects against cervical cancer?
The smear test is a ‘population screening’ that is offered free of charge to women aged 30 and above. Closing with two points about the ‘smear test’:
Firstly: ‘With the population screening for cervical cancer, we look at whether women between the ages of 30 and 60 have a risk of cervical cancer, In an early stage, cervical cancer can be prevented.’ 21 – RIVM
You read it correctly: In an early stage, cervical cancer can be prevented. More information about the ‘smear’ in our blog post: The ‘smear’ in the picture – why is it introduced and why is it ‘phased out’?
Second: Is a smear still necessary if you have had the HPV vaccination?
‘Yes. It remains important to have a smear from the age of 30, even if you have been vaccinated against HPV. The vaccination does not protect against all HPV variants that can cause cervical cancer.’ – RIVM 22
In other words, the smear tests for all 15 high-risk HPV viruses, instead of only HPV-16 and HPV-18. And that is the reason that vaccinated girls still need to have smears when they are adults.
Information or scaremongering?
What parents are missing in the information is that neither the policy makers nor the doctors nor the journalists have taken the effort to present the available figures in a clear and complete way. The information about the HPV vaccine is tragic. Essential information – needed to see the numbers in perspective – is missing. An illusion of danger is created with unproven future scenarios. And unsubstantiated fear is often the motivation of young girls to get a vaccine, which has not yet been proven to be safe, effective or necessary.
Who will – after a thorough study of all the above information – see any reason to vaccinate young girls against HPV?
12. Uiteindelijk zal niet meer dan 5% van de CIN-laesies zonder interventie leiden tot een cervixcarcinoom. http://www.hpvtest.nl/about-hpv/cervical-dysplasia-faqs/
About the authors:
Daphne Knipping is core member of the Vaccine-free team
Door Frankema is initiator of the foundationa Vaccine Free