By Norma Erickson
In an unprecedented move, pathologist/clinical microbiologist, Dr. Sin Hang Lee has decided to invite the international community of scientists and medical professionals to peer-review and/or discuss his latest research “Toll-like receptor 9 agonist in HPV vaccine Gardasil 9” in an open public forum.
According to Dr. Lee, during 2011/12, when he tried to publish papers describing HPV DNA fragments he had discovered in Gardasil 4, his first paper was rejected by three medical journal editors despite the fact that the manufacturer had assured health authorities worldwide no such fragments were in the final product.
The first of his papers regarding this subject was favorably peer-reviewed by three scientists who recommended publication. However, upon subsequent review by a journal editor publication was inexplicably denied.
Both papers were subsequently published in non-medical journals which deal with ‘pure science’ thereby limiting access to most medical professionals.
Dr. Lee also states that after submission of his latest research to “Vaccines” the editor-in-chief sent his paper out requesting a peer review. However, the editor’s subordinates refused to process the manuscript even though the journal claims to be “an international, peer-reviewed open access journal focused on laboratory and clinical vaccine research, utilization and immunization.”
Dr. Lee believes this unusual response illustrates a top-level concerted effort by vaccine stakeholders to suppress any information which could potentially impact the published safety profile of HPV vaccines.
Dr. Lee decided to release the paper to an open forum because:
-
- He believes medical professionals need access to all information which might impact their analysis of the safety profile of HPV vaccines so they can help their patients make intelligent choices regarding cancer prevention options.
- He believes the only way for medical consumers to make intelligent choices is to be informed of known potential risks as well as the promised benefits of any medical intervention, including HPV vaccines.
- He believes the process of discovering mechanisms of action associated with serious adverse events after HPV vaccinations will be expedited if the medical/scientific community is aware of any new research in that arena.
- He believes that discovering the mechanisms of action as quickly as possible will enable researchers to better define biological plausibility and causation, thereby allowing medical professionals to help those most susceptible to serious reactions avoid unnecessary risks.
- He believes open discussion and honest debate may help restore the public’s faith in science.
Therefore, in the interest of public health and safety, Dr. Lee cordially invites any medical/scientific professional interested in the benefit/risk profile of HPV vaccines to review and/or discuss his latest research via the comment section below. He has kindly agreed to answer any scientific questions regarding the following paper.
Toll-like receptor 9 agonist in HPV vaccine Gardasil 9
Author: Sin Hang Lee; Milford Molecular Diagnostics, Milford, CT, 06460, USA
* Correspondence: shlee01@snet.net ; Tel: +1-203-878-1438
Abstract:
Gardasil9 is a recombinant human papillomavirus (HPV) 9-valent vaccine, containing purified major capsid L1 protein of HPV types 6, 11, 16, 18, 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 re-assembled into virus-like particles (VLPs) as the active ingredient. Since the antigens are purified recombinant proteins, Gardasil9 needs a potent adjuvant to enhance the initiation of the immune response through activation of innate immunity of the host to generate high and sustained levels of antibodies for maintaining efficacy of vaccination. Historically, the aluminum salt, amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate or AAHS which is listed as the adjuvant for Gardasil9, was known to require a Toll-like receptor agonist, such as phospholipids, to work in combination to achieve its potent adjuvant effects in the recombinant hepatitis B vaccine, Recombivax HB®. However, there are no phospholipids in the purified HPV L1 proteins or in the Gardasil9 formulation. Since the Food and Drug Administration has informed the public that Gardasil4 does contain recombinant HPV L1-specific DNA fragments, these HPV DNA fragments may serve as Toll-like receptor 9 agonist in Gardasil9 vaccination. The author has tested 5 samples of Gardasil9 from 4 manufacturing lots by PCR amplification with a set of degenerate primers followed by heminested PCR or by another 5 sets of non-degenerate nested PCR primers in an attempt to detect all 9 vaccine-relevant HPV type-specific L1 gene DNAs bound to AAHS in the vaccine. Sanger sequencing of the PCR products confirmed the presence of HPV 18, 11, 16 and 6 L1 gene DNA bound to insoluble AAHS nanoparticles, but unevenly distributed even within one vaccine sample. In addition, these genotype-specific HPV DNA fragments were at least partially in non-B conformations. Since no L1 gene DNA of HPV 31, 33, 45, 52, and 58 was amplified by the commonly used degenerate PCR primers, the results suggest that these latter 5 type-specific HPV DNAs may all be in non-B conformations or have been removed as contaminants by a special purification protocol. Further research is warranted to standardize the HPV DNA fragments in Gardasil which are known to be potent Toll-like receptor 9 agonist.
Keywords: Gardasil 9; Gardasil; HPV vaccine; HPV DNA; non-B conformations; topological conformational change; Toll-like receptor 9 agonist; AAHS; amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate; DNA sequencing
Read this article in Spanish here.
Thank you for all your efforts to bring your findings to light!!
Blessings, Kat
Good Morning. I am Dr. Girolamo Giannotta and together with Nicola Giannotta we were among the speakers at the last congress (AutismOne) in Chicago. We presented and published a paper in which we exposed the molecular biology of certain adverse events following HPV vaccination.
In these links there are our scientific contributions, and we are ready to collaborate to reach the truth.
1- https://www.omicsonline.org/open-access/vaccines-and-neuroinflammation.pdf.
2- https://www.oatext.com/pdf/CCRR-5-454.pdf.
3- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryZ3DpHBOCg.
4- https://www.dropbox.com/s/p411gcqyzry0ro8/Post%20vaccination%20inflammatory%20syndrome..pptx?dl=0.
Thank you both and Dr. Hang Lee. I will go through your research. I’m currently reading the book “HPV vaccine on trial”
HPV vaccines cause a higher incidence rate of severe adverse reactions than other vaccines among vaccinees, for example when the rates of post-vaccination acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) were compared https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24147076 . The mechanism is complex and needs more research to elucidate. At the request of many parents whose children developed severe adverse reactions after HPV vaccination, I tested some samples of Gardasil 4 and Gardasil 9 for the presence of residues of HPV DNA fragments bound to AAHS which may play a role in the pathogenesis of this “post-HPV vaccination syndrome”.
The concerned citizens of the world may like to write to Dr. Shu-Kun Lin, Publisher of MDPI journals
(E-mail lin@mdpi.com ), asking him to direct the Editor of the Journal who rejected my article to conduct an open peer review of the manuscript posted in this column. The basis for the need of publishing this article is illustrated in a letter I sent to Dr. Harper, pasted below:
Prof. Dr. Diane M. Harper
Editor-in-Chief
Vaccines MDPI March 25, 2019
Cc: SANEVAX, Inc.
Re: MS vaccines-476060
Dear Dr. Harper:
This is my second letter, requesting a response from you as the Editor-in-Chief or from the Editorial Board of Vaccines MDPI with regard to the basis for editorial rejection of my recent manuscript without peer reviews. Since this study was performed at the request of SANEVAX, Inc. on behalf of a group of parents whose children developed serious adverse reactions after receiving Gardasil vaccination, this letter is being copied to the administration of SANEVAX, Inc.
As stated in my first letter dated March 21, 2019, I submitted a manuscript titled “Toll-like receptor 9 agonist in HPV vaccine Gardasil9” (MS vaccines-476060) on March 17, 2019 to be considered for publication in the Journal Vaccines-MDPI.
This paper reported, for the first time, irrefutable Sanger sequencing-based evidence that HPV L1 gene DNA fragments bound to AAHS in non-B conformations are the long-acting Toll-like receptor 9 agonist which is needed to achieve a potent adjuvant effect in Gardasil as the Toll-like receptor 4 agonist MPL in Cervarix.
Both Gardasil and Cervarix require a TLR agonist to enhance the immune response in HPV vaccination to maintain a sustained high level of anti-HPV antibodies in the host for vaccine efficacy.
However, I received a notice of editorial rejection on March 19, 2019 from the Vaccines Editorial Office, stating:
“We are writing to inform you that we will not be able to process your paper further. Papers sent for peer-review are selected on the basis of discipline, novelty and general significance, in addition to the usual criteria for publication in scholarly journals.”
Please confirm whether or not the basis for editorial rejection of this manuscript represents the following opinion(s) of the Editorial Board:
1) Research to find plausible mechanisms of Gardasil vaccination is not within the discipline of Vaccines.
2) The finding of Toll-like receptor 9 agonist in Gardasil9 is not novel but is already widely known.
3) A long-acting Toll-like receptor 9 agonist bound to AAHS injected into a human body has no general significance.
If this is indeed the view of the editorial board, then the scientific community should be made aware of this policy, and the lack of Editorial understanding of current vaccine science.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely yours,
Sin Hang Lee, MD, F.R.C.P.(C), FCAP
Please Join doctors social media groups such as Doximity and post your incredible work there to reach doctors
My name is Deborah Sullivan, I have worked as an oncology nurse for more than 25 years. I have always been associated with academic medicine and am a proponent of vaccination. I have four children, all of whom are fully vaccinated to date. I have two children who have suffered a severe adverse reaction to Gardasil and now both have chronic autoimmune issues and cardiac abnormalities.
I am begging that the researchers and editors of medical journals will allow this finding to be looked at. Thank you Dr. Sin Hang Lee for your research and dedication to finding the cause of the adverse reactions seen; and for upholding your oath to “do no Harm”
God bless you Sin Hang Lee & giannotta girolamo for all the work you do !
We are reading & we are fighting.
Here is a second Vaccines editorial rejection based on different reasons. It is common practices to find an undisclosed Big Pharma-paid consultant to give an unsubstantiated opinion to reject a manuscript based on solid research evidence, without giving the authors to rebut. My email dated July 19, 2019 to the Managing Editor is pasted below for public information.
Dear Fanny:
I felt compelled to comment on the second editorial rejection of this paper by Vaccines, for the record.
On March 19, 2019 your Editor rejected the manuscript “on the basis of discipline, novelty and general significance”. And now, your new Editor in Chief rejected it because of “methodology, experimental design, and controls”. May I ask the new Editor in Chief of Vaccines to point out the specific flaws of methodology, experimental design and controls described in this paper? Does the Editor in Chief refute Sanger sequencing evidence for the existence of HPV L1 gene DNA fragments found in Gardasil9, as reported in the rejected paper? Or the real motive of this editorial censorship is to suppress irrefutable scientific evidence that Gardasil depends on using a concealed Toll-like receptor 9 agonist as the vaccine adjuvant, an adjuvant which has not been approved by the FDA and has not been tested for safe application in humans.
I want to point out here for the record that Dr. Diane Harper was still the Editor in Chief in March 2019 on your Journal website. Your journal only made the following announcements in April looking for a new Editor in Chief as follows (in fact the period for application is still opened up to July 31, 2019).
“Announcements from MDPI, 9 April 2019
Editor-in-Chief Role Available at Immunology Journal Vaccines
https://www.mdpi.com/about/announcements/1504
If you are interested in this position or would like to suggest any potential candidates, please contact the Vaccines Editorial Office before 31 July 2019”
Since the issue of risks v. benefits of mass vaccination of adolescents to prevent cervical cancer is a global concern, editorial censorship of dissemination of scientific data on this issue ought to be known to the public. The editor who rejected peer review of this article must tell the public which part of the methodology, experimental design and controls were flawed so that I should have a chance to rebut.
Sincerely yours,
Sin Hang Lee.
On Friday, July 19, 2019, 02:19:18 AM EDT, Vaccines wrote:
Dear Sin,
Thank you very much for your understanding on the review rules.
And thanks for your reminder on the former EiC’s order. We indeed
noticed this information in your last message. For your information,
Prof. Diane M. Harper had agreed to step down from the EiC role at end
of 2018 and is listed as Former EiC on the board of Vaccines currently.
We appreciate Diane’s effort and support to Vaccines very much always.
So we sent your paper to the new EiC for a further check with respect.
We regret to inform you that negative feedback are received from him. To
make it more fair, we then sent your paper to another academic editor
for a scientific check, regrettably the methodology, experimental
design, and controls in this paper are not agreed neither.
The editorial office feel sorry that we are not able to further support
you on this paper as we need to take our academic editors’ decisions
into considerations. It is us who invite them to guide and supervisor
our editorial process and submissions.
Always we appreciate your interest in publication in Vaccines and will
be glad to collaborate with you on another paper in the near future.
We wish your this paper a successful publication on other platforms
sincerely.
Kind regards,
Fanny Fang
Managing Editor
My son had severe adverse reactions to two separate doses of Gardasil three and a half months apart. It has been almost 5 years, yet he still suffers horribly from chronic and debilitating issues that followed these vaccinations. I want to know WHY this happened, I want to know WHAT happened, and I want to know HOW to restore my son’s health, if possible.
I find it extremely irresponsible and insanely unethical to place a product on the market that has the potential to cause extreme harm without having appropriate medical intervention available in these adverse event cases. Even more infuriating to me is the fact that while there ARE doctors out there, like Dr. Lee, trying to help us find answers to help our injured sons and daughters, they are consistently roadblocked from fulfilling their obligation. Seems these people responsible for denying our suffering children help have forgotten or turned their backs on the oath to “do no harm.”
SOMEONE needs to evaluate the damage done and find answers–our sons and daughters are more than merely collateral damage, yet they are persistently treated as such.
I have read Dr. Sin Hang Lee’s article, suggesting that Gardasil may contain a concealed adjuvant which has not been approved by the FDA and has not been tested for its safe use in human vaccines. Since you have refused to send Dr. Lee’s manuscript out for peer review which may lead to acceptance for publication because of alleged poor methodology, experimental design and controls, we are requesting that you point out the flaws of methodology, experimental design and controls in Dr. Lee’s article so that the consumers can be educated and better informed.
Signed,
One angry Mom whose trust has been shattered and her son’s life destroyed.
P.S. We’re from the U.S. and my son was injured in November 2014 and February 2015. He lost significant functioning in his legs within 48 hrs of that Feb 2015 dose, just one month before he turned 19. He was left with 30/80 function in his lower extremities and 60/80 in upper. No one warned us that things like joint and bone pain could become chronic. No one ever warned us that headaches and chronic fatigue would be a lasting issue, no one warned us that this could essentially short-circuit their autonomic nervous system or cause painful autonomic neuropathy. No one warned us that my son could become a prisoner trapped inside a body that no longer functions properly and is in pain DAILY without hope of recovery. My grief is profound, my anger raging, my fear of what lies ahead paralyzing.
I want to thank Dr. Lee for being a man of sound morals and character who seems to be traveling a narrow path, one filled with conviction and persecution by people who SHOULD want to help just as much as he does. Shame on those who wish to try and bury what’s happening.
I report below a recent submission I made to the to the British Medical Jourmal (BMJ). It is most obvious that the manufacturers of Gardasil and numerous national agencies are not telling the truth about this vaccine. The serious injuries and deaths reported as adverse reactions are significantly more than any other vaccine. It is imperative that we are told the truth and I believe Dr Sin Hang Lee may have identified the underlying cause of the huge number of problems associated with this vaccine. Refusal to publish Dr Lee’s article for peer review is immoral and unethical. Somebody must stand up and act transparently to enable the TRUTH to be revealled.
Submission to BMJ on 4th July 2019
In 2002 Merke conducted a Gardasil HPV vaccine ‘FUTURE 2 study – NOT a side-effect study’ (original emphasis on NOT) in Denmark.
Kesia Lyng participated in the study and was told “the vaccine has already been proven safe”. She was also told that the study was ‘double-blind’ and that if she received the placebo it would be ‘saline’ (this was also written in the brochure provided) (1).
The first injection really hurt. Later that day she felt tired and her arm was weak. She was overcome by an unusual feeling all over her body; not dizzy but strange , and disconnected. She had a weird sensation in her arm for weeks after the shot.
Two months later Kesia returned for her second shot. It was more painful than the first and she had the same reaction as before and shortly after she also developed flu-like symptoms, muscle pains and a strange headache, feeling like her head was in a vice. She began having trouble sleeping for the first time in her life. She was exhausted.
Kesia asked the nurse if she could delay the third shot but was reassured that her symptoms were nothing to do with the vaccine. Kesia felt dizzy for the first time. She felt nauseated and her arm hurt more than ever. Her health took a sharp turn for the worse. She was told that the symptoms were not the kind expected with the vaccine. They persisted for the next 14 years.
Another young Danish woman, Sesilje, also participated in the same future 2 study, she was also given the same information and brochure. She also had very similar symptoms to Kesia after each shot. She also developed allergies to deodorants and skin creams. She also lost a lot of weight.
In 2007 when the study was completed, Kesia and Sesilje were informed which doses they had been given. Kesia had been given the vaccine and Sesilje the saline placebo – but they both had similar ongoing symptoms. In 2015 Sesilje found out that the ‘saline placebo’ used in the clinical trial was NOT just saline or a true placebo (do no harm). Sesilje worked in clinical research and realised that the control she received also contained the aluminium adjuvant system of the vaccine and knew that the aluminium had been toxic to her.
I met Kesia Lyng in 2017 and she informed me that her adverse reactions to the vaccine had been expunged from the trial data because they had been considered ‘new medical conditions, not believed to be related to the vaccine’!
My own daughter received three doses the Cervarix HPV vaccine in 2010/11, This also contains a ‘new’ similar aluminium adjuvant to the Gardasil. Her symptoms were very similar to Kesia’s and Sesilje’s, probably even worse. She missed all her education after the vaccine and has been severely disabled ever since. She had been seen by 28 health professionals before it was suggested that a Yellow Card should be raised, despite the vaccine being classified with an inverted black triangle at that time. N.B. new medicines are supposed to be intensively monitored to ensure that any new safety hazards are identified promptly. The Commission on Human Medicines (CHM) and the UK MHRA encourages the reporting of all suspected reactions to newer drugs and vaccines, which are denoted by an inverted Black Triangle symbol (▼).
Researching this vaccine by freedom of information act requests (FOIA) and parliamentary questions I find that almost 25,000 suspected adverse reactions and 9 deaths have been reported to the MHRA by Yellow Card. I also correspond with over 600 UK families with daughters in a similar situation. I also correspond with many hundreds of families in the USA, Canada, Spain, Denmark, Japan, South Africa New Zealand, Australia, Colombia, West Indies, etc, all with similar experiences. I also find that the World Health Organisation (WHO) global database of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) lists over 335,000 ADRs, including 490 deaths (2). They have also acknowledged that only approximately 10% of ADRs are reported.
Further research also finds that there is NO evidence that this vaccine has ever prevented, or will ever prevent, a single case of cancer. At best it is ‘expected to’ in decades time. In the meantime several government’s own statistics indicate that there has been increased incidence of cervical cancer in young women (mainly vaccinated population) in countries that have introduced HPV vaccines (3), (4).
Cervical cancer is known to be one of the most preventable of all cancers without the need of a vaccine. Regular cervical smear screening has been hugely successful for decades and proven to be almost 100% effective (5). France continues to focus on screening rather than vaccination and incidence of cervical cancer continues to reduce, even in young women (4).
(1) HPV Vaccine on Trial, book by Holland, Rosenberg and Iorio, page 6.
(2) http://www.vigiaccess.org
(3) http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/cervical-cancer/incidence#heading-Two
(4) Gardasil. Faith and propaganda versus hard evidence, book by Drs Nicole & Gérard Delépine, https://www.fauves-editions.fr/index.asp?navig=catalogue&obj=livre&no=128
(5) Open letter from Dr Sin Hang Lee to Ireland’s Dr Brenda Corcoran http://www.ificaeurope.org/blog/dr-lees-open-letter-to-dr-brenda-corcoran-hse
Ok, so I followed the links you provided to the VigiAccess page, that it is a collaborating center for the WHO. HOWEVER, the WHO own page concerning the adverse reaction for the HPV vaccine basically says that there is no difference between the vaccine adverse reactions and the placebo adverse reactions.https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/HPV_vaccine_rates_information_sheet_1217.pdf?ua=1
So I m very confused. If the WHO uses VigiAccess for DRUG monitoring, why does it list this as a safe drug when clearly there are issues with it from the VigiAccess evidence?
Hi Diane, please investigate the ‘placebo’ used by Merck in the studies. You will find that they are not in fact a true placebo but are the proprietary adjuvant AAHS, which is an Aluminium preparation which Merck will not share with scientists for independent safety analysis. It is an adjuvant that has not been tested for safety.
Kindest regards
Sarah
My daughter suffers from autoimmune medical issues for over 5 1/2 years now after receiving her 2nd Gardasil shot on 12/3/2013. Please tell me exactly why Dr. Sin Hang Lee’s paper has been rejected for publication. I see you noted flaws in his methodology, experimental design, and controls as the reasons for not publishing his paper: I believe Dr. Lee deserves a full and detailed explanation: Yours is rather vague. I am very interested in reading all papers regarding Gardasil, and I am particularly interested in Dr. Lee’s science and expertise. This is not the first time that Gardasil science which potentially explains what happened to the Gardasil-injured has been denied publication. I believe this is censorship of valid and pertinent scientific information. This information may explain what happened to my daughter and also uncover what we can do to heal her and all the others who have experienced adverse reactions after immunization. Gardasil seems to be a political hot potato with the Government and media protecting this money making HPV Vaccine. I live in CT and wrote my Federal Government Senators and Representative a few years ago regarding the censorship of Gardasil-related science. I never received a response from Senators Blumenthal or Murphy but I did get further follow-up from Representative Joe Courtney who took my issue all the way to Health & Human Services! Unfortunately their response was simply “They have a claim filed in Vaccine Court, and we cannot comment”. I applaud Joe Courtney and his staff for putting “politics” aside and pursuing my concerns. I am extremely disheartened by the lack of response from Senators Blumenthal and Murphy. This is an example of politics as usual when solid science is ignored when it presents anything unfavorable with respect to Gardasil. Please let him know exactly what flaws led you to the decision to not publish his findings.
Thank you Dr. Lee for your relentless efforts to hold authorities accountable and to document the truth about the HPV vaccine and its components. My daughter died from Gardasil and even though after eight years of litigation, DHHS conceded that she died from Gardasil. the authotities continue to say there are “no serious problems with the HPV vaccine.” With now about 470 deaths following HPV inoculations and tens of thousands of serious adverse events, many of which like ours were confirmed with a judgment, the so-called “authorities” still profess the vaccine is safe and turn a blind eye to researchers like Dr. Lee. We need to vote into office new legislators who will create and enforce a system of accountability and independent investigation. Citizens can also hit the corrupt medical industry where they feel it the most – in the pocketbook, by declining HPV vaccinations.
My daughter had a serious reaction in 2014 she was 12 years old. After her second injection our Doctor acknowledged vaccine injury and reported to the TGA here in Australia. I have struggled terribly and found this extremely hard to comprehend how my fit healthy daughter succumbed to such severe chronic illness after injecting her with HPV Vaccine when I thought I was protecting her from cervical cancer. In my research I have been been horrified at what I wasn’t told. I definitely wasn’t given FULLY INFORMED information. I am desperate for answers WHY this went so terribly wrong and WHY so many girls/boys globally are effected??? WHY WHY WHY ?????
I admire Dr Lee’s dedication and hard work. TRUTH MUST PREVAIL
I WANT ANSWERS and the international community of scientist’s and medical professionals to discuss Dr Lee’s latest findings.
We really appreciate all of your work on Gardasil vaccine – you have done a great service for those injured, disabled or passed away after taking this frightening vaccine. We are hopeful that authorities will take a deep look into your research, Dr Lee. Our daughter was disabled after two HPV injections, a terrible thing for one so young and promising. The truth must be heard!
This is a great piece of work by Dr. Sin Hang Lee who is an expert in the genetic diagnosis of HPV strains related to cervical cancer. His elegant studies on Sanger sequencing of PCR amplified fragments from vaccine preparations is a huge contribution to explain Gardasil’s toxicity in the early as well as chronic stages of the disease. Dr. Gherardi and collaborators in France studied the approximate clearance rate of hydroxide or hydroxide phosphate aluminum vaccines in their Macrophage Myofasciitis patients (PMID: 25699008). However, I’m not aware of any such studies with Gardasil’s AAHS adjuvant which due to its tight association with non-B conformation DNA can increase the time for such phagocytes to cause inflammation in target tissues. Dr. Lee found Gardasil’s HPV 16 DNA in the spleen of a New Zealand girl who died 6 months after vaccination so Gardasil can remain in the body much longer than extrapolated from other alum vaccines. Such time would be even longer in individuals with inherited defects in clearance of the vaccine/adjuvant via xeno/autophagy as French investigators suggested.
It’s good news that Merck seemed to figure out how to make DNA-free vaccine lots. But these could later be added to earlier preparations known to contain DNA as agonist for TLR9. As Dr. Lee explains, DNA is needed to bind to TLR9 and thus trigger inflammation (stages 0 & 1 and possibly 2, PMID: 26344951).
Certainly it’s a shame that Dr. Lee’s paper has been rejected, but he should be congratulated for placing such important manuscript in the public domain as his original intention of publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
Possibly this is an opportunity to call for scientists in different fields to carry out proteomic studies that are high yield considering that Virus-Like Particles vaccines can carry undisclosed and surreptitious antigens. Dr. Lee’s contribution showed that HPV viral DNA met that criteria in Gardasil. But I’m afraid to say that it might not be the whole story.
The specificity of dysautonomic abnormalities including Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS), Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) and Premature Ovarian Failure seem at odds with most of the abnormalities expected in ASIA / Encephalomyelitis Myalgia Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (EM/CFS) patients.
Possibly proteomic studies will uncover why Gardasil causes dysautonomic disorders like the ones identified by investigators in Japan and Denmark, but known to exist in smaller series elsewhere.
Likewise, this is an invitation to explain the rare clinical presentation of girls who experience tonic-clonic seizures like ones in Carmen de Bolivar, Colombia (links below). – Dr Gherardi and his French collaborators found that alum vaccines can migrate to the brain and permeate the Blood-Brain Barrier. Once in the brain, phagocytes can release of local cytokines that might injure the Central Nervous System and explain the cognitive and neuropsychiatric manifestations of EM/CFS. Tomljenovic & Shaw (2012) found Gardasil HPV 16 positivity in the brain of the New Zealand girl mentioned above. – Alternatively, adaptive immunity mechanisms can trigger vasculitis due to auto-antibodies against vascular targets (hypersensitivity type II) or deposited in vessels in immune complexes (hypersensitivity type III). We should expand on the causes of these rare syndromes.
https://youtu.be/H3JgRx12EVA
https://youtu.be/Vxe5lkeLgNM
Again, thank you Dr. Lee.
Sincerely,
Pompilio Martinez, M.D.
https://pompiliomartinez.wordpress.com
We presented at the recent congress in Chicago the hypothesis of a new post-vaccination inflammatory syndrome after HPV vaccines injection. This syndrome also includes the mechanisms discovered by prof. Lee.
This is the paper: https://www.oatext.com/post-vaccination-inflammatory-syndrome-a-new-syndrome.php.
Wow. pHARMa….