Trump’s proposed vaccine commission: Bias and Danger?

Vaccine Commission

By Norma Erickson

17 January 2017, Nature magazine published an editorial written by an anonymous author titled, “Trump’s vaccine-commission idea is biased and dangerous.” The first line of this editorial stated emphatically, “Scientists must fight back with the truth about the debunked link between vaccines and autism.”

The first, and most obvious question is: How did this anonymous author interpret a proposal to create a commission on vaccine safety and scientific integrity as an argument over vaccines and autism? Surely ‘vaccine safety and scientific integrity’ cover a much broader range of topics than the supposedly “debunked link between vaccines and autism!”

HPV Vaccines are a perfect example

1 December 2016, Nature Reviews Disease Primers published an article by Mark Schiffman, et al, under the title “Carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection.” If you scroll down and read the comment submitted by Dr. Sin Hang Lee you can clearly see at least seven points of discussion which need to be addressed concerning mass HPV vaccination programs. Dr. Lee’s comment ends with the following warning:

The misrepresentation and omission of facts should be considered if this Primer is used for health care policy decision making.

The SaneVax team asked renowned molecular pathologist, Dr. Sin Hang Lee, Is President Trump’s vaccine commission idea more biased and dangerous that the ‘science’ published in Nature Reviews Disease Primers?

Dr. Lee replied with an emphatic, NO!

Dr. Lee doubts that the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine-promoting paper published in the Nature journal is less biased and/or less dangerous than President Trump’s vaccine commission idea. In fact, his belief is so strong he felt compelled to issue a public reply to the anonymously written editorial. His comment can be viewed here.

When questioned further, Dr. Lee replied:

It is about time to put together a commission to study the safety and scientific integrity of the programs for mass HPV vaccination of American adolescents.

Dr. Lee drew attention back to the article Carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection by Dr. Mark Schiffman and colleagues which was published in Nature Reviews Disease Primers (2016;2:16086) stating:

In this article, the authors promote mass HPV vaccination of girls 9-13 years of age and teenage boys, at a cost of more than $50 million for every 100,000 adolescents, in the name of cancer prevention. Yet, there have never been any efficacy studies on adolescent girls 9-13 years of age.

Dr. Lee also pointed out that the authors could not show HPV vaccination has prevented a single case of cervical cancer using survival or irreversable morbidity as the endpoint, as required by drug law for efficacy evaluation. This is clearly stated in an FDA report as follows:

…efficacy in the prevention of high grade cervical disease has not been established.

During one clinical trial, an FDA report documented 7 deaths among the 1911 Gardasil-vaccinated women. This unfavorable clinical trial data and other sudden expected deaths of adolescents after HPV vaccination were omitted from Schiffman’s review article despite the fact death reports after Gardasil/Cervarix have been published in scientific journals.

In Dr. Lee’s opinion, Schiffman and colleagues “ambiguously constructed” a statement to hide the fact that the HPV vaccine Gardasil does contain recombinant HPV L1 gene DNA fragments despite the manufacturer’s initial claims to the contrary.

According to Dr. Lee, the authors also ignored the need for a special aluminum adjuvant to carry the free viral DNA into the macrophages as potent mediator to enhance a strong innate anti-viral immune response needed to generate an extremely high level of antibodies against the HPV L1 proteins. Dr. Lee states:

Such highly augmented anti-viral pro-inflammatory cytokine reactions may cause harm to certain genetically or physically predisposed persons, and may be linked to the sudden expected deaths after HPV vaccination reported in the literature.

To date, neither Dr. Schiffman, nor any of his co-authors, have publicly responded to Dr. Lee’s comments. One has to wonder why they appear to be reluctant to participate in open discussions. After all, doesn’t the health and well-being of an entire generation hang in the balance?

Bias and Danger?

Remember, this is only one type of vaccine. What if the questions surrounding HPV vaccine safety, efficacy and need apply to other vaccines as well?

As a medical consumer, you must decide where the danger to the health and well-being lies.

Is the real danger in open, honest investigation of vaccine safety, efficacy and need; or is it in the unquestioning acceptance of an ever-expanding list of CDC recommended vaccines?

President Trump, on the issue of organizing an independent Vaccine Safety/Scientific Integrity Committee, the SaneVax team and HPV vaccine survivors around the world stand beside you.

Read this article in Spanish here.