The discussion about the effectiveness and risks of the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Vaccine is gaining space in the media, which seem to be listening to the noise generated by the fact that there are hundreds of victims in the world with adverse effects, and the various organizations that oppose its obligation.
Cervical cancer is the second deadliest type of cancer in women in our country, with about 2,000 deaths a year. However, this vaccine created to prevent it and which is part of the National Immunization Calendar for 11-year-old girls, does not seem to be the solution.
It is important to mention that this year the Ministry of Health made this vaccine mandatory for 11-year-old men as well (for women it has been mandatory since 2011), with the unclear argument of "reducing the circulation of the virus."
As we have already seen, in Japan 64 young people sued the government and the two manufacturers of this vaccine (GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi, Pasteur, Merck Sharp & Dohme) for the damage they suffer after vaccination, such as problems in the nervous system, autoimmune reactions and pains throughout the body.
In Chile, the Talca Court of Appeals, the highest court in one of its regions, issued an order to the government to ban it.
In Spain, the first girls began to be vaccinated in 2008, and now, 9 years later, the real effects of this vaccine and the risks it implies, continue to leave many doubts, and hundreds of victims seek justice. The Association of People Affected by the Papilloma Vaccine (AVP) made a documentary to expose some of the questions posed by the papilloma vaccine, "Papilloma: women have to decide."
Why was the papilloma vaccine introduced in the vaccination schedule? Is there evidence of its effectiveness? Why do you try to deny the side effects it produces?
More and more countries and institutions question the real benefit of systematic vaccination against HPV, and it is not for less, if it is associated with more than 200 deaths in the United States and at least 352 in Europe, notified before the European Medicines Agency.
Recently La Nación gave space to this issue and mentions scientific works available so far that expose various positions:
In Argentina, a scientific article published in 2011 by the Ibero-American Society for Scientific Information (SIIC), authored by the doctor and professor of gynecology at the University of Córdoba, Teresita Audisio, presents an analysis of the design, evaluation, application and monitoring of the 2 vaccines available against HPV carried out by both manufacturing laboratories to comment on their application. The article, entitled "Objections in relation to both available vaccines against human papillomavirus", includes a brief bibliographic review on the natural history of HPV, the behavior of the immune system and other factors in the development of cervical uterine cancer. "According to our objections, the HPV vaccine is an authorized element with long-term effects as yet unknown that should not be applied to girls," the text warns. And elsewhere he maintains: “The short follow-up of the studies carried out with both vaccines did not allow us to observe the impact on the immune status, as well as the replacement by the HPV serotypes that the vaccine does not contain. The rapid authorization of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMEA) led to the introduction of the vaccine in many countries, without taking into account the indications and repercussions mentioned ". Finally, the article concludes that "The vaccine is not the solution."
A similar warning is held by the American College of Pediatricians in the United States, which pronounces on the lack of safety of the human papilloma vaccine (HPV or HPV). It has done it to document a new adverse reaction and to defend the right of families to decide whether or not to vaccinate adolescents and to declare in favor of informed consent.
It should be clarified that the regulatory health agencies of most of the countries mentioned, such as the ANMAT in Argentina, have approved the use of the vaccine and guarantee its safety. In our country, the latest report entitled International and National News on Drug Safety, published by the Pharmacovigilance Department of the National Administration of Drugs, Food and Medical Technology, which dates from December 2015 and is accessible on its website, highlights : "The benefits of using this vaccine continue to outweigh the risks, making it a safe vaccine." He cites for reference a study by the Canadian regulatory agency, Health Canada, which conducted a safety review that shows no new risks. "The agency conducted a safety review of the Gardasil® human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, based on reports received from autoimmune and cardiovascular diseases. It concluded that there is no evidence of an increased risk associated with these diseases, related to vaccination ”, concludes the report.