Cervarix

[Orphadeus]

Each dose of Cervarix contains 0.5 mg aluminium hydroxide: You can check at Page 12, line 300 - 303: www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM186981.pdf

'Gulf War Illness and the Health of Gulf War Veterans, Scientific Findings and Recommendations' states:

'Vaccines containing aluminium hydroxide adjuvant have also been associated with the development of macrophagic myofasciitis. This recently-identified condition is characterized by macrophageinfiltration of muscle tissue after receipt of vaccines. Patients develop arthromyalgias and fatigue, among other symptoms, with one report indicating that about half of macrophagic myofasciitis patients meet criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome.'

Page 119: www.va.gov/RAC-GWVI/docs/Committee_Documents/GWIandHealthofGWVeterans_RAC-GWVIReport_2008.pdf

I'd recommend you also read about the Canadian study on Page 119.

sorry wrong link but it clearly says hpv causes cancer

Persistent papillomavirus infection is required for the development of papillomavirus-associated cancer

I am not bothering any more as it pretty clear you have some very weird issues.

Saying that HPV causes cancer does not mean it does. I'm open to it but find assumption:

'The tumor viruses change cells by integrating their genetic material with the host cell's DNA.'

biology.about.com/od/virology/ss/cancer-viruses.htm

Stephen Hawking also does it.

'Women of all races had an HPV-16 prevalence of 17.9 percent, compared to 8 percent for men.'

www.stanford.edu/group/virus/papilloma/2004goglincarnevale/Papilloma/HPV16.htm

'There are many types of HPV, but one strain in particular known as HPV-16 is most strongly linked with oral cancer and also is a common cause of cervical cancer. That strain was found in about 1 percent of people studied, translating to about 2 million Americans.'

www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57366931-10391704/16-million-americans-have-hpv-in-their-mouths-mostly-men/

Someone is telling porkies.

If the former is true, it is most likely HPV does not cause cancer.

'Results during 2003?2005 documented an overall high-risk HPV prevalence of 23%.'

www.cdc.gov/std/stats10/other.htm

Lets remind outselves that high risk HPV is easily shaken off -

'It is important to note that the great majority of infections with high-risk HPV types go away on their own and do not cause cancer.'

www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/HPV

• yet many people have it. That suggests a very high proportion of people have it at some point. How surprised should you be that people there is a higher rate of HPV among people with cancer?

Here's another. Condoms have contained - and presumably still do contain - a known carcinogen. It is plausible that people who use more condoms are more likely to have more sexual partners and are more likely to have HPV. (After a few they do not use a condom.)

'Amyl Nitrate increases the risk of Cancer'

www.drugfree.org.au/fileadmin/Media/Reference/AmylNitrateInfo.pdf

Throat cancer?

Also, if I recall correctly, there is a potential cancer issue with regard to going down on women who are on the pill.

For people with high condom use or amyl nitrate use or in the habit of going down on women on the pill; not only is the cancer risk higher, there is likely also a higher level of HPV.

Is there any reason why cancer would not take up DNA?

get help Orphadeus, really.

The problem is the be all is The Narrative. N-Nitrosamine is still in condoms because the government had been urging condom use and a carcinogen did not fit The Narrative.

'Condom producers Durex were quick to respond. 'This is completely unsupported by medical and scientific evidence and no regulatory body has ever called for limits to be set on levels of nitrosamines in condoms,' said a company spokesperson the day the data were released.'

www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/Issues/2004/July/manufacturers.asp

According to Report on Carcinogens, Twelfth Edition (2011):

'N-Nitrosodimethylamine is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen based on sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity from studies in experimental animals.'

(Thats the N-Nitrosamine that appears most likely to be used in condoms, but the others are all carcinogens too - check the link):

ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/Nitrosamines.pdf

Expect no action.

The NHS pro-actively springing into action against HPV fits The Narrative. That they had been injecting 12 year old girls with Gulf War does not fit The Narrative.

Really Orphadeus - talk to someone in real life about your fears. No one here will be able to help you.

'HPV causes cancer' is science based on wishful thinking.

All quotes are from Page 1 of 'Profile of Cervical Cancer in England: Incidence, Mortality and Survival (October 2012)':

'Over the last 20 years the incidence of cervical cancer in England has decreased by a third'

'Incidence rates are now higher than 20 years ago in the under 35s due to marked increases over the last decade.'

'Incidence and mortality rates tend to be lowest for those Strategic Health Authorities (SHA) and Cancer Networks (CN) in the south and east of England, and highest in the north and the midlands.'

www.ncin.org.uk/cancer_type_and_topic_specific_work/cancer_type_specific_work/gynaecological_cancer/gynaecological_cancer_hub/resources/cervical_cancer.aspx

You need to click on the link of the title.

From those, it may be possible to answer the question.

The first quote presumably rules out HPV as a major factor.

The silence with regard to the incidence of HPV by region is deafening:

apps.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/country_pdf/GBR.pdf

Table 4 gives the incidence of cervical cancer by region.

'Over the last 10 years there has been a 77% increase in the incidence rate for women age 25-29, with 281 cases in 2008 (see figure). For women aged 30-34 the rate increased by 29%, with 309 cases in 2008. In women aged 20-24 the incidence rate has remained fairly stable, with 39 cases in 2008.'

www.ncin.org.uk/publications/data_briefings/cervical_incidence_and_screening.aspx

What could have caused an overall drop but an increase in the under 35s? It is said screening has reduced incidence yet I have also read that with screening, cases which are not cancer are counted as cancer.

Is it possible that since the 1970s there has been both a reduction of N-Nitrosamine in condoms, and an increase in the use of condoms from an earlier age?

Nitrosamines
? Problem: some are carcinogenic
? Some processing chemicals
used for rubber compounding
produce nitrosamines
? No limits for condoms; are limits
for baby teats

How to Keep Nitrosamine
Levels Low
? Nitrosamines are only a problem if they
come out of the condom, so only
extractable nitrosamines matter
? Extract as much as possible by effective
leaching
? Use accelerators that minimize
N-nitrosamines

www.path.org/publications/files/RH_condom_wrkshp_session7_en.pdf

It is entirely plausible that Nitrosamines have been reduced in condoms, and there has been an increase in condom use at a younger age.

Here's data on SDIs by region:

docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AgdO92JOXxAOdEdZQlRnQm8tOEdNTVB2dkFiRjhuVUE&hl=en#gid=0

We'll go by the warts. The East Midlands and West Midlands both have low wart rates. The average wart rate for England was 145.6 per 100 000 in comparison with 122.7 for East Midlands and 120 for West Midlands.

Yet with regard to cervical cancer:

'Incidence and mortality rates tend to be lowest for those Strategic Health Authorities (SHA) and Cancer Networks (CN) in the south and east of England, and highest in the north and the midlands.'

www.ncin.org.uk/cancer_type_and_topic_specific_work/cancer_type_specific_work/gynaecological_cancer/gynaecological_cancer_hub/resources/cervical_cancer.aspx

Click on 'Profile of Cervical Cancer in England: Incidence, Mortality and Survival (October 2012)'

The cervical screening uptake was 3.9% lower than the National Average in the East Midlands, and 2.4% higher than the National Average in West Midlands.

From 'Table 4: Incidence of cervical cancer in United Kingdom by cancer registry', I have singled out the rate per 100 000 women:

East of England 7.7
Merseyside and Cheshire 11.9
North Western 12.2
Northern Ireland 9.4
Northern and Yorkshire 12.3
Oxford Region 5.9
Scotland 12.1
South and Western 10.6
Thames 7.9
Trent 10.3
West Midlands 10.8

apps.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/country_pdf/GBR.pdf

Now, using the link in the previous post, wherever possible I am going to put places in order of wart prevalence (which I will call HPV), and put the cervical cancer incidence rate alongside:

East of England: HPV 118, CC 7.7
West Midlands: HPV 120, CC 10.8
Oxford Region (Oxfordshire): HPV 158.5, CC 5.9

There appears to be no correlation.

There indeed appears to be no correlation ....between your posts and anything that could be described as coherent, reasonable or balanced.

Do you seriously think you can overturn decades of research with a few directed searches on google, and a piss-poor data analysis? What are you going to do next? Disprove the theory of relativity with nothing but an abacus and a physics primer?

Pointing out the fact that there (unnecessarily) a known carcinogen in most condoms seems coherant, reasonable and well balanced in the context of the thread. Pointing out that a major study into Gulf War Illness has pointed at something that is in Cervarix is also reasonable.

Lets take the hypothesis that warts have spread in Oxfordshire quite recently and have a look at the world, as it can't spread through a country so fast.

Cervical cancer incidence by area of the world is here:

globocan.iarc.fr/factsheets/cancers/cervix.asp

Turkey is the most populous country within the lowest incidence region.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) prevalence and types among Turkish women at a gynecology outpatient unit:

'Overall, 23% of the women was HPV positive. The overall prevalence of HPV in women with abnormal Pap smears was 36% (93/403), of which in ASCUS 22%, LSIL 51% and HSIL 60%. Also, HPV DNA was positive in 20% of the women with normal cervical cytology. The most common HPV types in cytologically normal women were as follows; HPV 16 (36%), HPV 6 (22%) and HPV 18 (13%). The rate of other HPV types were as follows; HPV11 4.4%, HPV45 4.4%, HPV90 4.4%, HPV35 2.2%, HPV67 2.2%, HPV81 2.2%, and multiple type HPVs 8.9%. The most common HPV types in cytologically abnormal women were HPV 16 (35%), HPV6 (19%) and HPV18 (8%). The rate of multiple HPV infections in women with normal Pap test was 2.2%.'

www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/9/191

Nanny Hitler.

I think there is likely a link between a high prevalence of HIV and a high incidence of cervical cancer.

Cervical cancer incidence: globocan.iarc.fr/factsheets/cancers/cervix.asp

HIV incidence: www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2155rank.html

Turkey has a normal HPV rate but a low HIV rate and (being the most populous country in the lowest incidence area) a low cervical cancer rate.

Someone may find the info useful.

'Cervical cancer is considered an AIDS-defining illness or opportunistic infection.'

pwn.bc.ca/hiv-body/hiv-and-gynecological-care/hiv-and-cervical-cancer/

'HIV-positive women are living longer, but are now dying of cervical cancer'

www.irinnews.org/Report/97429/Cervical-cancer-a-major-threat-to-HIV-positive-women

Allegedly a team of researchers at The Royal Free believed there was no link between HPV and cervical cancer:

www.greenhealthwatch.com/newsstories/newsdirtymedicine/hpv-cancer-link-challenged.htm

The research should be: Downey,GP et al. Lancet. 1994;344(8929):1097

HPV 16 and 18 are believed to be responsible for 70% of cervical cancer:

www.cap.org/apps/cap.portal?_nfpb=true&cntvwrPtlt_actionOverride=%2Fportlets%2FcontentViewer%2Fshow&_windowLabel=cntvwrPtlt&cntvwrPtlt%7BactionForm.contentReference%7D=cap_today%2F0809%2F0809_NGCg_with_cervista_HPV.html&_state=maximized&_pageLabel=cntvwr

'It is estimated that as many as 75 percent of the reproductive-age population has been infected with one or more types of genital HPV.'

www.womenshealthmag.com/health/hpv-information

How can you say there is a link?

?We found that entire chromosomes were transferred [to the recipient cells], and we also found fusions, or translocations, between tumor cell chromosomes and recipient cell chromosomes,? said Holmgren

jnci.oxfordjournals.org/content/94/6/413.full

I think you get the picture.

'It is known that cancer progresses by vertical gene transfer, but this paradigm ignores that DNA circulates in higher organisms and that it is biologically active upon its uptake by recipient cells.'

www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0052754

I meant I think you have the picture of an alternate explanation.

'Transmission of HPV through routes other than sexual is definitely possible. One may be exposed to HPV simply by shaking hands as suggested in the finding of HPV virus under fingernails.
Sexually Transmitted Infections 1999 Oct;75(5):317-9:

www.health-science-report.com/alotek/topics3/article51/

Cancer causes HPV by weakening the immune system.

If you want my opinion, HPV cannot form cancer without an independant cancer cell.

The statistics say.

Look at Turkey:

'Breast cancer (36.47/100 ) is the most frequent type of cancer among women, followed by skin cancer (17.80/100 000), thyroid cancer (8.44/100 000) and lung cancer (7.20/100 000) and stomach cancer (6.81/100 ). The incidence of the five most frequent cancer types constitute 52.5% of overall cancer incidence among women. The remainder of cancer types has an incidence of 68.63 per 100 thousand. Cervical cancer comes 10th with an incidence of 5.32 per 100 thousand.'

jjco.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/06/17/jjco.hyq075.full

'Overall, 23% of the women was HPV positive. The overall prevalence of HPV in women with abnormal Pap smears was 36% (93/403), of which in ASCUS 22%, LSIL 51% and HSIL 60%. Also, HPV DNA was positive in 20% of the women with normal cervical cytology. The most common HPV types in cytologically normal women were as follows; HPV 16 (36%), HPV 6 (22%) and HPV 18 (13%). The rate of other HPV types were as follows; HPV11 4.4%, HPV45 4.4%, HPV90 4.4%, HPV35 2.2%, HPV67 2.2%, HPV81 2.2%, and multiple type HPVs 8.9%. The most common HPV types in cytologically abnormal women were HPV 16 (35%), HPV6 (19%) and HPV18 (8%). The rate of multiple HPV infections in women with normal Pap test was 2.2%.'

www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/9/191

In the UK, the cervical cancer incidence rate is 9.3 per 100 thousand:

Table 3: apps.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/country_pdf/GBR.pdf

Thats close to double the cervical cancer incidence in Turkey. Yet, the HPV rate among women with normal cervical cytology was 20% in Turkey -

www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2334/9/191

• in comparison with 8.9% in the UK -

Table 14: apps.who.int/hpvcentre/statistics/dynamic/ico/country_pdf/GBR.pdf

• and you might have noticed the most common HPV in Turkey was 16.

Its such a huge crime, that you do nothing?

'CERVARIX has not been evaluated for its carcinogenic or mutagenic potential.'

Page 13: www.fda.gov/downloads/BiologicsBloodVaccines/Vaccines/ApprovedProducts/UCM186981.pdf