So, what are we saying? That the American College of Paediatricians hasn't released the article at all?
No, but the only part of it in the article the OP linked to is; "The purpose of the statement is so that “individuals considering the use of human papillomavirus vaccines could be made aware of these concerns pending further action by the regulatory agencies and manufacturers.”
The rest has nothing to do with the statement. Also who do you think they are? They sound like they represent hundreds or even thousands of Paediaticions, but they don't.
www.snopes.com/pediatricians-association-admits-hpv-vaccine-cancer-link/
Add to that the age the vaccine is given and the age 'ovarian dysfunction' is picked up.
So a 12 year old has HPV vaccination before she starts her periods and therefore before her ovaries start to release eggs, when she does start to produce eggs she has irregular periods are these caused by the vaccine? Well you can't tell, many young women have irregular periods.
Maybe by the time she is 19 she has been diagnosed with PCOS, again was that caused by the vaccine? Again we don't know.
The only thing you can do is track the numbers of young women who do have PCOS, endometriosis, or just irregular periods and compare the numbers with those pre vaccination and see if numbers have gone up, then you can say there may be a link, but you have to look at other factors to see if there is anything else to account for a change eg if the US suddenly started to give free gynae investigations to women under 20 then the number of diagnoses may well go up.
I researched it and was appalled at what I found. Over 8500 reports of adverse effects and 5 deaths in the UK reported via the Yellow Book scheme to the MHRA. Needless to say my daughter isn't having it and nor are all the mums I know allowing their daughters to have it after I encouraged them to research.....
How many women die of cervical cancer?
www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cervical-cancer-statistics
Stats show 3000+ diagnoses (2012), 919 deaths (2013). Taking very rough figures your dd is 3x more likely to have an adverse reaction that may (not definitely is) be linked to the vaccine but if they develop cancer they are 183 x more likely to die than if they had the jab.
Actually that's all wrong, because the numbers for cancer and death are per year, the reactions are part of a total, so 2006 to 2016 - 10 years. So 0.5 deaths per year compared to 919, now I know only 70% of cervical cancers are stopped by the jabs, so I suppose it should be 70% of 919 is 614.
An adverse reaction can be a simple as bleeding from the injection site or feeling sick. At least one of the deaths which was highly publicised the girl had a heart condition and that is what killed her, but her death is still included in the figures.
Go look at the PM reports for those deaths, they may have happened just after a vaccine but it doesn't mean the vaccine caused it.