Add To Favorites In PHR

HPV vaccine

Capital - 9/21/2017

HPV vaccine

The AAMC column by Joanne H. Ebner headlined "A vaccine that prevents cancer" (The Sunday Capital, Sept. 17) regurgitates as fact dubious claims by the Centers for Disease Control about the human papilloma virus, or HPV, vaccine.

The Japanese government withdrew its recommendation for the HPV shot due to safety concerns. Ireland, Columbia, Finland, Norway, Spain and other countries have seen precipitous declines in sales because thousands of children have become severely disabled after the shots. In Maryland, at least one family has filed a claim for the death of a daughter.

The American Association for Cancer Research published in 2015 that vaccinated women are more infected with high-risk, low-risk and all types of HPV than unvaccinated women. The vaccinated kids are the ones who are more infected. Dr. Diane Harper, who helped develop the vaccine, states that any protection wears off after five years.

Informed medical consent for the HPV vaccine should include this written statement:

"The sales person and manufacturer of this vaccine are legally indemnified by the Vaccine Injury Act of 1986. The HPV vaccine has never prevented a single cancer, ever.

"One dose contains 500 micrograms of aluminum. The aluminum adjuvant causes cytokine storms, microglial activation and release of tumor necrotic factor in the brain.

"Viral type replacement might result in increased risk of cancers. The placebo used in clinical testing contained aluminum adjuvants. The safety monitoring period during clinical trials was too short for adverse neurological effects to manifest.

"Credible medical professionals have published reports showing this vaccine may cause autoimmune syndrome induced by adjuvants, primary ovarian failure, early menopause and death."

If Ebner wasn't protected from getting sued for damages arising from the vaccine, her sales pitch would undoubtedly be quite different.

JOSH MAZER

Annapolis

Permanent residence

Regarding The Baltimore Sun article headlined "Maryland 'dreamers,' officials react to Trump's DACA move" (The Capital, Sept. 6):

Is the termination of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program a truly a bad thing? What many people don't realize is that President Donald Trump did a huge favor for the "dreamers."

How? Because his decision to rescind what appears to have been an unconstitutional exercise or abuse of executive authority by his predecessor will more than likely result in bipartisan, albeit not overwhelmingly supported, legislation that accords the dreamers lawful permanent residence, or LPR, status. This is much, much better than temporary deferred action.

It gets even better. This LPR status, in and of itself, provides an inherent path to citizenship, as long-standing immigration law allows for those with this status to apply for naturalization after five years of permanent residence in the U.S., three if married to a U.S. citizen.

With this said, the public outcry must continue, to pressure our dysfunctional congressional representatives to set party politics aside and do what's truly representative of we the people.

DON CROCETTI

Arnold

Editor's note: The writer is a former director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service in Baltimore.

Severn River Bridge

I am appalled at what is going on with new construction on the Severn River Bridge. Statistically, there will be more accidents with narrower lanes on the bridge. Large trucks and other large vehicles that speed will probably take up more than their own lanes, and I can see a lot of danger in store.

How will increased accidents be helpful to avoiding congestion? With each accident, the congestion will multiply exponentially.

At this time, while they are redirecting some of the traffic, the work is slowing down traffic as well. This is not a good solution for congestion.

RUTH SHILKRET

Arnold

 
Processing...


Driving Walking/Biking Public Transit  Get Directions