More denialism and fear-mongering from vaccine-o-phobes

The following article appeared on Judicial Watch's website on June 30, 2008.

The article, from this website that claims it is interested in "promoting the integrity, transparency, and accountability in government, politics, and the law," is basically yet another conservative watchdog group's attempt to discredit the HPV vaccine, Gardasil.

It states, "Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, today released a report based on new documents obtained from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, detailing reports of adverse reactions to the vaccination for human papillomavirus (HPV), Gardasil. The adverse reactions include 10 deaths since September, 2007."

First, saying that Judical Watch "uncovered" these reported adverse effects is extremely misleading. Saying something is "uncovered" implies that it was hidden from public view, and implies that the government and/or pharmaceutical companies are trying to hide something. As Judicial Watch states, all VAERS records are provided to the public openly.


The more I read conservative "reports" and "news articles," the more convinced I become that they are the biggest paranoid conspiracy theorists out there.

To be clear, as part of the mandated Vaccine Adverse Effect Reporting System (VAERS) that pharmaceutical companies are required to participate in, any and all reactions, illnesses, and deaths that occur within a specified time frame of receiving the vaccine should be reported and investigated. These deaths can include, for example, a girl who receives Gardasil, and one week later dies in a car accident. Because she died within a week of getting the injection, it must be investigated as a potential adverse effect of the vaccine. Same goes, for example, for a girl who received Gardasil, fell off her bike, and is now in a coma in the hospital.

For example, in its article, Judicial Watch lists as one example of an adverse effect:

"Information has been received from a physician concerning a female patient who on an unknown date was vaccinated with a dose of Gardasil. Subsequently, the patient experienced a coma and is now paralyzed. At the time of this report, the patient's outcome was unknown. VAERS ID: 303188-1"

Um. I am truly saddened to hear about anyone in a coma. Yet, I cringe at the words "...who on an unknown date was vaccinated with a dose of Gardasil."

Like, how long ago did she receive Gardasil? And how much longer "subsequently" did she experience a coma? And what, exactly, happened to her in the meantime? When I was a toddler, I was given my childhood vaccines before kindergarten. Subsequently, I became a lesbian.

I'm sorry, but leaving out important details like dates, something I learned in Journalism 101 is THE single most important factor in telling an accurate, true, unbiased story is shoddy journalism at best. At worst, it is deliberate dishonesty. I haven't ever been to Judical Watch before, so I have no idea what kind of reputation it has among reputable news sources. But I am starting to place it in the dishonest propaganda category like AFA, FAF, and David Benkof.

As the VAERS website clearly states in its FAQ section, "The fact that an adverse event occurred following immunization is not conclusive evidence that the event was caused by a vaccine. Factors such as medical history and other medications given near the time of the vaccination must be examined to determine if they could have caused the adverse event. It is important to remember that many adverse events reported to VAERS may not be caused by vaccines."

As for the fainting and/or seizure episodes the Judicial Watch article discusses, let's consider this: a girl comes into the doctor's office who doesn't eat breakfast that morning (being a typical teenager), thus she already has low blood sugar, and then has a vasovagal response to the injection and faints. Most times, reactions like this are more so a result of hypoglycemia and anxiety/fear of needles (because the same thing happens during blood draws), than from whatever is in the actual vaccine.

Anyway, I have never seen more public outcry against a vaccine than this one. Sure, the vaccine denialists are out there, and have been since before Gardasil. But never have conservatives been so outspoken about vaccines until Gardasil. (and so willing to misrepresent the truth and the statistics). Coincidentally, it is one vaccine that deals with women and sexuality. Hmm...

The amount of hate some people carry is just sad. To supporters of Gardasil, let's all work together to fight unfair misconceptions and lies about the vaccine.