Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Gardasil: the denial continues

By Renate Klein - posted Tuesday, 30 June 2009

Two weeks after receiving the “cervical cancer” vaccination Gardasil, 26-year-old Shannon from Melbourne remembers, “it became so difficult to breathe that I went straight to the emergency room. I was very frightened at this point. Two weeks before I had been fit and healthy, and by this stage I was limping around the house like a stroke victim, wheezing and worried I was suffocating.”

At the hospital Shannon had x-rays, blood tests and an MRI. She was told that the lining of her left lung had become so inflamed that it was rubbing against her chest wall each time she breathed. The Head Consultant looking after her said that she must have gotten some mysterious virus and that Gardasil had been tested and was safe. She was released with no diagnosis other than “pleurisy” and given painkillers.

Five months after receiving the vaccine she saw a neurologist who confirmed that she had damage to her left side and that it was “an auto-immune reaction, resulting in inflamed lining of the left lung and nerves on the left side, with a temporal connection to Gardasil injection”.


Shannon says she’s never been so sick all her life. Fourteen months later she had to quit her job and is now desperately trying to regain her health.

Jade, a healthy 15-year-old girl from Adelaide spent six weeks in hospital after the first Gardasil injection because of severe lower back pain and paralysis of the legs. She was advised to get the second Gardasil injection and “within two hours she had paralysis of the legs again. They just gave out on her while she was walking along.” Twelve months later, Jade almost drowned, her leg paralysis recurs regularly and she was re-admitted to hospital. She is in excruciating pain and the daily physiotherapy makes it worse. Morphine helps her sleep for a few hours but then the pain starts again. Her relatives are beside themselves with worry. And as they say “not one medical person would say that Gardasil was responsible for her condition. The moment you mention it, they all clam up.” Despite an MRI no one has a diagnosis.

Shannon and Jade are just two of the Australian girls and women who have become seriously sick after receiving one or all three shots of the “cervical cancer” vaccine Gardasil free of charge, care of the Australian Government. Their upsetting stories and many others can be read here.

The free vaccinations for girls aged 12-13 and women up to 26 were started in April 2007. Gardasil is a vaccine against four strains of the sexually transmitted infection with human papillomavirus (HPV), two of which are associated with the development of cervical cancer. There are more than 100 strains of HPV and we are told that up to 80 per cent of people acquire the virus at some point in their lives. The good news is that in 90 per cent of these, a healthy immune system causes the virus infection to disappear in one to two years and no abnormal cells, let alone cancer, will ever develop (Lippman et al., 2007).

Moreover, as Merck-and GlaxoSmithKline-funded Rachel Skinner and colleagues write, “Estimates of the prevalence of HPV infection among women range from 2% to 44%, depending on age” (Skinner et al., Medical Journal of Australia, Vol. 188, number 4, February 18, 2008). Such figures are much less scary than the widely quoted “80 percent infected” (both women and men). Even more confusing is the fact that HPV infection, usually classified as a sexually transmitted infection (STI), can already be found in new born babies even if their mothers do not carry the HPV virus (Xavier Castellsague and colleagues, 2009 “Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection in pregnant women and mother-to-child transmission of genital HPV genotypes: a prospective study in Spain” BMC Infectious Diseases, 9:74).

There is a lot more to learn about the HPV virus than the simple story of a “cancer virus” annihilated by a miracle vaccine that the proponents of Gardasil want us to believe.


Furthermore, deaths from cervical cancer in Australia are continuing to decline probably due to a mixture of regular screening, improved general health and sexual hygiene. According to a report by the World Health Organisation, in 2006, 249 women died in Australia, and cervical cancer mortality ranks 17 out of all 23 listed cancers (WHO/ICO, 2007, p8). While every death is a tragedy, pre-cancerous cells are being detected through systematic Pap screening programs. Indeed, Gardasil advocates caution that women must continue with the Pap Smears as the vaccine will not be 100 per cent protective. For all these reasons, the question really must be asked how the need for this costly vaccine can be justified?

Australia was the first country to rush into administering this new and experimental vaccine on a grand scale. Straight after the first vaccinations reports about serious adverse effects began to surface (“Gardasil: we must not ignore the risks” Renate Klein and Melinda Tankard Reist, June 1, 2007 and “The Gardasil 'miracle' coming undone?” Renate Klein, August 21, 2008.)

Commonwealth Serum Laboratories (CSL) and Merck - the manufacturers of Gardasil - deny that there are any problems. So does the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). They continue their assessment of “Gardasil as safe and effective”. Their latest communiqué of May 5, 2009 states that “As of April 2009 a total of 1,304 suspected adverse reactions have been reported …” but that “The great majority have been mild and common problems such as soreness, swelling, or redness of the injection site”.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

4 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Renate Klein, a biologist and social scientist, is a long-term health researcher and has written extensively on reproductive technologies and feminist theory. She is a former associate professor in Women's Studies at Deakin University in Melbourne, a founder of FINRRAGE (Feminist International Network of Resistance to Reproductive and Genetic Engineering) and an Advisory Board Member of Hands Off Our Ovaries.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Renate Klein

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Renate Klein
Article Tools
Comment 4 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy