Cervical Cancer: Is Vaccination Wise? (first published in 2007)
Suddenly the news is dominated by HPV – the human papilloma virus. Girls from age 12 are to be offered a vaccine called Gardasil™, manufactured by Merck in the USA and licensed for use in this country. It contains killed representatives of four types of HPV, two allegedly responsible for 70% of all cervical cancer and two more responsible for 90% of genital warts.
Great things are being claimed for this new product – as for most new products in their turn. However it has only been shown to produce immunity against the viruses for up to 4 years so far, which probably reflects how far back the research goes. And the Vaccine Adverse Effects Register in the USA now records seven deaths among girls recently vaccinated with this product. It's not cheap, either. The initial course of protection – three injections over 6 months – will cost the NHS £240 plus VAT, before any discount for volume. The initial vaccination programme will cost around £100M, we are told.
Get past the marketing, however, and things are not quite that simple. There are several viruses that crop up all over the place, and HPV is one such family. There are at least 100 types, of which about 40 are associated with important conditions from warts on the feet to penile cancer. However, infection with the virus is far more common than any of these diseases (except perhaps warts). About 20% of women are said to be infected in the USA, perhaps up to 50% in the 20-30 age-group. If we take the 20% figure for women in the UK , only about 1.5% of these ever get cervical cancer at any stage in their lives. So what protects the other 98.5%?
Let's go back a stage. How come 80% of women avoid HPV? The fewer the sexual partners, the lower the risk. Condom use is also highly protective. So very simple personal choices determine most of the risk of HPV. Because nowadays we are expected to sanction sexual freedom from an early age, nobody is mentioning this.
Even if you acquire the virus infection, you are very unlikely to develop a dangerous sequel. What prevents that? Fruit and vegetables, and more particularly the antioxidants they contain. Vitamin C , betacarotene, vitamin E and coenzyme Q10 strongly deter cancerous change, and in foods can reverse it even after it has started. Folic acid can reverse pre-cancerous changes, apparently. That is abundant in all dark green leaves. Successful eradications of HPV infection have been claimed from applications of aloe vera extract, or diluted cider vinegar. These are credible, though I have no direct experience of either.
So why would a state commit itself to reliance on a vaccine that at the market rate costs £700M to initiate and £50M each year thereafter to maintain (based on 3M women eligible aged 12-19, £240 to vaccinate and £80 every 5 years to boost)? Why would a drug company discount the price 7-fold, or is the true cost being concealed?
Merck has a clear interest in making young British women guinea-pigs for the long-term effects of this vaccine. Clearly, these cannot be known in time for Merck to cash in on their patent, so they have to press the vaccine on as many state authorities as possible as soon as possible.
Substantial discounts would help clear the way.
But in this country our public health officials have been behaving like drug salesmen for years now. They don't need much persuading to accept every new vaccine that comes along, however preposterous the claims.
The choice is, I believe, a no-brainer. Accept a vaccine of unproven benefit, which may in the end be only 70% efficient (like most killed vaccines to date) and whose adverse effects we do not yet know; or limit your sexual excursions, use barrier methods rather than the contraceptive pill (which is another source of pre-cancerous mischief), and eat plenty of fruit and vegetables.