Press Release

November 11, 2011
By Leslie Carol Botha, Vice-President Public Relations

Gardasil Contaminated with HPV rDNA

In September of this year, SANE Vax Inc. broke the news that 100% of the Gardasil vials tested proved to be contaminated with a recombinant HPV DNA attached to aluminum.  The nonprofit organization contracted with a private lab to run the tests at request of informed physician and medical consumers concerned about HPV vaccine safety and efficacy.  The laboratory informed SANE Vax Inc. that one hundred percent of the thirteen (13) samples of Gardasil™ taken from lots  #1437Z, #1511Z, #0553AA, #NL35360, #NP23400, #NN33070, #NL01490, #NM25110, #NL39620, #NK16180, #NK00140, #NM08120 and #NL13560, currently being  marketed in the U.S.A., Australia, New Zealand, Spain, France, and Poland were found to be positive for HPV rDNA.

In the past month global government health agencies went from demanding that vaccine contamination be investigated – to accepting a universal statement possibly written by Merck – that the agencies were well aware that the ‘presence of DNA fragments was to be expected and did not pose a safety risk. 1.  And life went on as usual.

On October 25, 2011, an advisory panel to the CDC, who actually receives a ‘kick-back’ on Gardasil sales recommended that the vaccine be administered to boys ages 9 to 26 – creating a whole new market for sales and profits.  The recommendation, which falls short of a mandate, means Merck’s Gardasil vaccine could be added to vaccination schedules in pediatricians’ offices across the country.2

Meanwhile – a well-known doctor from Peru, concerned about the safety and efficacy of Gardasil, was scheduled to debate a doctor from Merck at a conference.  Just prior to the scheduled debate, the conference moderator told the audience that the doctor from Merck was in a hurry so he could not stay for the debate regarding the vaccine and instead he would be the first one to address the conferees.

When it was the doctor from Peru’s turn to speak she shared the data and research regarding the contamination of Gardasil with HPV rDNA attached to the aluminum adjuvant. The conference attendees were shocked.

The doctor then accompanied her gynecologist husband to a party for medical professionals and to her great surprise the doctor from Merck was at the gathering.  He of course, was embarrassed to be exposed. When approached by the doctor from Peru he told her that the findings on Gardasil contamination were indeed correct – and the fragments of HPV rDNA did not belong in the vaccine.  And then the ‘good doctor’ tried not to talk to her again that evening.  Perhaps this admission of guilt is the reason he could not or would not debate the vaccination contamination issue?

The Gardasil vaccine controversy reads like a well-scripted science fiction novel since medical professionals and researchers have not yet developed a test to conduct studies on the short-term or long term medical effects of a run-way genetically engineered virus bound to aluminum being injected into the body.

 SANE Vax Inc. Concerns
Does the aluminum adjuvant become the carrier for HPV DNA causing said DNA to remain in the blood and/or organs for an extended length of time?
Since viral DNA cannot replicate by itself (it needs a host cell) what happens if genetically engineered viral DNA enters a human host cell?
How will this now ‘genetically-engineered cell’ replicate?  Will it mutate the host cell leading towards cancer?
How will genetically engineered cells affect the reproductive health of future generations?
How does the immune system react to the detection of a combination viral DNA and human DNA in what was once a ‘normal’ cell? Will the immune system fight the now genetically engineered human cell?

Can Gardasil Contaminants be Transmitted to Others?

Back in the U.S. Lauren a Gardasil injured teenager – (now adversely affected as long as the purported vaccine’s efficacy – 5 years), was volunteering at a blood drive which left her mother Rosemary, Vice-President of Victim Support wondering ‘If the Gardasil victims are affected by the residue that is in the vaccine, what will it do if they give blood?  Could the recipients of the blood from donors who have had the vaccine be affected by the recombinant HPV DNA?  Can it be transferred via a blood transfusion?’


Here are the latest VAERS Stats for Gardasil and Cervarix up to October 11, 2011

 DESCRIPTION                    TOTAL
 Disabled                              780
 Deaths                                104
 Did Not Recover                  4,898
 Abnorm. Pap Smear             467
 Cervical Dysplasia                177
 Cervical Cancer                     41
 Life Threatening                  457
 Emergency Rm. Visit            9,312
 Hospitalized                        2,335
 Extended Hosp. Stay            208
 Serious                              3,155
 Adverse Events                  23,982

"An analysis by Wald & Shojan (2001) found that only 1.5% of all adverse events result in an incident report.  This means that these figures are at best only the very tip of the iceberg.

In New Zealand the Centre for Adverse Reactions Monitoring (CARM) has received a total of 376 reports of adverse reactions in association with Gardasil according to Official Information Act information up to 20 June 2011?

this is what CARM say

"  -  Julie Smith

Pertussis: The Fear Factor – by Meryl Dorey

Posted 12 December 2011 by The Refusers?

Fear is one of the most effective marketing tools – advertising gurus have known this for many years. If you can make someone afraid, they will buy what you have to sell without thinking too much or asking too many questions.

Seth Godin, author of Permission Marketing and All Marketers are Liars, states that, “Marketing with fear is a powerful tool. Fear is a universal emotion, it’s viral and people will go to great lengths to make it go away. Some items can’t be marketed without fear. Seat belts, for example. They’re not convenient, good tasting, fun to use or profitable. Fear works great in this case. …What if the marketer not only doesn’t create peace of mind, but intentionally destroys it for his own benefit? Sometimes, fear is used as a marketing tactic even if it doesn’t benefit the prospect at all.”

What many people don’t realise is vaccines are actually products. Like cars, refrigerators and breakfast cereal, vaccines are made by companies (multi-national pharmaceuticals) as a money-making venture. Drug companies don’t produce drugs and vaccines because they want to make people healthy. They make them for one reason only – to make a profit for their board and their shareholders – end of story. When it comes down to it, there is nothing that makes a drug company inherently any different from a tobacco company. As the research begins to emerge showing that vaccines are causing very serious problems and are not as effective as we’ve been told, the pharmaceutical industry has begun to use the same sorts of cover-ups and shonky research which the tobacco companies pioneered once the evidence that cigarettes caused cancer became irrefutable. And the media has been more than complicit in helping them get that message across.

In Propaganda (1928) Bernays, the father of modern marketing, argued that the manipulation of public opinion was a necessary part of democracy:

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organised habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are moulded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. …In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.”

Fear is used to sell vaccines
Nowhere is the use of fear as a marketing tool more evident than in the push to force parents to vaccinate their children. This is not new. Historically, we have seen the use of fear in vaccination campaigns and it has only gotten worse as the years have gone on and more vaccines have been added to our already overcrowded schedule

BY:- Stephanie Messenger

This is my journey….

I can’t say I believed in vaccination. I knew nothing about it, but had it done anyway. It’s what you do, right? You do what doctors and baby health clinics tell you and what your parents and the media advise you to do. Well I did it, without so much as a question or thought into it. Within moments of my son receiving his immunisations he was screaming. This continued for most of the day and when he wasn’t screaming he was crying. This was unusual as he was a very happy, placid baby, who was already rolling over at 8 weeks and gooing and gahing at the first sight of his mother. The doctor told me his reactions were ’normal’ and he’d be OK in a couple of days.

After the first day he had almost recovered with only some irritability and restlessness noticeable. As the weeks passed he continued to reach milestones and all appeared Ok.

At 4 months of age I dutifully took him for his next round of vaccinations. This time he screamed louder and I could not console him at all. I would breastfeed him, only to have him projectile vomit it back up and still the screaming continued. He had never before vomited at all, ever. After he had vomited 2 feeds I called the doctor and told her what was happening and she said to stop breastfeeding and give him juice only. He kept some of it down but still vomited often.

The next day I called the doctor and told her I think the vaccines have done this and she told me ’ no, it’s just a coincidence’ but to bring him back in, which I did. She referred me to a specialist. While waiting for the specialist appointment in a few days, my baby boy started doing strange things. He started arching his back and crying out in pain. He was as stiff as a board. His eyes would roll into the back of his head. He didn’t have a temperature. He had also started shuddering but he wasn’t cold. (I later learnt from the doctor these were convulsions and seizures). The vomiting continued and I was convinced to give up breastfeeding by the clinic sister. He vomited up the formula also. I was getting very scared.

We went to the specialist appointment and he took some blood for tests and then we had to wait. His symptoms continued and after several days word came from the specialist that the tests showed he was allergic to wheat. I stopped giving him the cereal I had started him on weeks before, but none of the symptoms went away. (when I thought about it later, it was actually rice cereal anyway)

I decided to move to a large city to get more help. Once I saw a doctor there he was immediately admitted to hospital for a battery of test – many of which were conducted under anaesthetic, which of course required my signature to say I have been notified that my baby could die while under. I had not been advised of this, but I signed it not knowing all the medical jargon as I needed to get my baby well again and trusted they knew what they were doing.

By this time my dear little son had lost a lot of weight and nothing I was doing (under advice from doctors and baby health clinics) was working.

After months of tests in the hospital (he stayed there) we were summoned in to an office to be told that they ’didn’t know why my baby was deteriorating, but they estimate he will pass away within a couple of months’.

Soon after I took my baby home to die.


Human Papilloma virus (HPV) Vaccine Policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?

Please read this paper very carefully, perhaps one of the most important ever to be written with regard to the HPV vaccines.  Here is the Abstract and Concluding Remarks.  There are also key points highlighted on the front of the paper but please read it in detail as it answers many questions and put the answers out there in such a prestigious Journal.  It is now there for all to see.   The Annals of Medicine is one of the most prestigious Journals and to have accepted this paper is a wonderful miracle.  Lucija and Chris Shaw are two wonderful scientists doing marvellous work.


All drugs are associated with some risks of adverse reactions. Because vaccines represent a special category of drugs, generally given to healthy individuals, uncertain benefits mean that only a small level of risk for adverse reactions is acceptable. Furthermore, medical ethics demand that vaccination should be carried out with the participant’s full and informed consent. This necessitates an objective disclosure of the known or foreseeable vaccination benefits and risks. The way in which HPV vaccines are often promoted to women indicates that such disclosure isn’t always given from the basis of the best available knowledge. For example, while the world’s leading medical authorities state that HPV vaccines are an important cervical cancer prevention tool, clinical trials show no evidence that HPV vaccination can protect against cervical cancer. Similarly, contrary to claims that cervical cancer is the second most common cancer in women worldwide, existing data show that this only applies to developing countries. In the western world cervical cancer is a rare disease with mortality rates that are several fold lower than the rate of reported serious adverse reactions (including deaths) from HPV vaccination. Future vaccination policies should adhere more rigorously to evidence-based medicine and ethical guidelines for informed consent.

Concluding remarks

Regulatory authorities are responsible for ensuring that new vaccines go through proper scientific evaluation before they are approved. An equal fiduciary responsibility rests with the medical profession to only promote vaccinations with those vaccines whose safety and efficacy have been thoroughly demonstrated. The available evidence, however, indicates that health authorities in various countries may have failed to provide an evidence-based rationale for immunization with HPV vaccines and in doing so, may have breached international ethical guidelines for informed consent. Contrary to the information from the US CDC, Health Canada, Australian TGA and the UK MHRA, the efficacy of Gardasil and Cervarix in preventing cervical cancer has not been demonstrated and the long-term risks of the vaccines remain to be fully evaluated.

Current worldwide HPV immunization practices with either of the two HPV vaccines appear to be neither justified by long-term health benefits nor economically viable, nor is there any evidence that HPV vaccination would reduce the rate of cervical cancer beyond what Pap screening has already achieved. Furthermore, the frequency, the severity, as well as the consistency of the patterns of ADRs reported to various governmental vaccine surveillance programmes for both Gardasil and Cervarix (Figures 2 and 3) raise significant concerns about the overall safety of HPV vaccination programmes. Because these programmes have global coverage (Table I), the long-term health of many women may be unnecessarily at risk against still unknown vaccine benefits. Altogether these observations suggest that a reduction in the burden of cervical cancer globally might be best achieved by targeting other risk factors for this disease (i.e., smoking, use of oral contraceptives, chronic inflammation) (85) in conjunction with regular Pap test screening. The latter strategy has already been proven successful in developed nations where the incidence of cervical cancer is very low (Table I).

According to the Helsinki Declaration and the International Code of Medical Ethics (104), the well-being of the individual must be a physician’s top priority, taking precedence over all other interests. Although the Declaration is addressed primarily to physicians, the World Medical Association encourages other participants in medical research involving human subjects to adopt these same principles (104). Greater efforts should thus be made to minimize the undue commercial influence on academic institutions and medical research, given that these may impede unbiased scientific inquiry into important questions about vaccine science and policy.

The almost exclusive reliance on manufacturer’s sponsored studies, often of questionable quality, as a base for vaccine policy-making should be discontinued. So should be the dismissal of serious ADRs as co-incidental or “psychogenic” in spite of independent research suggesting otherwise. It can hardly be disputed in view of all the evidence (i.e., case reports and vaccine-ADR surveillance in various countries) that HPV vaccines do trigger serious ADRs. What does remain debatable however is the true frequency of these events because all systems of monitoring for vaccine-ADRs currently in place rely on passive reporting. Passive ADR surveillance should thus be replaced by active surveillance to better our understanding of true risks associated with particular vaccines (especially new vaccines). The presentation of partial and non-factual information regarding cervical cancer risks and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, as cited above, is, in our view, neither scientific, nor ethical. None of these practices serve public health interests nor are they likely to reduce the levels of cervical cancer. Independent evaluation of HPV vaccine safety is urgently needed and should be a priority for government-sponsored research programmes. Any future vaccination policies should adhere more rigorously to evidence-based medicine as well as strictly follow ethical guidelines for informed consent.

LT&Shaw Annals Med 2011, HPV vaccines & EBM

POSTED 6 January 2012

GlaxoSmithKline Argentina Laboratories company was fined 400,000 pesos ($93,000USD) by Judge Marcelo Aguinsky following a report issued by the National Administration of Medicine, Food and Technology (ANMAT in Spanish) for the killing of 14 babies during illegal lab vaccine trials conducted between 2007 and 2008.

Likewise, two doctors -Héctor Abate, and Miguel Tregnaghi- were fined with 300,000 pesos each for irregularities during the studies.

The charges included experimenting with human beings, falsifying parental authorizations so babies could participate in vaccine-trials conducted by the laboratory from 2007 to 2008.

Since 2007, 15,000 children under the age of one from Mendoza, San Juan and Santiago del Estero have been included in the research protocol, a statement of what the study is trying to achieve. Babies were recruited from poor families that attended to public hospitals.

A total of 7 babies died in Santiago del Estero; 5 in Mendoza; and 2 in San Juan.

Pediatrician Ana Marchese, who reported the case through the Argentine Federation of Health Professionals (FESPROSA in Spanish), and was working at the Eva Perón children's public hospital in Santiago del Estero when the studies wee being conducted, said this morning in conversations with Continental AM radio that “GSK Argentina set an protocol at the hospital, and recruited several doctors working there.”

“These doctors took advantage of many illiterate parents whom take their children for treatment by pressuring and forcing them into signing these 28-page consent forms and getting them involved in the trials.”

“Laboratories can't experiment in Europe or the United States, so they come to do it in third-world countries."

Colombian and Panama were also chosen by GSK as staging grounds for trials of the vaccine against the pneumococcal bacteria.

Likewise, Marchese, explained the modus operandi: “Once a picked patient arrived, it would automatically disappear to be taken somewhere else in order to be treated by those doctors specially recruited by GSK. These kind of practices are not legal and occurred without any type of state control, plus they don’t comply with minimum ethical requirements.”

Marchese also remembered that “laboratory trials on human beings are not legalized in Argentina.”

Furthermore, the pediatrician explained that “it is also known that in various particular cases, the doctors who had conducted the trials did not answer the calls made by the worried parents after witnessing their babies’ reactions to the vaccines.”

According to Marchese, “there already exist very good vaccines for the same diseases, but we all know how laboratories work, they only care for their own business.”

To end, Doctor Marchese aimed to Santiago del Estero Governor, Gerardo Zamora, who “never ever came out to stage to comment on the case, and same happened with national deputies and senators that didn’t even bother into discussing a hot topic that was echoed worldwide. I’m also ashamed of the scientific community that also kept its mouth shut.”

Natural News

Wednesday, January 11, 2012
by: Rosemary Mathis, Vice President of Victim Support, SANE VAX, INC.

Written by Norma Erickson & Leslie Carol Botha

On January 12, 2011 the Annals of Medicine published a ground-breaking peer-reviewed paper titled, Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine policy and evidence-based medicine: Are they at odds?, 1written by renowned researchers Lucija Tomljenovic, Ph.D., and Christopher Shaw, Ph.D., with the Neural Dynamics research Group, University of British Columbia, in Vancouver. 2.

The article points out to the medical community what most consumers now know about the fraudulent global health agency policies in combination with the pharmaceutical companies lack of science based evidence demonstrating the safety and efficacy of Gardasil and Cervarix before they were unleashed on unsuspecting parents of adolescents.

Clinical Trials on Healthy People vs. Mass Vaccination Campaigns

Tomljenovic and Shaw clearly state the obvious in their abstract by stating that vaccines represent 'a special category of drugs generally given to healthy individuals and therefore a small level of risk for adverse reactions is acceptable.'

Merck's clinical trials were flawed because they used an aluminum adjuvant as a 'placebo' and only used saline as a comparative for minor, non-serious adverse reactions. With serious adverse reactions, they pooled the results from the saline group and the aluminum 'placebo' group. By doing this, they concealed the true rate of serious reactions.

If FDA approved drugs and vaccines were as safe and effective as Pharma would like consumers to believe the risk level should be negligible to none. The FDA removal of drugs after they have been on the market and damaged desperate people looking for cures who then have to file lawsuits to recover damages is simply unacceptable.

Medical Ethics Questioned

The authors also point out the myth of informed consent - basically a waiver signed by medical consumers that they have been 'educated' about the risk vs. benefit ratio of the drug about to be administered. Tomljenovic and Shaw open their paper citing that 'medical ethics demand that vaccination be carried out with the participant's full and informed consent' and not just the handing out of the HPV vaccine Patient Product Insert - prepared by none other than the vaccine's manufacturer.

What the authors do not cover in this paper is what happens to informed consent when governments grant children the right to consent to medical procedures, such as California's recent passage of AB 499 - basically granting parental rights of children ages 12 and older to the state for the treatment of STD's. Is it really because the 'state' knows better - or is it because legislatures have been paid off by the pharmaceutical companies?

The authors go on to state:

"What is more disconcerting than the aggressive marketing strategies employed by the vaccine manufacturers is the practice by which the medical profession has presented partial information to the public, namely, in a way that generates fear, thus promoting vaccine uptake.........It thus appears that to this date, medical and regulatory entities worldwide continue to provide inaccurate information regarding cervical cancer risk and the usefulness of HPV vaccines, thereby making informed consent regarding vaccination impossible to achieve."