Bye Bye Gardisil, Hello Lawsuits

[Anonymous]

This will surprise no one with a brain.

http://www.inquisitr.com/1226763/ga...of-all-time-according-to-former-merck-doctor/

 

[Anonymous]

Who ever started this thread didn't even spell Gardasil correctly.

 

[Anonymous]

Another load of shite. This will help understand the idiocy:

http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/antivaccine-lunatics-invent-hero/

 

[Anonymous]

Might be time to start up a new division. The Innocuous Products Division, featuring roots, barks and leaves! Pump the money in, sure to be a win!

 

[Anonymous]

Who ever started this thread didn't even spell Gardasil correctly.

Yeah, the thread was started by someone with a severely damaged brain. Gardisil? Know your subject before you preach your nonsense.

 

[Anonymous]

Leave it to you Merck morons to focus on the spelling of Gardasil and ignore the story. And you wonder why your company is circling the drain.

 

[Anonymous]

Merck is nothing but a law firm now anyway. Add this one to the stack, we'll get to it.

 

[Anonymous]

Leave it to you Merck morons to focus on the spelling of Gardasil and ignore the story. And you wonder why your company is circling the drain.

It's a non-story. Read #3's link.

 

[Anonymous]

It's a non-story. Read #3's link.

What I'm not buying is the hit-piece on the Gardasil basher. There's your non-story. I'd put just about anyone's morals up against Merck's. And I'd trust anything said that shines light on Merck's ethical shortcomings.

 

[Anonymous]

Leave it to you Merck morons to focus on the spelling of Gardasil and ignore the story. And you wonder why your company is circling the drain.

Focus on getting a life. This product works and is not going away.

 

[Anonymous]

Focus on getting a life. This product works and is not going away.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

 

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

Neither would I. The death toll rises...

 

[Anonymous]

Let's see. On one side we have massive (nearly 1 million participants in all) epidemiological studies done by the most prestigious groups around. Their data shows NO adverse events beyond what would be expected in a general population of women of that age. And in some cases, we actually see fewer events than would be expected.

On the other side, we have a French medical director fired by Merck in an acquisition, who never actually worked for Merck, nor had any inside information of Merck.

I don't know people, but if this were a football game, the "pro-Gardasil" side won the game 153-0.

 

[Anonymous]

Let's see. On one side we have massive (nearly 1 million participants in all) epidemiological studies done by the most prestigious groups around. Their data shows NO adverse events beyond what would be expected in a general population of women of that age. And in some cases, we actually see fewer events than would be expected.

On the other side, we have a French medical director fired by Merck in an acquisition, who never actually worked for Merck, nor had any inside information of Merck.

I don't know people, but if this were a football game, the "pro-Gardasil" side won the game 153-0.

Gardasil always struck me as somewhat of a scam…Useful maybe in Sub-Saharan Africa, but in the West with annual well-woman visits including PAPs??? No need for it…Just a scare campaign and cash cow for Merck…A few people die along the way?? Merck doesn't care...

 

[Anonymous]

Gardasil always struck me as somewhat of a scam…Useful maybe in Sub-Saharan Africa, but in the West with annual well-woman visits including PAPs??? No need for it…Just a scare campaign and cash cow for Merck…A few people die along the way?? Merck doesn't care...

And do you get a PAP for your head and neck cancer risk?

 

[Anonymous]

Let's see. On one side we have massive (nearly 1 million participants in all) epidemiological studies done by the most prestigious groups around. Their data shows NO adverse events beyond what would be expected in a general population of women of that age. And in some cases, we actually see fewer events than would be expected.

On the other side, we have a French medical director fired by Merck in an acquisition, who never actually worked for Merck, nor had any inside information of Merck.

I don't know people, but if this were a football game, the "pro-Gardasil" side won the game 153-0.

Well said. These anti vaccine whackjobs will believe anything as long as it is against vaccines. They don't take facts, science or studies from well respected organizations into consideration. If it's some lone nut with a theory or an opinion against vaccines, that's their new savior.

 

[Anonymous]

Let's see. On one side we have massive (nearly 1 million participants in all) epidemiological studies done by the most prestigious groups around. Their data shows NO adverse events beyond what would be expected in a general population of women of that age. And in some cases, we actually see fewer events than would be expected.

On the other side, we have a French medical director fired by Merck in an acquisition, who never actually worked for Merck, nor had any inside information of Merck.

I don't know people, but if this were a football game, the "pro-Gardasil" side won the game 153-0.

He was the second Merck researcher to blow the whistle, actually. Google Diane Harper, MD to get another whistleblower's dose of the truth behind this scam.

 

[Anonymous]

Let's see. On one side we have massive (nearly 1 million participants in all) epidemiological studies done by the most prestigious groups around. Their data shows NO adverse events beyond what would be expected in a general population of women of that age. And in some cases, we actually see fewer events than would be expected.

On the other side, we have a French medical director fired by Merck in an acquisition, who never actually worked for Merck, nor had any inside information of Merck.

I don't know people, but if this were a football game, the "pro-Gardasil" side won the game 153-0.

"153"? Well, that's just about as many Gardasil deaths that have been reported (144). In actuality, it's probably several times that number. And let's not forget the other 32,000 adverse reactions. They're often more than skin reactions. They're life-destroying illnesses. Go read the stories for yourself. It will take several days to get through them.

 

[Anonymous]

"153"? Well, that's just about as many Gardasil deaths that have been reported (144). In actuality, it's probably several times that number. And let's not forget the other 32,000 adverse reactions. They're often more than skin reactions. They're life-destroying illnesses. Go read the stories for yourself. It will take several days to get through them.

No evidence of causation. Every product has adverse events that may or may not be related to the product.

 

[Anonymous]

Gardasil always struck me as somewhat of a scam…Useful maybe in Sub-Saharan Africa, but in the West with annual well-woman visits including PAPs??? No need for it…Just a scare campaign and cash cow for Merck…A few people die along the way?? Merck doesn't care...

No people have died along the way, so it's hard to take anything from you as being serious. As for PAP's, yes they find the cancer, mostly. But prevention is much better.

Finally, a cash cow for Merck? First, if you actually had taken Finance in college or grad school, you're missing what exactly qualifies as a cash cow. But that's not germane to the conversation. The fact is, Merck and other companies make boatloads more money in sick people. Gardasil is three doses.

Oh, and you're forgetting about all the other HPV related cancers. Some of them nasty.