DR.
CRAIG REESE, D.C., P.C.
January 2007 Newsletter
Click
here for printer friendly/easy read version
Hope everyone had a great holiday season and got back safely from all
their travels. It is snowing again today which is very pretty but messy
to get around in. Since we have had so many snow days in the past few
weeks, I have had the TV news on which is something I rarely do. Consequently,
I get to see commercials I would never see normally. I’m always
amazed at the number of drug commercials per hour that we are blasted
with. We teach our kids that drugs are bad and then we indoctrinate them
for ten minutes every hour of TV watching about what drug will make them
feel good or brighten their day or save them from certain death.
Gardasil
The
latest ad is aimed right at your daughters who are aged 9-26. It is a
new vaccine that is touted as your daughter’s guarantee to prevent
them from getting cervical cancer. It is designed to fight infection from
four strains of human Papillomavirus (HPV 6, 11, 16, 18). It is a series
of three vaccinations given over a six month period. It contains virus-like
particles (VLP) made from the L-1 protein of these 4 viruses. It also
contains water, yeast and aluminum but no mercury. The package insert
can be seen at http://www.merck.com/product/usa/pi_circulars/g/gardasil/gardasil_pi.pdf
. It has been studied on about 20,000 women over a four year period
with good results so far. There have been no long term studies over 5
years for side effects or continued immunity and no studies done on men
that I could find. It was interesting to note that the vaccination and
the aluminum containing placebo had similar levels of side-effects but
the aluminum-free placebo had about ½ the reaction of the other
two.
Dr.
Mercola’s View
Since
there is a lot of information about HPV and this new vaccine, I’ve
copied Dr. Mercola’s whole article so as not to misquote him: http://www.mercola.com
Feds
Approve Unnecessary Cervical Cancer Vaccine That Will Make Drug Company
Billions
All
11- and 12-year-old girls should receive a new vaccine to prevent infection
with human papillomavirus (HPV), the most common cause of cervical cancer,
according to the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
The
recommendation is geared to reach girls before they begin sexual activity,
as HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in the United
States. However, the vaccine -- Gardasil, made by Merck -- is also advised
for females aged 13-26.
The
Food and Drug Administration approved Gardasil in June 2006. It is licensed
for females aged 9-26 and is given in three doses over six months, at
a cost of $120 per dose. Critics have raised concerns that states might
require the HPV vaccine for school admission, a move that would make "state
officials, not parents," in charge of the sexual health of U.S. children.
No states are considering making the vaccine a school requirement at this
time.
Over
6 million Americans are infected with HPV each year. Most infections clear
up on their own, but certain types of HPV can cause cancer.
New
York Times June 30, 2006 (Registration Required)USA Today June 30, 2006
Dr. Mercola's Comment:
Yes,
you read it correctly. This vaccine will cost as much as 10 times more
than other vaccines. Nearly $400 for the three-dose series.
The
panel's vote all but commits the federal government to buy vaccines for
as many as 7 million girls at a total price that could exceed $2 billion.
Yes folks, $2 billion for an absolutely unnecessary and worthless vaccine.
Let
me be more precise, worthless for consumers who will receive it but not
so worthless for Merck who will make billions from this vaccine. They
have successfully manipulated the government again to transfer even more
billions to their pockets.
I haven't
had a chance to research it, but my strong guess is that this advisory
panel is loaded with physicians connected to Merck and is rampant with
conflict of interest just as others have been in the past.
Merck
needs this vaccine, as they are losing billions on Vioxx and billions
more on Fosamax for all the lawsuits those drugs generated.
Wouldn't
it be nice if we could just get a shot, or in the future just eat a plant
that is reengineered to contain a vaccine, that would rid of us cancer?
Of course it would.
Unfortunately,
that is not the way our bodies were designed. Cancer prevention is not
as simplistic as taking a vaccination. Maintaining a high level of immune
integrity is the key, and this is done through the basics of emotional
balancing, optimized nutrition, avoidance of toxins, proper sleep, exercise
and hydration.
This
research is clearly another deceptive ploy by Merck to generate revenue
for their vaccine division in exchange for the delusional hope that a
vaccine will reduce the risk of cancer.
Cervical
Cancer Virtually 100% Avoidable
Cervical
cancer is well documented to be caused by an infection acquired through
sexual contact. So it is behaviorally avoidable. Many conservatives oppose
making this vaccine mandatory, citing fears that it could send a subtle
message condoning sexual activity before marriage.
Also,
a New England Journal of Medicine study found the use of condoms reduces
the incidence of HPV by 70 percent. By comparison, Gardasil counteracts
four varieties of HPV that cause 70 percent of the cases of cervical cancer
and 90 percent of genital warts.
According
to the CDC, HPV is the most common sexually transmitted disease in America
(more than 6 million women contract it annually), yet the immune systems
of many women are strong enough to clear up these infections on their
own.
Cervical
Cancer ReviewCervical cancer, arising in the lining of the cervix, affects
about 9,700 women in the United States each year. About 3,700 die. Worldwide,
a half million get the disease and 233,000 die.
Back
in the 1970s, herpes simplex virus (HSV) was proposed as the sexually
transmitted cause of cervical cancer, based mostly on population studies
that showed a correlation of the disease with HSV DNA. That approach shifted
to HPV in the 1980s, and over the years population studies set the pace
for the now well-accepted view that cervical cancer is strongly related
to the transmission of HPV.
This
is a group of more than 100 viruses, about 30 of which are said to be
linked to cervical cancer. Of these 30 or so, HPV-16 is said to be found
in 50 percent of cervical cancers. HPV-18 accounts for another 20 percent.
In addition
to the population studies that link HPV to cervical cancer, there is,
for example, research showing that HPV viral DNA can be found integrated
in the genetic structure of cervical cancers.
Back
in 1992, however, a question was raised about the dominant and increasingly
entrenched theory that HPV causes cervical cancer. It came from Peter
Duesberg and Jody Schwartz, molecular biologists at the University of
California at Berkeley.
Among
the various issues they raised about the acceptance of HPV as the cause
of cervical cancer was their fundamental concern that there was a lack
of consistent HPV DNA sequences and consistent HPV gene expression in
tumors that were HPV-positive. They instead suggested that "rare
spontaneous or chemically induced chromosome abnormalities which are consistently
observed in both HPV and HSV DNA-negative and positive cervical cancers
induce cervical cancer."
In short,
Duesberg and Schwartz were pointing to the possibility that "carcinogens
may be primary inducers of abnormal cell proliferation rather than HPV
or HSV." And here's the key point: "Since proliferating cells
[cancer cells dividing wildly] would be more susceptible to infection
than resting cells, the viruses would just be indicators rather than causes
of abnormal proliferation."
The
concept they raised back in 1992 is still relevant today, only science
has gone on to assume that causation of cervical cancer has been well
established.
Even
the National Cancer Institute (NCI) says that "direct" causation
has not been demonstrated; however, the NCI and just about everyone else
works with the principle that it has been established. Lip service is
paid to other possible factors that may be involved in cervical cancer
such as environmental conditions, including smoking. Even dietary factors
-- particularly low levels of vitamin A and folate -- have been suggested
as associated with a risk for cervical cancer.
But
once a vaccine to prevent HPV infection is raised as a weapon to prevent
cervical cancer, then it's pretty clear that the medical establishment
has gone all the way in accepting a theory.
Your
Choice
Recently
I heard a well meaning but misinformed state senator talk about making
this vaccine mandatory for all young girls in Colorado,. Fortunately,
this has not happened yet and I don’t know if there is even a bill
before the state legislature but you may be hearing more about this in
the near future. This vaccine will not kill an infection that you already
have and it will not heal up the cervix that is already abnormal. Although
HPV is the most common form of sexually transmitted disease, most HPV
infections resolve themselves and are not a problem. Recurring infections
can cause changes to the cervix and can then lead to cervical cancer.
Genital and plantar warts are also caused by some strains of HPV. I have
been able to correct an abnormal Pap smear by clearing up yeast and other
infections in women and their sexual partners. I’m not fully convinced
that HPV is the direct cause of cervical cancer and there are lots of
natural anti-viral treatments like Echinacea, garlic, lomatium, aloe vera,
etc. that can be tried, as a way to clear up HPV. Check out all the information
available and make up your own mind. If you have an abnormal pap or warts,
get in and we can help.
Breast
Cancer Drop
On a
similar note, in July of 2002 a study came out that said synthetic hormones
were causing an increase in breast cancer and heart disease. Many women
immediately stopped taking these medications. The next year the breast
cancer rate fell by 7.2% which was the first time that cancer rate had
fallen in decades. There is a great article about it at Raw Story: http://www.rawstory.com
Office
News
The
only schedule change for January is that I will be out of the office on
Thursday January 18. Be careful shoveling all that snow!
Home
|