Cervical cancer vaccine deemed safe, but questions remain

A government study deemed Gardasil safe for cervical cancer prevention, but questions remain about complications and effectiveness.

By

Stephanie Rogers

Wed, Aug 19 2009 at 4:00 PM

Related Topics:

Viruses & Diseases

DRUG IN QUESTION: Gardasil is the first vaccine to prevent cervical cancer. (Photo: ZUMA Press)

When pharmaceutical giant Merck & Company debuted Gardasil three years ago, it was hailed as a public health breakthrough that could save millions of lives. The vaccine was immediately foisted upon young girls and their parents through a series of ads proclaiming that recipients could be “one less” victim of cervical cancer.

Show summary in full view

Although some serious complications have been linked to the vaccine, including at least 20 deaths and two cases of Lou Gehrig’s disease, a government report recently found that Gardasil has a safety record on par with that of other vaccines. More common complications include fainting episodes and an increased risk of potentially fatal blood clots.

The study, performed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention along with the Food and Drug Administration, concluded that there is no way to tell if the complications were a direct result of the vaccine.

Although the study deemed Gardasil safe, the authors note that their analysis is based on imperfect data drawn from reports made to a voluntary surveillance database. Most of these reports were filed by Merck & Company and did not include enough information to warrant further investigation.

Experts disagree on whether the risks outweigh the benefits, with some doctors noting that routine screening will catch human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted virus that can cause some types of cervical cancer, and that vaccinating healthy young girls may not be necessary. An editorial accompanying the study in the Journal of the American Medical Association also questioned whether the vaccine will reduce cervical cancer fatalities.

“I wouldn’t accept much risk of side effects at all in an 11-year-old girl, because if she gets screened when she’s older, she’ll never get cervical cancer,” Dr. Charlotte Haug, an infectious disease expert from Norway, told The New York Times.

“You don’t have to die from cervical cancer if you have access to health care.”

Merck was pleased with the report, stating that it confirms their favorable safety profile of the vaccine and that screening alone is not the answer. The company is awaiting an upcoming FDA decision on whether Gardisil, currently approved for females ages 9 to 26, could be expanded to include males of the same age to reduce HPV transmission to women.

You might also like:

Join the conversation

Comments: 3

Guest Aug 20 2009 at 3:50 PM

Most staistics used for medical research are very incomplete and misleading. I discovered this when my 13 year old daughter was dx with bone cancer. The statistics claim a 60 to 70 percent 5 year survival rate. When I questioned the oncology practice, which was 40 years old about their success rate, they hammed and hawed. I finally asked to speak to 10 year survivors they had treated. It took them THREE WEEKS to produce ONE and she lived 3 states away. This was a cancer treatment center that was

.... More

considered PREMIERE. My daughter, who survivied 5 years and 2 weeks goes in the WIN column, but we certainly don't feel like we won. These statistics they tout for all their drugs and treatments are nonsense conjured up to keep their obscene profits going.

Log in or register to post comments
Report This Post

EastSideChick Aug 19 2009 at 4:52 PM

In my opinion, there is no need of this vaccine for girls if they aren't at risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease (ie if they practice abstinence or safe sex with one partner who they know is free of any STDs). It definitely seems like the benefits do not outweigh the risk, and that is the question you have to ask before getting any vaccination.