by Jefferey Jaxen
Health Impact News
The public, medical community and politicians throughout the world are witnessing a polarization regarding the safety of the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine. A historic, global backlash of parents , whose teenagers have been injured by the HPV shot, is currently threatening the very root of a multibillion dollar vaccine industry . While families and communities at the grassroots level continue to organize to effect change at the county, state and district levels, those within the ranks of medicine  and research  are making their objectionable discoveries public. However, when research findings threaten public immunization policy, initially set by conflicts of interest and compromised regulatory agencies , those in positions of power must react with integrity.
HPV Vaccine Censorship?
Recently, the medical journal Vaccine has abruptly withdrawn a study that casts doubt on the safety of Merck’s Gardasil HPV vaccine, and by extension, the entire global push to mandate the shot  by law to boys and girls. Are the nine authors of the recently rejected Gardasil study another chapter in the continued global vaccine research fraud ? The study found that mice injected with Merck’s Gardasil HPV vaccine  exhibited neurological and behavioral abnormalities. The study concluded to suggest curbing the current worldwide push to immunize all boys and girls with the HPV vaccine pending further investigation. Perhaps the mice in the study showing neurological and abnormal behaviors were simply exhibiting psychosomatic reactions  and should be referred to psychiatric counseling
According to initial reporting by Vancouver’s Metro News :
“The study appeared online in Vaccine on Jan. 9. But on Tuesday, a month after it was published, the article’s abstract was replaced with a message  that the publisher has temporarily removed the article. The note doesn’t explain why, but states that a replacement message will appear soon either giving a reason or reinstating the article.”
The move by the journal Vaccine to put on hold and send for re-review the recent Gardasil HPV study is raising questions. Sources told Health Impact News that the pulled HPV study was temporarily removed at the request of Vaccine’s Editor-in-Chief Dr. Gregory Poland. In addition, Dr. Poland recommended the study be further reviewed. Commenting on these unusual events, one of the Gardasil HPV vaccine study’s authors, Dr. Shaw, told Health Impact News:
“It is odd that an already peer-reviewed, revised after review, and then accepted study would be re-reviewed.”
The move by Vaccine’s Editor-in-Chief Dr. Poland to personally request the Gardasil study be removed at such a late stage appears to show that he may no longer trust the competence of his initial reviewers assigned to the study.
Further adding to the mystery, the recently rejected Gardasil HPV study was submitted first to the Journal of Neuroimmunology where it was withheld for nine months and then rejected.
Is There a Conflict of Interest?
Even before this recently rejected study, Merck’s Gardasil HPV vaccine can readily be found at the center of controversy  regarding severe adverse reactions throughout the world. Are there any connections or conflicts of interest that could account for the bizarre events surrounding the rejection of a study that is critical of Merck’s Gardasil HPV vaccine?
The Editor-in-Cheif of the Journal of Neuroimmunology , the first journal to withhold and then reject the Gardasil HPV study, is Dr. Michael Racke. According to the American Academy of Neurology :
“Dr. Racke has received personal compensation for activities with EMD Serone, Novartis, Roche Diagnostics Corporation, Genentech, and Amarantus as a consultant.”
EMD Serono, Inc. is a subsidiary of Merck KGaA , Darmstadt, Germany.
Moving over to the journal Vaccine, there is yet again another potential conflict of interest. The Editor-in-Chief of Vaccine is Dr. Gregory Poland who personally rejected the recent Gardasil HPV study. The Mayo clinic’s website  has this to say about Dr. Poland:
“Dr. Poland is the chairman of a safety evaluation committee for investigational vaccine trials being conducted by Merck Research Laboratories. Dr. Poland offers consultative advice on new vaccine development to Merck & Co., Inc.”
Dr. Poland has conducted four studies to date  with direct affiliation to Merck.
One such study that now comes into question was the pro-HPV trial from 2005 published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings  titled Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a novel vaccine for human papillomavirus 16: A 2-year randomized controlled clinical trial. Dr. Poland’s 2005 pro-Gardasil study was published one year before the approval of Gardasil by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2006. In addition, Dr. Poland acted as a Safety Monitor  for two other clinical trials of HPV vaccines funded by Merck Research Laboratories
In 2012 Dr. Poland and Dr. Jacobson authored The Clinician’s Guide to the Anti-Vaccinationists’ Galaxy  published in the journal Human Immunology. Poland’s co-author on the article, Dr. Jacobson , is himself a member of a safety review committee for a post-licensure study funded by Merck & Co. concerning the safety of a HPV vaccine.
Are both the Journal of Neuroimmunology and the journal Vaccine involved in a conflict of interest? Does the public and medical community call for an investigation when the editor-in-chief’s of two medical journals reject unfavorable Gardasil research while at the same time received personal compensation from Merck, authored studies in collaboration with Merck and chaired vaccine committees created by Merck?
Is There a Bigger Picture?
In predictable fashion, mainstream news coverage was quick to defend the status quo that vaccines are safe and effective by running the headline “A UBC prof, his anti-vaccine backers and studies slammed by the WHO.”
However, the same World Health Organization (WHO) being pandered to in the mainstream news headline has recently been accused of HPV research fraud by Dr. Sin Hang Lee, Director of the Milford Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory in Milford, Connecticut. Dr. Lee recently filed an open-letter of complaint  to the Director-General of the WHO, Dr. Margaret Chan, stating:
“I have come into possession of documentation which leads me to believe multiple individuals and organizations deliberately set out to mislead Japanese authorities regarding the safety of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil® and Cervarix®”
It is interesting to note that both Dr. Lee’s research and the authors of the rejected Gardasil HPV study both cite aluminum adjuvants in the HPV vaccines as major contributors to the observed serious adverse reactions.
North America, along with the rest of the world, is rapidly experiencing a push to mandate the HPV vaccination for their populations. Across the board, lawmakers and politicians rely on the recommendations of regulatory agencies. The regulatory agencies, often exhibiting their own deep conflicts of interest  with vaccine makers, rely on peer-reviewed medical studies for their recommendations. When the root of the tree (peer-reviewed medical studies) is potentially black-listing research, the fruits produced (mandatory laws forced onto the public) become rotten.
HPV Vaccine Injuries: “I Cannot Begin to Describe What it is Like to Watch your Daughter Live in Such Agony” 
“They’ve Been Robbed of Their Womanhood” – Local Milwaukee Media Covers Gardasil Vaccine Injuries 
Comment on this article on VaccineImpact.com 
Medical Doctors Opposed to Forced Vaccinations – Should Their Views be Silenced?
One of the biggest myths being propagated in the compliant mainstream media today is that doctors are either pro-vaccine or anti-vaccine, and that the anti-vaccine doctors are all “quacks.”
However, nothing could be further from the truth in the vaccine debate. Doctors are not unified at all on their positions regarding “the science” of vaccines, nor are they unified in the position of removing informed consent to a medical procedure like vaccines.
The two most extreme positions are those doctors who are 100% against vaccines and do not administer them at all, and those doctors that believe that ALL vaccines are safe and effective for ALL people, ALL the time, by force if necessary.
Very few doctors fall into either of these two extremist positions, and yet it is the extreme pro-vaccine position that is presented by the U.S. Government and mainstream media as being the dominant position of the medical field.
In between these two extreme views, however, is where the vast majority of doctors practicing today would probably categorize their position. Many doctors who consider themselves “pro-vaccine,” for example, do not believe that every single vaccine is appropriate for every single individual.
Many doctors recommend a “delayed” vaccine schedule for some patients, and not always the recommended one-size-fits-all CDC childhood schedule. Other doctors choose to recommend vaccines based on the actual science and merit of each vaccine, recommending some, while determining that others are not worth the risk for children, such as the suspect seasonal flu shot.
These doctors who do not hold extreme positions would be opposed to government-mandated vaccinations and the removal of all parental exemptions.
In this eBook, I am going to summarize the many doctors today who do not take the most extremist pro-vaccine position, which is probably not held by very many doctors at all, in spite of what the pharmaceutical industry, the federal government, and the mainstream media would like the public to believe.