Medical journal questions wide use of HPV vaccines
Sometimes, it's a short trip from "miracle drug" to "hold on a minute." Even as mandates for new vaccines against cervical cancer were due to go into effect in Virginia and Great Britain, two articles in the New England Journal of Medicine called into question whether the effectiveness of the vaccines justifies their high costs.
One of the vaccines, Gardasil, sped from application to approval by federal authorities in half a year — that's a process that takes three years and more for many vaccines. The process accelerated because Gardasil vaccinates against HPV, which can, in rare cases, cause cervical cancer. Allowing that drug to collect dust during a lengthy approvals process would have been a political minefield.
Since licensing, Gardasil has been administered to millions of teenage girls and women in Europe and the United States. A series of three shots for the vaccines costs in the hundreds of dollars. Before the vaccines were rushed out, a comprehensive system of Pap smear screening in Western countries had already reduced cervical cancer death to low levels. That's why some are wondering whether Gardasil makes sense financially (not to mention it's been linked to seizures and even death).
Docs representing Big Pharma sniffed that the financial objections in the medical journal were "theoretical."
You know what else they are? Common sense.
