Judicial Watch • JW Seeks Answers to Payouts Made to Victims of HPV Vaccines

JW Seeks Answers to Payouts Made to Victims of HPV Vaccines

JW Seeks Answers to Payouts Made to Victims of HPV Vaccines

FEBRUARY 28, 2013

HPV Vaccine Gardasil linked to serious side effects, including seizures, paralysis, blindness, speech problems, short term memory loss, Guillain-Barré Syndrome and death 

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the Obama Administration’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to obtain records related to the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP), a program that compensates patients who have been adversely affected by certain vaccines, including Gardasil, the vaccine for the sexually transmitted disease human papillomavirus (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:13-cv-00197)).

Judicial Watch initiated an investigation of HPV vaccine Gardasil after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) fast-tracked the vaccine for through the approval process in 2006. Since 2007, Judicial Watch has uncovered government records documenting thousands of adverse reactions associated with the vaccine, including seizures, paralysis, blindness, pancreatitis, speech problems, short term memory loss, Guillain-Barré Syndrome and death.

Judicial Watch seeks the following records pursuant to its November 1, 2012 FOIA request filed with the Health Resources and Services Administration, a component of HHS:

1. Any and all records regarding, concerning, or related to the inclusion of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines as covered vaccines under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP).

2. Any and all records depicting the number of claims filed under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) for injuries or deaths allegedly associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines.

3. Any and all records depicting the amount of compensation paid to claimants under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) pursuant to claims related to injuries or deaths allegedly associated with human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines.

HHS acknowledged receipt of Judicial Watch’s FOIA request on November 2, 2012. By law, HHS was required to respond no later than December 4, 2012. However, as of the date of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit, the agency has failed to provide responsive documents, indicate when a response is forthcoming, or notify Judicial Watch why the records should be exempted from disclosure.

VICP is a Health and Human Services program that compensates patients who have been adversely affected by certain vaccines. The HHS web site describes the program as a “no-fault alternative to the traditional tort system,” and it covers 16 specific classes of vaccines, including HPV vaccines which were added in 2007. The number of successful claims made under the VICP to victims of HPV will provide further information about any dangers of the vaccine, including the number of well-substantiated cases of adverse reactions.

According to the Annals of Medicine: “At present there are no significant data showing that either Gardasil or Cervarix (GlaxoSmithKline) can prevent any type of cervical cancer since the testing period employed was too short to evaluate long-term benefits of HPV vaccination.”

“From the very beginning the federal government has attempted to shield the public from the truth about Gardasil. Despite safety concerns, the vaccine continues to be pushed for both girls and boys. For the supposed most transparent administration in history to stonewall on an urgent matter of public health is particularly galling,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

In addition to obtaining records from the FDA through the agency’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) which has documented thousands of adverse reactions to Gardasil, Judicial Watch also published a special report in 2008 detailing Gardasil’s approval process, side effects, safety concerns and marketing practices.

Sign Up for Updates!


  • cycle3man

    I just do not understand why this information is not available on line.
    The fact that this information has to be pried lose using the freedom of information act is a travesty.
    Why and What are these bozos trying to keep from the public?

  • woodet

    Thank you for investigating this. Right now in the Florida senate there is a bill SB 146 that has been introduced. It is the human papillomavirus vaccination bill. Starting with the 2013-2014 school year parents and guardians of 6th grad students will receive information regarding the HPV. The information must “at a minimum, include the connection between human papillomavirus and cervical cancer as well as other cancers and diseases.” and must “notify the parent or guardian that a vaccine is available to help prevent” and “the advisory committee recommends that the vaccination process be completed before the student enters grade 7.” I’m calling everyone I can this morning and asking them not to support the passage of this bill. I foresee this being the stepping stone to have it mandated for attending public schools.

  • JBishop

    Thank you for investigating this issue.

  • Elizabeth Hart

    Gardasil was originally rejected by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) in 2006.
    An article by Matthew Stevens in The Australian newspaper at the time (November 2006), reports the PBAC rejected Gardasil because it was “too expensive and, just maybe, not what it was cracked up to be anyway”.(1) Apparently,Tony Abbott, then the Australian Federal Health Minister “took to the airwaves, passing on PBAC’s concerns about the efficacy of Gardasil and even floating the bizarre idea that a misplaced confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccine might actually result in “an increase in cancer rates”.”
    According to Matthew Stevens very interesting report in The Australian, it took just 24 hours for the then Prime Minister, John Howard, to “put an end to the nonsense”, delivering “sparkling prime ministerial endorsement to Gardasil along with a clear direction to Minister Abbott that the immunisation program should proceed. And pronto.”
    So is this how important decisions on vaccination practice are made? On the whim of a Prime Minister in pre-electioneering mode? John Howard’s wife had cervical cancer.(2) Did this personal experience affect Howard’s decision? Was this appropriate considering the complexity of the issue?
    What sort of lobbying took place to overturn the PBAC’s original decision to reject Gardasil?
    This decision to add HPV vaccination to the Australian vaccination program for both girls and boys will impact on millions of children around the world.
    Getting a vaccine on the national schedule must be the ‘golden goose’ for vaccine manufacturers as this assures a mass market for their vaccine product. It also helps create a ‘domino’ effect as other countries follow suit and adopt the vaccine, creating a mass global market.
    No wonder Ian Frazer was willing to forego royalties from developing countries(3) – how much profit will he reap from sales of the vaccine to governments in developed countries?
    I suggest there should be an urgent independent investigation into the aggressive marketing of the Gardasil HPV vaccine.
    Elizabeth Hart
    http://over-vaccination.net/ – Challenging Big Pharma’s lucrative over-vaccination of people and animals
    References:
    1. Howard rescues Gardasil from Abbott poison pill. The Australian, November 11, 2006: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/howard-rescues-gardasil-from-abbott-poison-pill/story-e6frg9lx-1111112503504
    2. How the Rudds profited from Janette Howard’s cancer scare. Crikey, February 22, 2007: http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/02/22/how-the-rudds-profited-from-janette-howards-cancer-scare/
    3. “Ian Frazer as co-inventor of the technology enabling the HPV vaccine receives royalties from their sale in the developed world.” Catch Cancer? No thanks, I’d rather have a shot!. The Conversation, 10 July 2012: http://theconversation.edu.au/catch-cancer-no-thanks-id-rather-have-a-shot-7568

  • Elizabeth Hart

    The co-inventor of the technology enabling the HPV vaccines, Ian Frazer, states: “Through sexual activity, most of us will get infected with the genital papillomaviruses that can cause cancer. Fortunately, most of us get rid of them between 12 months to five years later without even knowing we’ve had the infection. Even if the infection persists, only a few individuals accumulate enough genetic mistakes in the virus-infected cell for these to acquire the properties of cancer cells”. (1)
    So Ian Frazer has acknowledged that the risk of cancer is very low… I find it astonishing that the HPV vaccine is being pushed upon adolescents around the world. I wonder how many of these young people and their parents are being properly informed of Ian Frazer’s statement above?
    For information, here’s a link to a letter I’ve forwarded to Chris Mitchell, Editor-in-Chief of The Australian newspaper, on this topic: “Is universal HPV vaccination necessary?”: http://users.on.net/~peter.hart/Is_universal_HPV_vaccination_necessary.pdf
    As I note in my letter, I am unconvinced of the need for universal HPV vaccination and suspicious of the motives for its promotion.
    Ref. 1: “Catch cancer? No thanks, I’d rather have a shot!” published on the CSIRO and university funded website The Conversation (10 July 2012): https://theconversation.edu.au/catch-cancer-no-thanks-id-rather-have-a-shot-7568

  • tlmoorman

    Great article. My 16 year old is one of the injured. Slight wording problem in paragraph 2– “through the approval process” or “for the approval process” but not “for through the approval process”.




0