Activities

  1. Home
  2. Activities

Submission of °»The opinion document against Expertise of a related academic association relating to propulsive movement of Human Papillomavirus° HPV°ňvaccine (Preventive Vaccine for Cervical Cancer) °»

2016-07-04

Medwatcher Japan has submitted °»The opinion document against Expertise of a related academic association relating to propulsive movement of Human Papillomavirus° HPV°ňvaccine (Preventive Vaccine for Cervical Cancer) °» as of 4th July 2016 to 17 academic associations who have concurred their states.

The expertise of the academic association says °»We highly recommend the jab of the vaccine from a professional point of view°…. However, the exact rate of side-effect occurrence is still unknown, also the result of damage-situation research regarding HPV vaccine. Thus, there lies a critical problem of the safety by hearing the report of side-effects or research reports from the doctors on site.

On top of it, HPV Vaccine don°«t match such large-scale vaccination campaigns by risking the danger of side-effects because it shows no effectiveness and no necessity in terms of public health Therefore, the academic association should not recommend inoculation with this vaccine.

Furthermore, the expertise of the academic association writes in regards to the result of the follow-up research of the side-effects conducted by the Health, Labour and Welfare Ministry in September 2015, °»The number of those who haven°«t recovered from the side-effects is 186 (about 0.002% of all inoculations)°… °»This means 2 people out of 100 thousand people haven°«t recovered their full health°…. These sentences indicate those numbers are the actual rate of people who haven°«t recovered their full health because of the vaccine. However, the rate does not include the possibility of the non-reported cases or cases which can°«t be followed. This means that their report underestimates the danger of the HPV vaccine and it's not accurate scientifically.

Thus, our opinion document submitted to 17 academic associations who have concurred their states includes the following statements:

1. The status of °»highly recommend°… for HPV vaccine is not appropriate.

2. The written status of the expertise of the academic association regarding the safety of HPV vaccine is too inaccurate issued by a scientific academic association given the status is for the general public. Since there are some statements which are scientifically incorrect, we expect your association to recant your concurrence on the Expertise of the academic association after you swiftly have a meeting within your board of directors.

3. We expect you to submit the gist of your board of directors meeting regarding your concurrence on the Expertise of the academic association.