At a recent family gathering my thirteen year old granddaughter showed me a small mark on her upper arm where she had been vaccinated at school “against cervical cancer”. She informed me: “You see, Grandma, young people between thirteen and nineteen sleep around these days, which makes them likely to get cervical cancer.” She had been told that the vaccine would protect her.
Subsequent investigation revealed the following facts. The vaccination is probably against HPV – Human Papillomavirus, which is “the most common sexually transmitted infection in adults”. Wikipedia carries the following information:
In the UK
HPV vaccination with Cervarix was introduced into the national immunisation programme in September 2008, for girls aged 12–13 across the UK
· girls aged between 16 and 18 from autumn 2009, and
· girls aged between 15 and 17 from autumn 2010.
By the end of the catch up campaign, all girls under 18 will have been offered the HPV vaccine. Women over the age of 18 are not included in the programme as it would not be cost effective in preventing cervical cancer.
It will be many years before the vaccination programme has an effect upon cervical cancer incidence so women are advised to continue accepting their invitations for cervical screening.
The HPV vaccine is licensed for “girls aged 9 to 15”, which means children. It is also licensed for “women aged 16 to 26”, which means young people. It is offered through the schools education service.
When told about the vaccination, and the reasons for it, I was deeply shocked, but did not hesitate to believe the child. At just over twelve years old, I would have had no idea what was meant by “sleeping around”. Could it mean a tramp who had nowhere to live? Or camping out? As I did neither, I would have been mystified as to the need for a vaccination. And my parents, having been asked for permission, would have been outraged. Just think about it – a child of thirteen years old is vaccinated against sexually transmitted disease! What does that tell the child? It is alright to accept an invitation to have sex with a boy? An older man? Who? Do her parents understand why she has been offered to be immunised against sexually transmitted disease?
What is the reaction of the reader? Are you shocked? Do you disbelieve what you are reading? Do you blind me with science, saying that it is just a precaution, but one worth taking in view of the fact that cervical cancer is not confined to the middle-aged and elderly, but is occurring in young people? Do you turn on me in anger, accusing me of seeking to cause unnecessary suffering by protecting children from knowledge of the real world? The subject, when mentioned, raises powerful emotions. It also reveals great ignorance about the fundamental underlying issues, such as the origins of these policy decisions.
In Sexual Sabotage Judith Reisman notes that “there is big money in the collaboration of Big Pharma, Big Pornography and Big Sexology”:
“Not coincidentally, big-business abortion funders (Rockefeller) and pornographers, (Playboy and Rockefeller) initially financed the sexology ‘field.’ … It seems eerie that Alfred Kinsey and his saboteurs launched this brave new world in 1948, the year of Orwell’s 1984. Now it is in full gear and fully financed - by Eli Lilly, Pfizer, Ford, Rockefeller, the pornography industry, and State-supported research, schools and libraries. Thus the SIC [Sex Industrial Complex] is entrenched in our society. …
“To unravel the agenda and outcomes of the pedophile lobby, again, ‘follow the money.’ In 2003, the Kinsey Institute built on tortuous child sexual experiments published Sexual Development in Childhood,[i] a product of the pornography-pharmacology connection. The marketing strategy of this deadly collaboration is to give children legal access to pornography (as in some ‘sex education’ classes today), so that they will have sex with each other and adults, then to vaccinate children for venereal diseases and even pregnancy, thereby preventing unfortunate consequences of such abnormal behaviour. This was – and is – a business partnership made in hell.”
Thoroughly researched and referenced, Judith Reisman’s Sexual Sabotage answers many of the questions asked by a generation of grandparents who feel uneasy at the lifestyles adopted by young people, lifestyles which all too often lead to tragedy and heartbreak.
See also http://www.famyouth.org.uk/ for information on the nature of sex education programmes in UK
[i] John Bancroft (ed), Sexual Development in Childhood, (Bloomington
No comments:
Post a Comment