The warnings intensify – but the authorities and the media remain silent. A new US study reveals worrying new findings: the HPV vaccine, aggressively marketed for years to young girls, is suspected of causing serious health problems. How much longer will this be swept under the carpet?
Researchers at the University of Maryland have analysed actual health insurance data on vaccinated girls and young women – and found a worrying result: the risk of developing an autonomic dysfunction disorder, such as POTS, within three years of vaccination increases by 23%. For menstrual disorders, the increase is up to 30%. No theories, no model calculations – but real diagnoses from everyday life, documented in a huge database. And yet we are still being told that the HPV vaccine is “safe”?
Better research design gives clear answers
For years, official bodies and studies by manufacturers have claimed that there is no link between vaccinations and such complaints. However, a new study clearly challenges these claims. Instead of relying on dubious reporting schemes such as VAERS, for the first time, data from the same individuals before and after vaccination were compared, a much more reliable approach. And lo and behold: girls in the hormonal transition phase of puberty are particularly vulnerable. It is this group that is being urged to be vaccinated worldwide. Coincidence? And this despite the fact that the protective effect of vaccination is apparently massively overestimated.
The authors of the study see possible links with the vaccine’s ingredients – in particular the so-called adjuvants. These active ingredients, mainly aluminium-based, have for years been suspected of dangerously irritating the immune system. An overactive mast cell reaction can not only upset the autonomic nervous system but also the hormonal balance. However, these risks are rarely discussed in awareness-raising events – if they are discussed at all.
🚨 New Study published 11 March 2025, demonstrates HPV Vaccination doesn’t protect recently vaccinated females against HPV, doesn’t show protective effect against incident HPV detection in females, nor reduced transmission or protection for one’s partner.
– VaccineMole (@VaccineMole) April 3, 2025
Source:… pic.twitter.com/lpX0lo5LY8
Worse still, despite clear warning signals, official bodies such as the EMA and CDC are keeping a low profile. Vaccination is still recommended without restriction. Even when indications of adverse effects are registered, they are dismissed across the board by saying that they have not been proven causal – a rhetorical ploy designed to stifle critical scrutiny at the outset. The fact that the British Medical Journal already exposed the massive flaws in European risk assessment in 2015 is consistently ignored. Why?
Lawsuits against Merck
At the same time, manufacturers are also under increasing pressure. Several lawsuits are currently being filed in the US against Merck, the company behind the controversial Gardasil vaccine. The charges: deliberate deception of the public, concealment of risks and manipulation of research data. If confirmed, this would be a scandal of historic proportions – but the major media companies remain silent.
One particularly serious issue is the role of aluminium adjuvants. According to the complaints, Merck did not make their use transparent, even though these substances are strongly suspected of causing uncontrolled immune reactions. Internal expert reports speak of ‘targeted data control’, i.e. the active manipulation of scientific results to build a ‘clean’ safety profile. For profit?
🚨📢2012 Autopsy Study of two young girls (19-14 years old), who died after receiving Gardasil HPV vaccine, indicates HPV-16L1 particles from HPV Gardasil Vaccine reach brain arteries/vessels, posing an inherent risk for triggering potentially fatal autoimmune vasculopathies…. pic.twitter.com/gM37yHozCq
– VaccineMole (@VaccineMole) June 21, 2025
Groups of side effects had already been identified in early marketing authorisation studies. Between 2006 and 2013, reports of POTS, ovarian failure and other serious symptoms skyrocketed. Yet authorities looked the other way. Instead of finally looking and focusing on independent investigations, those affected were dismissed as “isolated cases”. This pattern is all too familiar from other pharmaceutical scandals.
Information on side effects? No chance
Particularly questionable is the so-called “notification method”, which is currently practised in many doctors’ surgeries. HPV vaccination is simply given as a matter of routine – without thorough information, without dialogue with parents and without information about possible side effects. This is medical automation that makes a mockery of the principle of informed consent. Is this still ethically justifiable?
And even when symptoms do occur, the problem is often downplayed. While some organisations recommend that reactions are checked within six months of vaccination, how is this supposed to work if parents or doctors are not even told about the risks? The decision on a medical intervention should never be left to blind trust. It must be based on real information – anything else is irresponsible.
