So what, you think to yourself? Okay, sure, you and many others have other things to be concerned about – and who cares about a 15th century heretic? Well, maybe some of us do, and I might on this occasion talk some heresy myself. How ’bout that?
But first, let’s be clear about what heresy is, and what Jan Hus’ heretic speech was about, very briefly. This, in case you don’t read the Wikipedia article http://t.co/lM1SlwF about the medieval thinker, a Czech priest, philosopher, reformer, master and rector at Charles University in Prague, chaplain to the royal court, confessor to the queen, a key predecessor to Luther and the Protestant movement of the 16th century. It was only some 150 years later that “in 1567 Pope Pius V canceled all grants of indulgences involving any fees or other financial transactions” [indulgence = remission before God of the temporal punishment due for a sin after its guilt has been forgiven].
The Czech king (“Good King Wenceslas” of the English Christmas carol fame) supported Hus preaching against indulgences and other such corruption of “the substance and spirit of the gospel“, but the church’s hierarchy, having declared war on Naples, needed vast revenues to fund the war effort… When the sales of indulgences continued, riots broke out in Prague. Three pro-Hus students were beheaded, and then buried to public acclaim in the Bethlehem Chapel. The hierarchy countered by excommunicating Hus (for the second time). The archbishop “interdicted” the city; that is, he deprived the people of al the spiritual resources of the church, a terrifying development in the middle ages.
This is citing from http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Heritage/Jan Hus.htm ; there too you can get the rest of the story about the General Council in Constance, which city was then in Switzerland, with Hus guaranteed a “safe conduct”.
You could see at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/heresy that the dictionary defines heresy as (1) an opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system, and (2) as the maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine. In our time, reference could also be to other types of system or establishment.
More to the point of the Master Jan Hus anniversary, and for a scholarly treatise on the punishment that the medieval intellectual received from the then establishment, treat yourself to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_burning .
For, now that I gave you a preamble, I’ll go into a bit of potentially or mildly heretical talk myself, in relation to cervical cancer (and other STDs, sexually transmitted diseases). It is not heresy to remind ourselves that the HPV vaccines do not cure cervical cancer nor do they prevent infection by all strains of HPV – but it could be heretical to discuss that there has been a grave concern among the public about adverse effects, injuries and even deaths in some young recipients of the vaccines.
And even more so to point out that behavior control (the personal health practices referred to below) is advisable in view of the fact that the cancer is associated with early start of sexual activity and with promiscuity. “It is well known that more than 90% of cases of anogenital warts are caused by HPV. HPV has been implicated in cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, penis, anus, and oropharynx. The virus is a necessary cause of cervical cancer. [Note that] as many as 24 million American adults–that is, 1 in 5–may be infected with HPV.”
Sadly, and dangerously for the health of all of us, the above-cited phrase about “It is well known” is misleading because it pertains only to medical people (not even to all of them) as opposed to the general population. “Knowledge about the relationship of HPV to cervical cancer is low even in the United States and the United Kingdom.” One of the sources, on which this assessment is based, concludes: Cervical cancer risk factor knowledge, especially knowledge about HPV is low, even among women with the history of cervical cancer. Younger and more educated women are more likely to have HPV and cervical cancer knowledge accuracy. The importance of personal health practices and the focus on health education should be equally emphasized to achieve successful cancer prevention through vaccination. [Emphasis mine.]
In May, @bioZhena tweeted some on this subject. –
@bioZhena: http://to.ly/awun reports of injury, death related to #Gardasil #HPV #vaccine It prevents positive #Pap – not CC [Cervical Cancer] Think Ovulona http://to.ly/xEO AND THINK ABOUT THE BOLD-FONT STATEMENT JUST ABOVE.
There then appeared a physician’s tweet “in defense of” the HPV vaccines, dismissive of the public concerns:
@bioZhena responded with a request for the source of the info, i.e., for those “several good publications”.
@bioZhena: RT @DrJenGunter: @bioZhena 2011 meta analysis in peer reviewed journal > 44,000 girls no increase in adverse events with Gardasil vs. control #vaxfax — Any chance that you’d share the 2011 meta analysis reference, please?
@bioZhena: #Gardasil Gardisil Silgard Re: @DrJenGunter 2 @bioZhena “don’t use media sources as references, there are excellent reviews of VAERS and Gardisil in real journals”. Please cite them disproving deaths, harm. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org . I look forward to hearing from you. Hard data is indeed necessary.
Did not receive any, unfortunately.
Meanwhile, the government’s Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – in “Reports of Health Concerns Following HPV Vaccination” http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/vaccines/hpv/gardasil.html – states, among other things (albeit not “in real journals”):
There have been some reports of blood clots in females after receiving Gardasil. These clots have occurred in the heart, lungs, and legs. Most of these people had a risk of getting blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (the birth control pill), smoking, obesity, and other risk factors.
As of February 14, 2011, there have been 51 VAERS reports of death among females who have received Gardasil. Thirty two of these reports have been confirmed and 19 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. A death report is confirmed (verified) after a medical doctor reviews the report and any associated records. In the 32 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination. END QUOTE.
Whereupon @bioZhena suggests: The anti-Hippocrates harm does not go away, and cervical cancer screening is no less needed post-vaccination than without it. That’s why @bioZhena’s interest in the topic, as we propose to introduce a better screen than the Pap – but this requires some funding. With our screen done automatically by women at home (in the background of the primary use of the Ovulona™ monitor), the concern that the Pap frequency would suffer in the West is or can be answered, and providing the screen to the population in the non-West countries is a big plus.
Posted by: http://twitter.com/bioZhena 5/26/2011 12:48:52 AM from Twitzer
@bioZhena: #vaxfax #womenshealth Worth repeating: Vaccination does NOT replace routine #cervicalcancer screening – does NOT protect against all #HPV types http://to.ly/aB3v And: Vaccines do NOT cure cervical cancer
That’s it – we can do better than the Pap.
But does anyone hear this?
Is this a heresy?