Gardasil cervical cancer vaccine "safe," feds say

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The huge marketing push around the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, and anecdotal reports about girls fainting after getting the shots, may have you second-guessing its safety.  New data may ease your mind.

An estimated 2.5 million girls between the ages of 13 and 17 have been vaccinated with the three-shot series, which protects against four strains of human papillomavirus (HPV), a sexually transmitted disease that causes 70 percent of cervical cancers. Since the Merck vaccine was approved two years ago, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has received 10,326 reports of adverse events after girls got the shot, the agency reported yesterday—but the vaccine itself doesn't seem to be responsible.

"Experts have not found a common medical pattern to the reports of serious adverse events reported for Gardasil that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine," the report says. "Gardasil is safe to use."

The majority of reactions—94 percent—were not considered to be serious. Among them: fainting, pain, headache, nausea, fever and swelling on the arm where they were vaccinated. "Fainting is common after injections and vaccinations, especially in adolescents," the agency says. (Needles can prompt teens to pass out, an Associated Press report on the fainting episodes earlier this year noted.)

The severe reactions in the report included blood clots and Guillan-Barré Syndrome, a treatable but not curable condition that can cause muscle weakness. Twenty-seven girls who received the shots died, but the CDC said "there was no common pattern...that would suggest [the deaths] were caused by the vaccine." The report attributed the deaths to diabetes, heart failure, viruses and drug use.

(Image by iStockphoto/Don Bayley)

 


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


 

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe