While he may not technically be a whistle-blower he is certainly functioning as one.
On page 5 is a statement from Dr. Helen Petousis-Harris that I found a bit disconcerting:
" ... The GACVS has not yet had a chance to delve into the DNA question.”The GACVS is the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety - part of the WHO.
Have residual VLP's (virus like particles) been found in HPV vaccines? Sure. Has residual HPV DNA been found in HPV vaccines? Yes. Do we know if this affects vaccine safety? No. But they are still recommended as a routine for every child (male or female) at age 11. Why? How is this when there are case reports and VAERS reports of permanent disability and even death following administration of this vaccine? She goes on to dismiss as a mere "hypothesis" (page 6) what Shaw and Tomljenovic posit in their papers (see links below) about the HPV vaccine. Hypotheses are what science is all about - it is the first step in the scientific process! If Dr. Helen Petousis-Harris embraces the scientific process she would not have been so condescending in response to other scientists contribution to the body of knowledge regarding the HPV vaccine.
It is this aspect of "we don't know what we don't know" that so concerns me - time and again limited, small clinical studies demonstrate "safety" but with wider use more serious concerns surface (the real clinical trial also known as "post marketing clinical studies" whereby consumers are used as volunteer subjects in a clinical trial of far less rigorous design). For this reason the use of a vaccine should be entirely voluntary and completely free of any kind of manipulation or coercion (like you cannot go to school or work unless you comply with the entire schedule of recommended vaccines). Some might be willing to accept unknown risks because they may perceive sufficient benefit to justify this. Others should not be forced into accepting unknown risks when they do not believe there is sufficient benefit to justify these unknown risks. Each person (or parent for a minor child) must make their own personal calculation about these sorts of things.
But as Dr. Lee points out ... they (a scientific panel like GACVS or a parent or adult individual) should have all the current, known information in order to make this decision - and it seems relevant information may have been withheld. As he also states, this understandably undermines confidence in medicine, science, and scientific bodies.
It remains to be seen if the Director-General of WHO will take action and investigate his allegations. These allegations deserve investigation - we all deserve better from scientists and from policy makers.
We all deserve the freedom to make our own medical decisions.