[stef25]

This is what google shows: 7 deaths out of 24K vaccinated individuals.

"An Indian government committee and subsequent investigations concluded that the seven deaths were most probably unrelated to the vaccine itself. The reported causes included drowning, snake bite, intentional ingestion of poisonous substances (suicide), malaria, brain hemorrhage, and viral fever."

This was in a trail for the HPV virus so presumably they wanted subjects who were not yet sexually active. Girls were chosen because HPV can affect the cervix. So you vaccinate them, and then follow them up for maybe 15 years and see how it turns out.

Enrolling young children in a trail like is always going to ethically hard to justify. And it's well possible they chose India instead of California for this reason. However the protocol makes sense.

I worked in clinical trails for years, believe me the LAST thing anyone wants is problems like these because you'll end up losing billions.

To market something in EU or USA you need EMEA or FDA approval. They will check every single piece of paper and can tank your entire decades long project.

Respectfully, you're blowing this way out of proportion, this is just more "billionaire hysteria"

[ogogmad]

Deaths of "many girls", when the parent comment said it was at most 1 out of 2300 participants (a suicide)? Those numbers might, however, be untrustworthy. I don't know India well enough to know how much to trust statistics compiled there.

What sources are there on the hospitalisations?

[myrmidon]

Your article is careful to never explicitly state correlation between the vaccine and those seven girls deaths. Without such a link, your argument falls apart.

> So answer me honestly: Did that same billionaire (Bill Gates) and his organisation (Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) do the same exact trials in his home country (USA)? "clinical trials of unproven vaccines on thousands of poor minor girls, without consent of then and their parents"

This accusation is toothless. You would need to show two things:

- There were actual unacceptable risks or side-effects from the vaccine under test (your article completely fails to show this, and if you believe it does, then you are simply a victim of clickbait formulations)

- The study was done in India because of risks to subjects deemed unacceptable in the US (and not simply because it was cheaper)

What the article does show is that there was shoddy handling of consent. Which is valid criticism! But it is also somewhat unsurprising given the low literacy rate at that time and place. And this alone is simply not sufficient foundation for your accusations.