HPV vaccine cutting cervical cancer by nearly 90%

2PhiloVoid said:

I think you've misunderstood my post there, sister Sparagmos. Like one of the posters above, you've introduced an equivocation that misrepresents my point.

But, that's ok.

Click to expand...

Why aren’t my examples equivocal?

Sparagmos said:

Why aren’t my examples equivocal?

Click to expand...

Actually, they are equivocations.

And I'm saying that your examples misrepresent my point of view, and thus, by your attempt to apply these examples as a kind of evaluation to what it is you think I meant, then you've ended up equivocating since your examples are nowhere near being analogous in structure to my statements.

read too many negatives re vaccine so not getting shot for my teen
plus shot doesn't protect from all cancer causing hpv's

no shot for breast cancer which has higher risk
two of my neighbors died from breast cancer in last 3 yrs

about 42,000 die yearly from breast cancer
about 4,000 die yearly from cervical cancer

Hazelelponi said:

My daughter died of cervical cancer

Click to expand...

sorry for your loss

mama2one said:

read too many negatives re vaccine so not getting shot for my teen
plus shot doesn't protect from all cancer causing hpv's

Click to expand...

It's a vaccine. Not all vaccines prevent every virus of a particular type.

mama2one said:

no shot for breast cancer which has higher risk
two of my neighbors died from breast cancer in last 3 yrs

Click to expand...

It's not a "shot" for cancer. It's a vaccine for a HPV which causes cervical cancer. It has no impact on breast cancer. That doesn't lessen its value against cervical cancer.

mama2one said:

about 42,000 die yearly from breast cancer
about 4,000 die yearly from cervical cancer

Click to expand...

Again, not the same cancer, not the same cause. To complain a vaccine doesn't cure all cancer when it does prevent some cancers is as irrelevant as complaining that aspirin doesn't lower your cholesterol. That's not what it does. It's not what it's for.

2PhiloVoid said:

I'd think that, instead, the whole point in ameliorating the HPV problem would be to first center upon identifying scientifically and medically what HPV is and knowing how it is transmitted in the first place ...

... I think an accentuation upon committed, life-long, monogomous relationships would go far in reducing the spread of HPV, also in the first place.

Click to expand...

Teens and grownup have sex, some break up and move on. Some men and women cheat on each other, Even some Conservative Christian men and women . Then it's a good idea for teens to get HPV vaccination. I would say it reckless not to get HPV vaccination. Very irresponsible. Luckily your children have the options to get them until 20 and up if they are still virgins or never had HPV. So preach about monogamous relationships, but it's very un likely to not have sex , before you get married.

mama2one said:

read too many negatives re vaccine so not getting shot for my teen
plus shot doesn't protect from all cancer causing hpv's

Click to expand...

It does protect against cancer causing HPV viruses though not all. Because it’s not a 100% guarantee you are against it? Well at least it will be available when she is 18 and can decide for herself.

no shot for breast cancer which has higher risk
two of my neighbors died from breast cancer in last 3 yrs

about 42,000 die yearly from breast cancer
about 4,000 die yearly from cervical cancer

Click to expand...

Two different cancers and all cancers are complex. At least the HPV vaccine is proven to reduce cervical cancer. It’s benefits are not negated because it doesn’t prevent all cancers.

comana said:

Because it’s not a 100% guarantee you are against it?

Click to expand...

my first sentence was:
read too many negatives



Suspected Adverse Effects After Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: A Temporal Relationship Between Vaccine Administration and the Appearance of Symptoms in Japan

2PhiloVoid said:

Actually, they are equivocations.

And I'm saying that your examples misrepresent my point of view, and thus, by your attempt to apply these examples as a kind of evaluation to what it is you think I meant, then you've ended up equivocating since your examples are nowhere near being analogous in structure to my statements.

Click to expand...

Yes I understand that you feel I’ve misunderstood your point, so can you explain? If people just abstained from sex, then HPV wouldn’t be an issue. Also, if people just stopped being mean, bullying wouldn’t be an issue. Why aren’t these analogous in structure?

mama2one said:

my first sentence was:
read too many negatives



Suspected Adverse Effects After Human Papillomavirus Vaccination: A Temporal Relationship Between Vaccine Administration and the Appearance of Symptoms in Japan

Japan took it off market in 2013 due to over 2000 side effects

so no we won't risk it

Click to expand...

That is your choice but according to this article HPV Vaccination in Japan: A Researcher’s View it was never removed from the market in Japan but the ministry of health did stop recommending it in 2013. They are now reconsidering that decision in light of the vaccine’s safety and effectiveness.

.

mama2one said:

well the Tokyo Times reported it was taken off market:

Side effects in young girls take Gardasil out from Japanese market - Tokyo Times

Click to expand...

Seven year old article that was incorrect about removing it. It has remained available but removing the endorsement from the ministry of health has effectively reduced the percentage of women taking the vaccine to 0.1% of those eligible and approximately 3000 Japanese women die of cervical cancer annually. How many would be alive today if Japan had chosen to continue to endorse the vaccine?

CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN said:

Teens and grownup have sex, some break up and move on. Some men and women cheat on each other, Even some Conservative Christian men and women . Then it's a good idea for teens to get HPV vaccination. I would say it reckless not to get HPV vaccination. Very irresponsible. Luckily your children have the options to get them until 20 and up if they are still virgins or never had HPV. So preach about monogamous relationships, but it's very un likely to not have sex , before you get married.

Click to expand...

Yep. I understand all of that. And of course, teenagers can get the HPV vaccine, and I in no way have diminished that as an option in what I've said thus far in this thread. I'm not sure why several here are responding to me as if I supposedly said that no one should get the vaccine ...

Sparagmos said:

Yes I understand that you feel I’ve misunderstood your point, so can you explain? If people just abstained from sex, then HPV wouldn’t be an issue. Also, if people just stopped being mean, bullying wouldn’t be an issue. Why aren’t these analogous in structure?

Click to expand...

Sparagmos, before I attempt to get into some kind of extended (and perhaps needless) explanation as to why, can I politely ask you to read post #2 in this thread ? If you haven't read it, doing so might clear some things up for you. If that doesn't, then let me know and I'll proceed.

2PhiloVoid said:

Sparagmos, before I attempt to get into some kind of extended (and perhaps needless) explanation as to why, can I politely ask you to read post #2 in this thread ? If you haven't read it, doing so might clear some things up for you. If that doesn't, then let me know and I'll proceed.

Click to expand...

Lol, yes, PhiloVoud, I did read post #2. An increase in abstinence certainly would decrease rates of HPV. But making abstinence the norm is a lost cause, no one has figured out how to do it in thousands of years, and in this case, it’s not necessary to try and do the impossible and get everyone to abstain because we have a vaccine that works. Abstinence education is a complete failure, there’s plenty of data showing that.

Sparagmos said:

Lol, yes, PhiloVoud, I did read post #2. An increase in abstinence certainly would decrease rates of HPV. But making abstinence the norm is a lost cause, no one has figured out how to do it in thousands of years, and in this case, it’s not necessary to try and do the impossible and get everyone to abstain because we have a vaccine that works. Abstinence education is a complete failure, there’s plenty of data showing that.

Click to expand...

I nowhere said I was a proponent of so-called "abstinence education."

Yet, regardless of this, I'm kind of surprised how this hasty generalization has been jumped to in this this and (seeming?) laid firmly laid to my account.

But y'know, too..........now that you bring it up, so-called "abstinence education" does sound like a tempting idea for me to further consider. Maybe as a proponent of social justice and social science I should revisit the notion and see how it might be re-analyzed and "improved" for additional advocacy in society, especially since I think men would do better to 'hold off' from sex until they can avoid using women to their own advantage.

By the way, do you have any idea as to why you and others here are jumping to this conclusion even though I didn't specifically say I held such a position?

Sabertooth said:

It is a "recombinant" vaccine.

Click to expand...

Update: apparently, the routine Hepatitis B vaccine is a recombinant vaccine, too, but hasn't had all of the damaging side effects that have been litigated for Gardasil.
That means that the latter has been causing its injuries though a different mechanism.

2PhiloVoid said:

I'd think that, instead, the whole point in ameliorating the HPV problem would be to first center upon identifying scientifically and medically what HPV is and knowing how it is transmitted in the first place ...

... I think an accentuation upon committed, life-long, monogomous relationships would go far in reducing the spread of HPV, also in the first place.

Click to expand...

Public policy has to be pragmatic and can't rely on what one person or group views as their "preferred moral approach" to addressing a problem.

Sort of like when people try to pitch "abstinence only education" as a solution unplanned pregnancy. It may be a lofty ideal to aspire to (getting people to not 'fool around' until they're in a position where they can support a child), but pragmatism and data suggests that you're simply not going to be able to control people in that way...at least not in any sort of meaningful size of the population. Same goes for your pitch of "encouraging life-long monogamy", maybe a lofty goal, but you're not going to be able to convince most people to do it.

If you can't control a behavior, then the next best option you have is to take the approach of mitigation and prevention of the worst outcomes of it.


For example:
In attempting to address health/obesity related issues (and the negative outcomes that come along with it). Sure, one could simply say "Well, the solution is for people to eat better and exercise"... and you may be able to convince some people to do it, but anyone being realistic about it knows a lot of people are still going to eat their fast food and play video games all day, therefore, we still need keep the insulin and blood pressure medication on-hand to mitigate the effects of it on a larger scale.

ThatRobGuy said:

Sort of like when people try to pitch "abstinence only education" as a solution unplanned pregnancy. It may be a lofty ideal to aspire to (getting people to not 'fool around' until they're in a position where they can support a child),.

Click to expand...

maybe if parents actually tell their children that sex is for marriage only

I started telling daughter that summer before 3 rd grade
one can't just hear it once, either
needs to be an ongoing conversation

mama2one said:

maybe if parents actually tell their children that sex is for marriage only

I started telling daughter that summer before 3 rd grade
one can't just hear it once, either
needs to be an ongoing conversation

Click to expand...

Not all parents agree that sex is only for marriage and not all children keep to their parents moral teachings who do believe that.