What do you think? 6th grade girls required to be vaccaniated for HPV.

[andiesmama]

Less than 5,000 people die each year in the US from cervical cancer.

Seems significant to me. I'd sure hate for my daughter to be one of those 5,000.

 

[HeatherJay]

It just all seems like such a scam to me...even if the vaccine is effective at preventing cancer causing strains of HPV.

The politics behind it all, and the exploitation of people's fear....grrr. It's the principle of the whole thing. It just seems so dirty, IMO.

 

[jgonz]

Sure, I wouldn't want one of my daughters to die from cervical cancer either. However it's MUCH more likely that a woman will get either breast or lung cancer. Those 2 cancers are Far more common among women, and the 2 cancers that more women die from.

The medical community is neglecting to tell women that HPV is NOT that serious in most cases... Most women have HPV at one point or another in their lives and their bodies fight it off without them even knowing they had it. It's only Occasionally that a woman has a problem with it.

But the real issue here is that Gardasil is being MANDATED. Unless you know you have the right to say no and claim a religious or philosophical exemption (in Texas) women, no, Young Girls, are going to be forced into getting it.... and potentially have Serious problems from the shot itself since we have no idea what the long term effects are.

 

[wanderingone]

I think if a girl in 6th grade is having sex the parents should be A LOT more worried about her emotional well being than weather her latest vaccine will save her.

The idea is for women to be vaccinated BEFORE they are old enough to have had sex, it's meant for women who have not had the opportunity to be exposed to HPV.

I have a funny feeling this could lead to girls and even boys thinking they are protected from STDs and lead to more sex, more STDs spread and more unwed kids having babies.

I didn't take my daughter to get her vaccine and say "This makes it safer for you to have sex" I told her this is a vaccine to protect against certain types of the HP Virus. All of the information provided with the vaccine, including the publicity campaig makes it clear the vaccine does not prevent STD's, treat HPV or treat cancer. To my daughter it was the same as getting any other vaccine, to help provide protection against a disease, regardless of how it's transmitted.

Girls and boys who think this will provide them with opportunities for "safe sex" are going to be the same ones who are misinformed about what makes for safer sex in general, with or without the vaccine and that's the fault of their parents not Merck

 

[Entertaining_Angels]

I do disagree that the medical community is not sharing about the other strains of HPV and how in most cases they are considered relatively harmless. In fact, I've seen the opposite. Nearly every research and journal article I've read discusses those statistics. Doesn't change that this vaccine is pretty successful with the harmful cases. I just have to know more about long-term side effects before I trust the vaccine but I don't see the vaccine in quite the sinister light like some see it.

 

[HeatherJay]

I do disagree that the medical community is not sharing about the other strains of HPV and how in most cases they are considered relatively harmless. In fact, I've seen the opposite. Nearly every research and journal article I've read discusses those statistics. Doesn't change that this vaccine is pretty successful with the harmful cases. I just have to know more about long-term side effects before I trust the vaccine but I don't see the vaccine in quite the sinister light like some see it.

I don't see the vaccine itself as sinister (despite being highly perturbed by the marketing campaign)...just not as anything that should be made manditory, either.

I agree with whoever said that manditory vaccinations should be limited those airborne diseases and those spread through casual contact only.

 

[Entertaining_Angels]

Heather I agree I just see some more sinister thinking in a few of these replies. I also have not noticed the marketing campaign. I haven't noticed any ads...I just have seen the news articles and journal reports. I don't really watch tv if they've been showing ads.

 

[HeatherJay]

Heather I agree I just see some more sinister thinking in a few of these replies. I also have not noticed the marketing campaign. I haven't noticed any ads...I just have seen the news articles and journal reports. I don't really watch tv if they've been showing ads.

I catch the occassional commercials about it on TV (mostly on MTV and VH1...I suppose where they figure their target audience might be hanging out)...and I've heard similar ads on the radio. And yes, they do specifically refer to it as both an HPV vaccine AND "cervical cancer vaccine", using the terms interchangably. I think that's the thing that truly bothers me about the whole campaign. It's blatantly misleading.

 

[GolfingMom]

Heather I agree I just see some more sinister thinking in a few of these replies. I also have not noticed the marketing campaign. I haven't noticed any ads...I just have seen the news articles and journal reports. I don't really watch tv if they've been showing ads.

Here's the link to a Gardasil commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ8x3KR75fA

 

[Entertaining_Angels]

Here's the link to a Gardasil commercial:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJ8x3KR75fA

The only thing that really bothers me is that this just needs to be tested more. I don't know if the ad which is clearly targeted at young women will really make them go get the shot. I don't know.

 

[Sascha Fitzpatrick]

a) aren't most vaccines 'mandated' (ie. polio, tetanus, hepatitis)? And can't they all be refused due to 'medical or religious reasons'. Therefore I don't understand the reasoning for everyone getting upset about the mandate on THIS one, when it's the same of all the others. Some people I've heard say 'but unlike the others, HPV isn't as easy to contract' - but either is Hepatitis. Again, you need to be in contact with blood or have sex with the person in order to contract it. And that is a mandated one too (or, it is at least in Australia - and from what I've heard it is in the USA).

b) Jgonz - the research you documented actually proves that Gardasil has the same risks of abnormalities in offspring, as the placebos (the placebos actually had more). There were also some other findings in that piece that showed the placebo had the same risks, if not higher than the Gardasil. So that made me wonder why you posted the research?

c) Why hasn't this been given to men? A number of reasons:

- it does not work on them as well (mostly it doesn't do anything)
- when looking at morbidity/mortality rates, cervical cancer in women is MUCH more prevalent and dangerous than in men, so it was important to study prevention for women first and foremost.
- they are testing various things to protect men from the HPV virus as 'carriers'. As yet, this is proving a lot harder than finding the vaccine for women - but rest assured it is being researched in great detail right now (the doctor who discovered the vaccine for women works at my hospital, and is heading up the team searching for the male vaccine).

As for me, I am interested in seeing the long-term affects, but that's the only thing causing me hesitation.

I do not see that this is going to make young girls more promiscuous, and considering hepatitis vaccines are also mandated, I don't see the issue in regards to this being a 'sexual contact' virus (most of the time), rather than airborne, that we are being mandated over.

Meh...

Sasch

 

[jgonz]

I'm not sure why that piece was highlighted and those statistics given... I was copying and pasting from another source. I obviously didn't read it well enough! lol

I think the reason most people are getting upset about this one is the Circumstances...
1) The Governor of Texas "decided" to make it mandatory after being given $6000 by Merck... screams of a pay off...
2) Plus, he made an executive decision, and never even Asked the legislature their opinion (by vote).
3) Then, there is the fact that it's to be given to girls entering 6th grade... which is really rather Young!

The age that was decided on, the way it came about... all of it is very suspect.