having read this thread, i conclude that there are two problems:
1) the fact it's being forced
2) suspect/lack of scientific study on effects of drug
At least I think anyway, please correct me if I'm wrong. This came up in an earlier thread regarding New Hampshire making the drug available to all girls, and most people thought it would be a good idea for it to be available and mandatory for all girls to have it.
So is that it? Or is it something else?
Merck and Perry sitting in a tree...
Moderator: aquaphase
a vaccine that prevents a virus that causes cancer IS a good thing, but only making it mandatory for girls is the part that throws up a huge red flag for me. both males and females get and transmit the virus, so why not make it mandatory for both males and females as is the case with all other mandatory vaccines (i.e. polio, measles, mumps, chickenpox, and, for a while, smallpox - i still have the scar from my smallpox vaccine). it is better medicine to give the vaccine to as many people as possible so that you can reach a level of 'heard immunity' (in epidemiological terms) more rapidly.
another think that raises a caution flag is the newness of the vaccine and the lack of long term research. this ties back into the singling out of females for the vaccine. to give the new vaccine women but not to men speaks to our society's gender inequalities and willingness to devalue women. and for a governor that has shown no respect for women in the past to do this "good thing" on behalf of the "weaker sex" is cause for pause.
squeez "takes off flannel shirt and shaves armpits" le
another think that raises a caution flag is the newness of the vaccine and the lack of long term research. this ties back into the singling out of females for the vaccine. to give the new vaccine women but not to men speaks to our society's gender inequalities and willingness to devalue women. and for a governor that has shown no respect for women in the past to do this "good thing" on behalf of the "weaker sex" is cause for pause.
squeez "takes off flannel shirt and shaves armpits" le
"Hope is for sissies"-House
Mere "hope deserves money" 1975
Mere "hope deserves money" 1975
Ok, so I see his motives. He's secretly hoping that it kills off the females so he can have all the boys to himself.
Seriously though, those are very good points. Has this drug had any independent testing done on it at all? Because if it hasn't, I don't care what it cures, the risks could severely outweight it. And yeah, Merck is not insurance to me that it's for the welfare of the common man (or woman in this case).
Seriously though, those are very good points. Has this drug had any independent testing done on it at all? Because if it hasn't, I don't care what it cures, the risks could severely outweight it. And yeah, Merck is not insurance to me that it's for the welfare of the common man (or woman in this case).








I thought the differences were:This came up in an earlier thread regarding New Hampshire making the drug available to all girls, and most people thought it would be a good idea for it to be available and mandatory for all girls to have it.
So is that it? Or is it something else?
1. NH made it available free.
2. NH didn't require it.
If I misunderstood on those two points, that's my bad. But that's where I think the differences are.
"There are many fish in the sea, Maria. But you're the only one I want to mount over my fireplace." ~Walter Matthau
I remember hearing recently that many drugs were often not tested extensively on children, noot only because the idea of testing drugs on kids pisses people off but because it's often assumed that whatever is safe for adults is safe for children, only in smaller doses -and I would guess in most cases this is true. But when it's not true, they can have completely unexpected sidee effects. It makes me wonder how thoroughly the vaccine was tested on pre-pubecent girls.
"There are many fish in the sea, Maria. But you're the only one I want to mount over my fireplace." ~Walter Matthau
According to the American Cancer Society, "Almost all (>99 percent) cervical cancers are related to HPV."p.s. "most" ovarian cancer isn't caused by HPV, just a significant percent. genetics is a bigger factor.
Not all HPV leads to cervical cancer, but all cervical cancer is caused by HPV.
The ACS is also strongly in favor of the vaccine, and trials are currently being done in to determine if the vaccine is equally safe in boys.
I'm still not sure what to think of this. At first my reaction was "GREAT!" but there are definitely some suspicious motives involved. I think making it available for free would have been a little easier to swallow.
These are the things I find interesting from the website that Justin posted for the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/
...Human papillomavirus is the name of a group of viruses that includes more than 100 different strains or types. More than 30 of these viruses are sexually transmitted...
This is from the link for specific information regarding the vaccine.
The quadrivalent vaccine, Gardasil®, protects against four HPV types (6,11,16,18 ), which are responsible for 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts.
...The duration of vaccine protection is unclear. Current studies (with five-year followup) indicate that the vaccine is effective for at least five years...
The private sector list price of the vaccine is $119.75 per dose (about $360 for full series).
And then there's this that I don't understand since they just said that 6, 11, 16 and 18 account for 70% of cervical cancers. Does that mean that 6 & 11 are only responsible for genital warts?
A bivalent HPV vaccine is in the final stages of clinical testing in females. This vaccine would protect against the two types of HPV (16,18 ) that cause 70% of cervical cancers.
I'd rather wait before making it mandatory and I agree that males should be required to get it if females are. Should the goal be preventing cervical cancer or eliminating the virus - like smallpox? (Of course, I don't know if that's even a possibility.)
I am not anti-immunization but among the scariest events of my life to date were taking my children in for their first immunizations.
...Human papillomavirus is the name of a group of viruses that includes more than 100 different strains or types. More than 30 of these viruses are sexually transmitted...
This is from the link for specific information regarding the vaccine.
The quadrivalent vaccine, Gardasil®, protects against four HPV types (6,11,16,18 ), which are responsible for 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts.
...The duration of vaccine protection is unclear. Current studies (with five-year followup) indicate that the vaccine is effective for at least five years...
The private sector list price of the vaccine is $119.75 per dose (about $360 for full series).
And then there's this that I don't understand since they just said that 6, 11, 16 and 18 account for 70% of cervical cancers. Does that mean that 6 & 11 are only responsible for genital warts?
A bivalent HPV vaccine is in the final stages of clinical testing in females. This vaccine would protect against the two types of HPV (16,18 ) that cause 70% of cervical cancers.
I'd rather wait before making it mandatory and I agree that males should be required to get it if females are. Should the goal be preventing cervical cancer or eliminating the virus - like smallpox? (Of course, I don't know if that's even a possibility.)
I am not anti-immunization but among the scariest events of my life to date were taking my children in for their first immunizations.
formerly known as valentine (and who lives in WEST Fort Worth)
it's a good job this forum gets spammed to shit with pharmacy bots. Surely one of them has the cure.These are the things I find interesting from the website that Justin posted for the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/
...Human papillomavirus is the name of a group of viruses that includes more than 100 different strains or types. More than 30 of these viruses are sexually transmitted...
This is from the link for specific information regarding the vaccine.
The quadrivalent vaccine, Gardasil®, protects against four HPV types (6,11,16,18 ), which are responsible for 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts.
...The duration of vaccine protection is unclear. Current studies (with five-year followup) indicate that the vaccine is effective for at least five years...
The private sector list price of the vaccine is $119.75 per dose (about $360 for full series).
And then there's this that I don't understand since they just said that 6, 11, 16 and 18 account for 70% of cervical cancers. Does that mean that 6 & 11 are only responsible for genital warts?
A bivalent HPV vaccine is in the final stages of clinical testing in females. This vaccine would protect against the two types of HPV (16,18 ) that cause 70% of cervical cancers.
I'd rather wait before making it mandatory and I agree that males should be required to get it if females are. Should the goal be preventing cervical cancer or eliminating the virus - like smallpox? (Of course, I don't know if that's even a possibility.)
I am not anti-immunization but among the scariest events of my life to date were taking my children in for their first immunizations.
The best things in life are truely free
Singing birds and laughing bees
You got me wrongs says he
The sun don't shine in your TV
Singing birds and laughing bees
You got me wrongs says he
The sun don't shine in your TV
Of course we'll never know because Justin deletes them. The Man's always trying to keep us down.it's a good job this forum gets spammed to shit with pharmacy bots. Surely one of them has the cure.
"There are many fish in the sea, Maria. But you're the only one I want to mount over my fireplace." ~Walter Matthau
According to MSNBC, yes.So is the mandatory vaccination going to be free at least??
As I recall, mandatory vaccines have to be made available to everybody, whether they can pay or not. When my kids needed immunizations for school, I took advantage of the public health clinics whenever I could - there was a nominal charge, 5 or 10 bucks I think. If you're on welfare and/or Medicaid, it's just free.Perry also directed state health authorities to make the vaccine available free to girls 9 to 18 who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover vaccines. In addition, he ordered that Medicaid offer Gardasil to women ages 19 to 21.
Sybil
Are you on the list?
- KathrynTheGreat
- Posts: 123
- Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 10:32 pm
On NPR this morning, I heard part of Perry's State of the State address, and he said that parents would be allowed to opt-out of the vaccination requirement if they chose to do so.
So it doesn't really seem much different from New Hampshire's program, except that it will reach a much larger group of people.
So it doesn't really seem much different from New Hampshire's program, except that it will reach a much larger group of people.
Return to “Slapdash Incongruities”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests