Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michele Bachmann Talks HPV Vaccine, Homosexuality on Jay Leno Show (She ain't backing down)
Christian Post ^ | 09/18/2011 | By Anugrah Kumar

Posted on 09/18/2011 8:43:48 PM PDT by SeekAndFind

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last
To: Kleon

That’s what most people say after they meet a candidate. That’s why candidates get out and shake hands and talk to actual people. They are professionals at making people come away thinking, “wow, he/she is very, very impressive.”


61 posted on 09/19/2011 8:44:30 AM PDT by DRey (Perry/Rubio 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

Sorry to be you.

You should allow people to listen to other people
INSTEAD of bowing down to RINO Perry and MERCK
and their lobbyists.


62 posted on 09/19/2011 9:04:56 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj

thank you. you are correct.

MERCK, Perry and PerryBOTs will be responsible
for thousands of women with cervical cancer who
now feel they DO NOT NEED PAP smears.
This is false security because MERCK, Perry and
his BOTs claim the vaccine PROTECTS against
cervical cancer. That is a lie.


63 posted on 09/19/2011 9:06:54 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

You PerryBOTs ought to have helped FIRE DEPARTMENTS
in Texas instead of making it difficult for them.

Instead, you have wasted YOUR TIME and GOOD WILL
trying to sell Texan children as lab rats.

and then trying to cover THAT up.

Shame on you drowning in your denial.


64 posted on 09/19/2011 9:09:08 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mazz44; R.I.chopper; algernonpj
According to this http://apps.nccd.cdc.gov/uscs/toptencancers.aspx most cases of cervix cancer from 2003-2003 are hispanic women, second black women, third are American Indian/Alaskan natives...


65 posted on 09/19/2011 9:42:50 AM PDT by hamboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: ohioman

LOL..... a million comedians starving to death and you’re trying to be funny.

Only mistake? ONLY MISTAKE????


66 posted on 09/19/2011 9:59:40 AM PDT by dusttoyou (paulnutz/bachnutz/palinwishers are wee-weeing all over themselves, Foc nobama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
People can listen all they want. That is not the issue. Merck is a company that is profitable. That is good. We should hope they continue to be. It is their profits that generate the research dollars that bring new life saving drugs to market. Since when are we against profit?

It is about lives. More people die from HPV related cancers than from any form of side effects, particularly from this drug which has a better record than virtually ANY vaccine on the market. End of story.

I am not a shill for Merck I own none of their stock, do not work for them, and do not know any one that works for them. I did own stock in Bristol Meyers but sold it last year.

Perry had good intentions and went about it in the wrong way. Bachman’s intentions are not good. They do not lead to informed consent, freedom, or parental choice. It also leads her to look like an uninformed zealot.

I have not decided who I will vote for. Here in Ohio, by the time I get to vote in the primary it is almost certain to be inconsequential anyway. That being said, I would vote for Bachman, Perry, Cain, Santorum, even Gingrich before I would vote for Romney. This Gardasil issue is irrelevant on every level and helps ONLY Obama. Bachman should dump it fast. I am not the least bit sorry to be me. I believe that I have lead a good life and try to take things as they come. I wouldn't trade places with anybody. It is unfortunate that you would deign to decide that your life is better than mine. It is condescending and inappropriate

67 posted on 09/19/2011 10:28:15 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
I am not a PerryBot. I am more likely to vote for Bachman, or Santorum. Even Gingrich. My first choice would be somebody else all together. I believe that the best candidate is not running. I do not want to have to vote for Romney.

I have no idea what Perry's stand on Fire Departments is. I could care less. My stand on Fire Departments may be the same or it may be different. None the less, my analogy is correct.

The candidates screaming about Gardasil LOOK STUPID! It is about the millions of unemployed and the disaster in the White House and which candidate has the best ideas to fix the economy.

Gardasil is a drug that has been tested for over a decade and has gone through all the necessary steps to bring it to market. The regulatory processes are the most stringent in the entire World. Probably more stringent than necessary. Gardasil helps to protect against a deadly communicable disease that causes enormous pain and cost to society.

If Perry had pushed for voluntary use, for which it already was approved, insurance and Medicaid would not pay for the drug. That would leave parents who could not afford the exorbitant cost UNABLE TO DECIDE TO GET IT! Thereby REDUCING their CHOICES! If they decided NOT to get vaccinated they needed only sign an opt out. Regardless, the legislature in Texas over rode Perry and have decided to side with the fear mongers. So be it.

I am unashamed about my position on this topic and Perry should be unashamed as well.

68 posted on 09/19/2011 10:53:20 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

My condolences on your personal tragedy. I can’t imagine what it is like to have to deal with such a situation.

However that does not change the science and valid questions surrounding Gardasil and how it has been marketed. I find it repulsive that a pharmaceutical companies prey on parent’s love and desire to protect their children, abusing those emotions misrepresent their products.


69 posted on 09/19/2011 10:54:43 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj
From what I have scene the benefits of the vaccine far outweigh the potential side effects. That being said, Merck has every right and every responsibility to it's stock holders to aggressively market it's approved products.

This is an important drug that can help to reduce a large percentage of HPV related diseases.

Perry gave parents an opt out. An opt in was already available. An opt out would require that a persons insurance pay for the drug increasing choice and freedom not lessening it.

70 posted on 09/19/2011 11:02:40 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Lazlo in PA
Re:"Unfortunately the CDC, along with the FDA and EPA have had their missions severely compromised by political agendas, and one is wise not to take their cheer leading for Gardasil as the final word."

How about taking the word from a Doctor who deals strictly in these types of matters.

http://www.nationalreview.com/blogs/print/277093


I take you you have no comments on the FDA, EPA, and CDC regarding political agendas, and what passed for science in the mandated replacement of CFC inhalers with HFA inhalers, or in reports and mandates on man-made global warming, the ozone hole, and CO2 'pollution'.

Before I take the word of Henry I. Miller, M.D., the Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy & Public Policy Hoover Institution of Stanford University, and a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, as well as the founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA, I have a bridge to sell you. Mr Miller's piece blightly ignored any severe adverse effects after the vaccine went public, etc. [if you are really interested in anything other than cheer leading for Gardasil, read prior posts for details].
71 posted on 09/19/2011 11:10:38 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town; Sola Veritas; hamboy; Diogenes

Once again you are conflating science with politics. If you are interested, read through posts by myself, hamboy, diogenes, and Sola Veritas - including linked articles.


72 posted on 09/19/2011 11:13:11 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: hamboy

Thanks.

Have you found this chart anywhere else? I keep getting a resource error.


73 posted on 09/19/2011 11:25:39 AM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj
I read them. They are not persuasive to me. They should not be persuasive to others either. Even if everything they argue is true, it doesn't outweigh the benefits of the drug in my mind. 16,000,000 people have been vaccinated with this drug. Very few have had any side effects at all.

If parents wanted to opt out they could. as it stands now If they wanted to opt in they would have to pay. Many people can not afford the cost so they have no choice. Perry offered an alternative that offered a choice, opt out or get the shots and have it paid for by insurance or Medicaid. This gives more freedom than the alternative.

If you want to opt out good, do so. As it stands, because of the Texas legislature those who want this protection for their children, but can not afford it, have no choice. How is that a winning argument? It isn't. It just makes Conservatives look like heartless, unscientific, jerks.

74 posted on 09/19/2011 11:31:20 AM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town; algernonpj
"Perry had good intentions and went about it in the wrong way.
Bachman’s intentions are not good.
I would vote for Bachman, Perry, Cain, Santorum, even Gingrich before I would vote for Romney.
...
From what I have scene (sic) the benefits
of the vaccine far outweigh the potential side effects. "

You are a very confused RINOphilic grasshopper.

75 posted on 09/19/2011 11:53:24 AM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
There is no confusion here. Bachman is trying to make points out of this issue. It is a stupid move. Thta being said I think she is more conservative than Perry. I think Santorum is more conservative than Perry. You can be incorrect in one since and still be the most conservative.

Never the less, your arguments are not enlightening. They are not productive and they are not supported by the acts on record. We pay billions and billions a year to over see the FDA and CDC. They give Gardasil high ratings. Merck is attempting to save lives and make a profit. nothing wrong with that. Drug companies and their research have driven life expectancies to double over the past century. We all have benefited from their efforts. Your assumptions of my politics and your personal attacks are unwarranted. I can not help the fact that you are not capable of understanding the idea that a mandate with an opt out increases freedom and informed consent because without a mandate large portions of the population would not be able to afford the vaccine.

76 posted on 09/19/2011 12:09:28 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

They do....they destroy at least one biological connection and use a child as a means for an artificial end. You can never use people as a means and be ethical....it is evil.

It is why Marxism is so evil....they ignore individual needs for the collective...and because in their moral relativist world—they (those in power) decide life and death and can eliminate those who don’t conform to their state of slavery.

Homosexuals are playing god in the artificial creation of a child—mocking Natural Law and God’s laws. It is evil to remove a child from their natural world—intentionally. It is one thing for orphans to exist by accident—quite another to have it intentionally imposed on them and a forced non-biological connection which removes meaning and connection from that very child’s life.

You are making a child the object of some selfish adult need.

The idea that you can create “human” beings by unnatural environments—and expect the same results by removing their genetic rights from them intentionally, is evil and a incredibly SELFISH act that is evil.

It comes directly from Marx and the Brave New World and elimination of the family unit. You can not remain human and remove that biology which makes you so. It will create a sick, sick society....devoid of humanity.

Remove biological meaning from children and you remove their dignity as a human being and create a meaningless world which mocks God, the true designer. You don’t create children and disregard their fundamental rights to a biological mother and father.

Their biology is part of the great joys and happiness that occur in life. It is the teleological reason for how human beings are designed. Stupid hippies should understand the importance of nature and nature’s laws. Although their minds are so drugged out, I am sure they have no cogent thoughts in their empty heads.


77 posted on 09/19/2011 12:30:49 PM PDT by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town
You have much confusion.

The 2006 population of women in the US per the census was 151,795,031.
Number of cervical cancer cases diagnosed in 2005 per the CDC was 11,999.
Therefore, 00.07904% of women were diagnosed with cervical cancer that year.
The number of deaths by cervical cancer in 2005 were 3,924.
Gardasil does not protect against cervical cancer.
It might protect for some short time against some HPV.
It has side effects, some serious.

The Gardasil death rate is .0125% .

PEOPLE SHOULD CHOOSE WISELY.

Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, Inc.
“Opting-Out” of HPV Vaccine WILL NOT WORK
Texas Governor Perry is misleading legislators and families in Texas
by claiming that they will be able to “opt-out” of having their 6th grade daughter
vaccinated with the vaccine for the sexually transmitted virus HPV.
For many families currently, the exemption isn’t worth the piece of paper it is printed on.
Besides the simple fact that parents should not have to get permission
from the state to make informed consent medical decisions
for their own children"

NO MORE RINOs. NO MORE PerryCARE.

78 posted on 09/19/2011 12:53:55 PM PDT by Diogenesis ("Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. " Pres. Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

RINOphilic grasshooper ... ROFL

I needed the laugh.


79 posted on 09/19/2011 12:59:15 PM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis
Gardasil protects for a lifetime. For women that is around 80.4 years. They get vaccinated with three shots in one year for a lifetime of protection against THE MOST COMMON HPV RELATED CAUSES OF CERVICAL CANCER.

Yes, it doesn't protect against all instances of this cancer, just a vast majority. It does not protect against all HPV related causes of genital warts, just the vast majority. It does not cure any disease, but vaccines protect against diseases they do not cure any of them.

On the non vaccination side we have exactly ZERO proof that anybody has been seriously injured or killed by this Vaccine. that is zero out of sixteen million plus.

Your position is causing confusion and undue concern for others. Diseases kill, Vaccines protect against diseases.

The drug industry has done more for the health of society than any other industry. They have particularly helped the poorest among us.

80 posted on 09/19/2011 1:26:49 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-117 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson