Parents Block Plans to Vaccinate Nine-year-olds against Sex Virus

news.scotsman.com ^ | 07/01/07 | Brian Brady

[vin-one]

Not saying that your daughter wouldn't be chaste, but when her future husband may have had a fling, before het met her and pass it on.......

[Rb ver. 2.0]

If it's the "conservative values" of the modern republican party then she'll be pregnant before she leaves home.

[Alter Kaker]

Does it REALLY cause 70 percent of cervical cancer, or is this just another way to sell a designer drug?

Not only does HPV cause at least 70% of cervical cancer cases, but there's reason to believe (a number of studies are forthcoming) that it causes several other kinds of cancer as well. This isn't some rare bug that affects some tiny portion of the population -- it's endemic, and if your daughter reaches adulthood, then she will almost certainly become infected through no fault of her own.

[trumandogz]

If you decide not to permit your 9 year old to get immunized against HPV / cervical cancer, you're suggesting not only that you're confident that she will never once have sex outside of marriage, but that her future husband won't either.

AK: My post needed a Sarcasm Tag.

However, you without question the most pragmatic person on FR and almost always correct.

And yes, in refusing to provide their daughter with the vaccine, they are taking a gamble with their daughter's life. It is almost as if they are saying that cervical cancer is due punishment for girls who choose to have sex prior to marriage as well as women who do not marry men who are not virgins.

[Neo-Luddite]

My worry, what are the other attendant risks of this new vaccine--I never hear them mentioned. What are the short term/long term consequences.

I know Merck is making some great money and the bandwagon is rolling over the rights of parents to refuse to weigh the risks and benefits themselves; They must be 'chuchie-charlies' that dare think their daughter might remain chaste. Or, could it be, that their thought process had actual risk/benefit analysis involved that goes against the thinking of the heard because they've done their homework.

[Alter Kaker]

"By age 50, at least 80 percent of women will have acquired genital HPV infection. "

Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

http://www.cdc.gov/STD/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm#common

[concerned about politics]

80% of American women get infected with HPV by the time they're 50 years old.

Apparently they missed their regular pap smear appointments. I'll have to remind my daughter to not to skip those. IF the disease is present, it can be treated easily, and the patient can go on about her business.
The odds of my daughter getting it are slim because it's associated with mutable sex partners. Her and her fiancee are both waiting for marriage, so I don't see a problem with avoiding this shot.
Forcing parents to give their daughters this shot is fascism. Parents should make the decision - not the politicians.

[Alter Kaker]

They are the same ones who encourage their children not to wear seatbelts because they should be good drivers.

LOL!!!! Great analogy.

[Guenevere]

A very sensible post....Thanks!

[balch3]

teach abstincence and you don't have to worry about a "sex virus."

[poobear]

Me thinks your post was meant for someone else. My point was meant for the whole "lets make it mandetory for just girls" is a crock since this medicine could also prevent males from spreading HPV in the first place.

[concerned about politics]

Don't be so hasty to subject everyone else's children to something that might be dangerous to them many years down the road.

Bingo. Sometimes the long term side affects are worse than the disease.
Let the parents decide. Politicians are concerned about the campaign cash. Parents are concerned about the children.

[Neo-Luddite]

Parents should make the decision - not the politicians.


Bingo--this is not like mumps or polio--there is no compelling 'risk to the population at large' issue that can be argued.

[concerned about politics]

80% of American women get infected with HPV by the time they're 50 years old. Although HPV doesn't always cause cervical cancer, virtually 100% of cervical cancer cases are caused by HPV.

Are you suggesting that 80% of American women are "liberal whores?" Maybe you need to get that chip off your shoulder.

Reread my post. My daughter is 17. Not 50.

[Maigrey]

Sorry, honey. She's more likely to get heart disease or breast cancer than cervical cancer.

And it's the parent's choice, and the kids, not the nanny state.

[Alter Kaker]

The odds of my daughter getting it are slim because it's associated with mutable sex partners.

Mutable? It's associated with multiple sex partners only to the extent that the risk of infection increases with increasing sexual frequency, but this is an infection so pervasive that the risk even with a single lifetime sexual partner is not insignificant.

I know that you believe your daughter's fiance is a virgin, and he may well be. It just seems silly to me to potentially risk your daughter's life (and that is, in fact, what you're doing) on the belief that there's no chance that she could ever in her life exposed to the most common virus on the planet. The cost is minimal and it gives you one hell of an insurance policy in the event that a doctor should one day miss something at a pap smear.

[Neo-Luddite]

Analogy is not argument--and it's a poor one at that.

[brittmac]

Exactly.

She may never have sex outside of wedlock, but most men are (asymptomatic) carriers of the virus, which would naturally include most future husbands.

So is it okay to contract HPV once your married? Will the virus be any less virulent/carcinogenic just because you have a ring on your finger?

[concerned about politics]

And yes, in refusing to provide their daughter with the vaccine, they are taking a gamble with their daughter's life.

So how has woman kind survived this long? Shouldn't we all be dead by now?

I don't know anyone who has ever had cervical cancer. Where are all these diseased people?

[Arizona Carolyn]

You mean the crowd who have actually done enough research to understand there is no safe vaccination?