Posted on 02/02/2007 1:28:44 PM PST by YCTHouston
AUSTIN — Gov. Rick Perry ordered today that schoolgirls in Texas must be vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, making Texas the first state to require the shots.
The girls will have to get Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV, that are responsible for most cases of cervical cancer.
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass laws in state legislatures across the country mandating it Gardasil vaccine for girls as young as 11 or 12. It doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.
Details of the order were not immediately available, but the governor's office confirmed to The Associated Press that he was signing the order and he would comment Friday afternoon.
Perry has several ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, his former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.
Toomey was expected to be able to woo conservative legislators concerned about the requirement stepping on parent's rights and about signaling tacit approval of sexual activity to young girls. Delisi, as head of the House public health committee, which likely would have considered legislation filed by a Democratic member, also would have helped ease conservative opposition.
Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
It wasn't immediately clear how long the order would last and whether the legislation was still necessary. However it could have been difficult to muster support from lawmakers who champion abstinence education and parents' rights.
Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion rights and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base.
But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different than the one that protects children against polio.
"If there are diseases in our society that are going to cost us large amounts of money, it just makes good economic sense, not to mention the health and well being of these individuals to have those vaccines available," he said.
Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit stating that he or she objected to the vaccine for religious or philosophical reasons.
Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say mandates take away parents' rights to be the primary medical decision maker for their children.
The federal government approved Gardasil in June, and a government advisory panel has recommended that all girls get the shots at 11 and 12, before they are likely to be sexually active.
The New Jersey-based drug company could generate billions in sales if Gardasil — at $360 for the three-shot regimen — were made mandatory across the country. Most insurance companies now cover the vaccine, which has been shown to have no serious side effects.
Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave.
A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government.
"I bet if you took a poll of FR though you'd find that 99% of us wouldn't."
I bet that 99% of freepers would want protection from homosexual rapists and forcible injections from tainted needles;-)
There also is a public interest in eradicating the disease.
If you don't think a vaccination against getting cancer is a good thing, then forcing you to opt out, no matter how little effort that takes, is a bad thing.
If you think the program will prevent cancer, it's hard to understand why opting out is desirable, or why the program is not good. If you want to opt out and be unprotected against cancer, that's an option.
I don't see how having to say, "NO, I don't want my daughter to be protected against cancer" is that much of an imposition on parents who feel that way.
Nobody is forcing you to do anything.
But I get the feeling you think they should...? That's what's so disturbing about this thread.
For the record, I don't know what I'll do regarding my three girls and this vaccine; they're young enough that I have some years to decide.
I thought that's what our guns were for.....
DG, I think most of us agree that cancer is a bad thing - this being FR, I'm sure some wll have to disagree. But there are a whole lot of causes and potential causes of a whole lot of illnesses. How much does the government have to do to protect you from yourself?
The state does some stupid things, but vaccinating against cancer doesn't rank in the top 10 of stupid things. Probably not in the top 1000.
"NJ mandates that every child attending school be given the Hepatitus vaccine (not sure which one)
A parent refused to vaccinate his child and not only was the child banned from the classroom but the school system moved to remove the child from the parents home.
This was a NJ freeper and goes back a few years ago. I do not know how this was resolved."
Our daughter refuses this vaccination, because it insults her chastity. Yes, she knows that there is a small chance that she could get it if there was a blood exposure. We sent the school a letter stating our position, they object, we ignore them. So far, no problem.
A summer camp required a letter from our priest to exempt her. Now my daughter doesn't believe that her religion forbids her to get this vaccine, but she does believe that her religion forbids her to act in a way that would make this vaccine necessary. I'd call that a philosophical objection, which isn't allowable, but I'm not going to insist on fine distinctions here.
Mrs VS
Here, the government is offering your daughter a vaccine against cancer. How often do you get the opportunity to turn down a government program?
I'm not sure why anyone would want to when it involves CANCER, but you certainly can decline.
No one yet has come on this thread to explain why cervical cancer is a good thing. I'll wait awhile longer.
The assumption that our daughters are going to be sexually active before marriage is offensive.
It's not a vaccination against getting cancer though. It's a vaccination against the sexually transmitted virus that causes genital warts. Some strains of that virus can increase the likelihood of cervical cancer, though even among people who have the virus only a small percentage ever develop into cancer. Otherwise 30%-50% of all women would develop cervical cancer since that is the HPV infection rate that you and others keep claiming. In reality it affects a fraction of a single percent of the population (about 5,000 people in the U.S. anually).
By calling this drug an anti-cancer vaccine you are giving it an improper medical description and a deceptive label. The purpose of doing so is clearly political because "anti-cancer vaccine" has a better ring to it than "genital wart vaccine" even though that's what it is. Vaccines are weakened, dead, or altered strains of pathogenic microorganisms that stimulate the body's immunity to those organisms. They prevent diseases you can "catch" externally from other persons. Cancer is not "caught" externally - it is a genetic mutation of the body's own cells.
If you are going to keep arguing for Perry's position on this particular vaccine I will respect your right to do so even though I disagree with it. You're entitled to take that opinion. You are not entitled to misapply language by calling this an "anti-cancer" vaccine though, nor are you entitled to suggest that people who oppose this STD vaccine are opposed to curing cancer.
Big red, that is rough what you are going through. I pray for your healing and that you will be with your family for many years to come.
My daughter doesn't want to get this vaccine because it implies she will be unchaste. I tell her a perfectly chaste woman can be infected by her husband if he has one prior contact.
I will share your story with her. Some good will come out of your suffering. That is not much compensation but that's why you told your story - thank you.
I still object to the government forcing a vaccine for a disease that is not casually transmissible, but I think it is wise for parents to have their daughters vaccinated. You don't have to explain the moral aspect to an 11 y.o., you just have to tell her it will protect her later on. It does still protect when given to older girls and young women but the immune reaction is stronger at young ages.
Mrs VS
Wrong. It's offering a vaccine against genital warts. Genital warts, in rare cases, can also contribute to cervical cancer. The vaccine itself does NOT cure cancer though. It only prevents genital warts, and in doing so reduces the risk of cancer.
The language you use to describe things is important. If you want all girls vaccinated against genital warts say so. If you want to reduce the risk of cancer by vaccinating girls against genital warts you can say that too, even though I'll disagree about its necessity. But don't misportray the genital wart vaccine as a cure for cancer.
I think we can count on something changing. At some point, you will no longer be allowed to opt out. Hopefully your kids will be out of school by then.
"Here, the government is offering "
Lost me right there buddy.
Thank you for calling it what it is. This "anti-cancer" nonsense is pathetic. Those who even use such a term show their ignorance of scientific fact, as if cancer can be "caught" from someone. I think FR should call this by the correct label you have listed...ANTI GENITAL WART VACCINE. Somehow, I don't think Gov. Perry will find that as politically effective.
It's true, but not so weird when you follow the money trail.
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.