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.
You keep going back and forth: It cures cancer/who said it cures cancer. Why not do a little research before you post baseless medical opinions, Doc? Or better yet, read your own posts before you flame people who make reasonable, consistent replies to them.
Dozens of other governors are probably being pressured by Merck to sign the same thing - that means your state, my state, everybody else's state. I was a bit surprised when I heard on the radio today that this was coming out of Texas first. I expected California or Minnesota would be first, so this is a bit of a shocker.
I don't equate the two, as you do. But if you're going to prevent all consequences of sex that may or may not occur, by all means, be all-inclusive. Don't be so wishy-washy about it. If you've determined that all little girls are sluts, and it's your job to prevent the natural consequences of their actions, don't do it halfway.
A cure for cancer is quite different from a prevention of it. The only dishonesty is equating the two, which you have done.
Nobody knows the far-reaching affects of these drugs. I think MAKING someone do this is asking for lawsuits down the line if these drugs end up causing serious problems. I hate this!
Please point to one post where I said it cures cancer. I'll wait patiently.
I don't equate the two. What have I said that makes you think that?
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.
"Somehow cancer has now been downgraded to genital warts."
And a vaccine to prevent cancer in the first place is a CURE once you've been diagnosed with it?
That's what you read into my post????
What next?
The bigggest problem I see on the horizon is that women who've had the vaccine will become complacent about their annual paps, and in 10 years or so we're going to see an uptick in women dying from the 15% of HPV this vaccine DOESN'T protect against.
I think it's criminally irresponsible of Merck to market this vaccine without shouting from the rooftops that it isn't a cure-all and women will still be at risk for cervical cancer and still need to get annual paps. But in all the advertising I've seen it's mentioned only in the fine print.
10 to 20 years from now the trial lawyers are going to get rich, once again, as women who've had the vaccine and still gotten cervical cancer sue the pants off Merck.
Never in my born days did I think a Republican Governor would make a "have sex" vaccine mandatory for our 11 year old daughters.
I think Rick Perry's political career is over. McCain or Guiliani better not pick him as a VP or even have him as Secretary of HUD in their cabinet.
Now I wish "Grandma" would have won.
This is pathetic. You don't want a vaccine against cancer. You don't want a vaccine against genital warts.
You don't want a vaccine against anything that you think nasty people get. That's what this all about.
No. Your medical distinctions are severely confused. A pathogen is cured by killing it off as it attacks. Since cancer is a genetic mutation rather than a pathogen, a "cure" for cancer would be the elimination of its incidence. Once cancer has occured though, the medical solution is not to "cure" it but to either remove it if possible or drive it into remission.
223, 228,231 and a bunch of other ill-informed spin that I'm not going to bother cutting & pasting for you. If you can't follow your own train of thought, how do you expect anyone else to?
And you never answered the point about the executive order running roughshod over the normal legislative process, the improprieties of financial and political relationships behind the deal, the valid complaints regarding potential side-affects of the drug, or any of the valid, rational discussion about the real nature of HPV, the financial burden this requirement places on families and taxpayers, or the principled conservative opposition to further government intrusion. All you've done is shout "CANCER!" and then denied it when you're proven wrong.
What's your agenda? Did Rick Perry give you genital warts?
My position remains the same.......I want this vaccine available but not mandated, I also despise the advertising about it. It is a vaccine against a sexually transmitted virus that is known to cause cancer. It is not a cancer vaccine.
Since cancer is a mutation rather than a pathogen, there is technically no such thing as a true vaccine against cancer. There are drugs that kill cancerous cells or assist the body in killing them. There are also drugs that combat other things that can contribute to cancer. They are not true vaccines against cancer though.
You don't want a vaccine against genital warts.
There already is a vaccine against genital warts. I simply don't believe it is necessary for all people to have it since genital warts are sexually transmitted.
It's hopeless. You misrepresent my position, and then you attack your perception of it as faulty.
You make it impossible to have a discussion when you don't respond to what I actually say.
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.