Posted on 02/02/2007 1:28:44 PM PST by YCTHouston
On the other side, measles and rubella can be fatal for healthy children. The statistics on the CDC site is that mortality for measles is one out of 1000. For rubella, while it isn't usually fatal for children, children spread it to pregnant women. The virus then causes heart defects, deafness and mental retardation in their babies.
Protecting children from all diseases is thought to promote the development of allergies - the "hygiene hypothesis." No doctor I know of or have heard of recommends exposing children to measles, mumps or rubella to avoid this, however. Older siblings, pets, and colds are a better choice.
For the last time, the government isn't forcing anyone to take it. Any parent can opt out. And you accuse me of constructing a strawman?
Sorry, but I don't believe you, newbie.
There once was a day when McCain was sane. Whatever hit McCain has now bonked Perry in the noggin. Unbelievable.
No it isn't, because HPV is much more widespread in the general population than any of those diseases, and since it is generally asymptomatic, the vast majority of people affected don't know it.
The answer is to teach children basic morality and thus significantly reduce their risk of ever coming into contact with one of these horrible diseases.
What does "basic morality" mean with a virus this widespread? Does basic morality involve only marrying a virgin?
For the last time, that simply isn't an accurate portrayal of the situation. The "opt out" procedure isn't the same as simply saying no. It burdens parents with the requirement of applying by affadavit to be listed as a "conscientious objector" pending government approval.
And even if you don't consider that process excessive, there is also a long track record in this country of busybody liberal bureacrats at Child Services using "conscientious objector" applications as evidence to snatch kids into foster care. There are also left wing busybody legislators who file bills every year trying to change the "opt out" form from a one time thing to an annual process that must be completed over and over and over again.
Not quite true. Well over 90% of cervical cancer cases are caused by one of a number of HPV strains. Gardasil protects against the two strains most commonly associated with cervical cancer (along with two other strains associated with genital warts), and it's those two common strains that account for about 70% of cervical cancer cases. That means 20%+ of remaining cases are caused by a variety of rarer HPV strains that Gardasil doesn't target.
I've seen claims on this thread alone ranging from 30-80% exposure. What I haven't seen is hard scientific evidence of those claims in the form of a representative statistical sample out of the population.
and since it is generally asymptomatic
Genital warts - one of the most common types of HPV - is anything but asymptomatic.
What does "basic morality" mean with a virus this widespread?
I'm still waiting for the proof that it's as widespread as many people are claiming. Given how rare cervical cancer is (less than 10,000 cases in the entire U.S. last year), either HPV's incidence or its tendency to induce cervical cancer is being SEVERELY overstated.
And that'll simply fall under the child abuse label, or negligence (in providing for the child's health, according to some), or endangering the welfare of a child. There's lots of ways social services can get you. If someone doesn't believe it, they can talk to or read up on all the homeschool pioneers who had their kids put in foster care with those charges, for simply homeschooling their children. Social services has done it for less.
Have you ever tried taking a child to the doctor or enrolling them in school and trying to opt out of a vaccination?
I agree. The numbers (and facts) don't add up. IMHO, it's not so much about health, although I do believe a lot of good people may think so.
As I stated in an earlier post, the incidence of cervical cancer is the highest in third world countries, basically because women in third world countries do not receive regular pap smears and HPV testing. So, why not market and make vaccinations mandatory for this wonder vaccine in third world countries where the incidence of cervical cancer is so much higher than the US?
$$$$$
Perhaps Merck is scrambling in anticipation of those hefty Vioxx verdicts.
Go back to the first post by CP that I answered and you'll find them.
Thanks. I took the 70% figure from a fact sheet aimed at the general public. Shame on me - I didn't dig for the details!
Geesh, how would a girl that is a virgin and chooses to remain one until marriage inspect her finance for genital warts?
In any event, genital warts can be treated and they go away. The virus doesn't but the warts do.
Where would we ever be without the ever loving watchful eye and caring hand of our friendly state officials? They know so much more than we. They are so much smarter, wiser, caring,,, they only eat perfect foods, and drink the finest water. Their clothes are knit with the finest gold by little angels sent from God. When they pass by in their special SUV's, birds sing and butterflies flutter. The clouds part and the sun rays shine down upon their faces as they speak their commands! I can barely look upon them as they speak,, I know how unworthy I am,, I feel so ashamed in my simple minded ways!
Tell me about it.
My kids all had chicken pox. When it came time to enroll them in high school, they would have been required to have the vaccine anyway if I couldn't have provided medical proof that they had it; that meant a doctor's eyewitness diagnosis. Believe it of not, chicken pox scars don't count.
ROTFLMBO!!!!
Meanwhile the rest of us great unwashed masses can only gaze on in rapt wonder and awe.
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.