Posted on 02/05/2007 7:13:36 AM PST by Froufrou
CDC hasn't approved it yet??? I asked the Atty. Gen. how the Gov. can do this without a vote? $360 for EACH girl. AND, he ordered Medicaid to pay for girls 19 to 21!
Do you know how many Latinas alone in TX fall between ages 11 and 21??? We'll go broke!
No one of course, but that isn't the issue.
The issues are
(1) Has the link between the virus that causes warts and the virus that causes cervical cancer been established?
I am unaware of any peer reviewed articles published. If you know of any, please share them
(2) Does the vaccine do what they say it does? Cleared by the FDA just means it's (relatively) safe. The CDC is supposed to determine if it's necessary, and has issued no recommendation.
-----
The State of Texas recently went directly against the CDC's recommendation for Acanthosis Nigricans screening, yet the State used the newly-created Texas-Mexico Border Health Coordination Office at the University of Texas-Pan American in order to implement it.
Why do the Governor and the State legislators think they have the medical ability to override (or blindside) the highest acknowledged medical authority in the nation?
"About 30% of cervical cancers will not be prevented by the vaccine, so it will be important for women to continue getting screened for cervical cancer (regular Pap tests)."
This here horse don't even have a saddle on it yet. Too fast out of the gate!
"Were this still appropriate for my daughters (they are married)"
Marriage has nothing whatsoever to do with it. It's recommended for females from 11-26. TX will not pay for it beyond age 21, as it now stands.
I'd be looking for that to change, though.
What do they care, it's not their money.
Univesal healthcare, here we come!
(Yippie!) /S
I won't protest the merits of the vaccine itself. However, the dictatorial manner that Gov. Perry imposed it is another matter. I'm just torn what to call Perry in the future: Chairman or Comrade, or maybe someting more informal like Hugo or Fidel.
The 30% is from cervical cancers not caused by HPV.
"maybe someting more informal like Hugo or Fidel."
ROTFLMAO! Some would argue that illegal aliens [being poor] are disease-ridden and this is one more of our social mandates - not to help them, as they want it to seem, but to prevent them from infecting the rest of us.
perse, the point about foster kids isn't lost on me. But those parents need their puny little stipends just to make ends meet. They won't rock the boat.
This vaccine should be tested thoroughly before it is forcibly given to children in Texas.
If the side affects are not serious it would be wonderful for a small percentage of people who are unlucky in love.
It has been said that nearly 80% of women will be exposed to this virus in their lifetimes. Not exactly a small percentage of women "unlucky in love." If you need me to find the study or the article that references that stat I will.
Then the noble thing is for adult women particularly sexually active women to volunteer for clinical trials of this vaccine.
It stinks that foster care children will be used to test this vaccine.
Of the 4 most common strains of HPV, 2 cause 70% of all cervical cancers, and the other 2 cause 90% of all cases of genital warts.
My school's database is slow during the day, and I'm not really one for biology, but here's a few articles to start you out:
Parkin. Int J Cancer. 2006 Jun 15;118(12):3030-44. The global health burden of infection-associated cancers in the year 2002.
Cancer and the Immortal Strand Hypothesis. John Cairns. Genetics. Bethesda: Nov 2006.Vol.174, Iss. 3; pg. 1069
How HPV may cause cancer by deactivating genes that detect damaged DNA.
Solution structure of the partially folded high-risk human papilloma virus 45 oncoprotein E7. O Ohlenschläger, T Seiboth, H Zengerling, L Briese, et al. Oncogene. Basingstoke: Sep 28, 2006.Vol.25, Iss. 44; pg. 5953
"Direct evidence" of the interaction between the cancer-related HPV protein and the host's cells.
Identification of biomarkers that distinguish human papillomavirus (HPV)-positive versus HPV-negative head and neck cancers in a mouse model Katerina Strati, Henry C Pitot, Paul F Lambert. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Washington: Sep 19, 2006.Vol.103, Iss. 38; pg. 14152
Researchers give mice HPV, mice get cancer.
The Tango and Tangle of Human Papillomavirus and the Human Genome. Robert D. Burk, Rob DeSalle. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Oxford: Aug 2, 2006.Vol.98, Iss. 15; pg. 1026
Abstract: Human papillomavirus (HPV) oncogenic types, especially type 16, are some of the most potent human carcinogens described. The odds ratio of squamous-cell cancer in HPV16-infected women has been estimated to be 435 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 278 to 679) and appears to be high throughout the world. The public health burden of both HPV and cervix neoplasia is profound; cervical cancer is the second most prevalent cancer in the developing world with nearly half a million cases diagnosed per year.
(2) Does the vaccine do what they say it does? Cleared by the FDA just means it's (relatively) safe. The CDC is supposed to determine if it's necessary, and has issued no recommendation.
You propose two questions here. 1: Does it doe what they say it does? And 2: Is it necessary? The answer to the first is, "Yes, for at least a few years." You can see that in the FDA link I provided above and the CDC link below. The answer to the second is a public health question, and depends on what you consider necessary. Many people don't consider seat belts, fluoridated toothpaste, or the Second Amendment necessary -- sometimes the government has to override those opinions.
And if you have access to JAMA, you may enjoy this, since it touches on the CDC and the public health aspects of HPV infection:
CDC Panel Backs Routine HPV Vaccination. Bridget M Kuehn. JAMA. Chicago: Aug 9, 2006.Vol.296, Iss. 6; pg. 640
Abstract: A vaccine that has been shown to prevent cervical cancer, precancerous genital lesions, and genital warts may soon become part of the schedule of vaccinations for preteen girls if leaders of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Department of Health and Human Services follow the recommendation of a CDC scientific advisory panel. In June, the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices voted unanimously to recommend that girls aged 11 to 12 years be routinely vaccinated against the human papilloma virus (HPV).
You may read the minutes of that meeting here.
It is my understanding that it does no good once a woman becomes sexually active. Its one of the reasons cited for administering it so young. Both of my daughters are married.
Is that incorrect?
It does no good once the woman is infected with the virus. It is a vaccine after all, not a cure.
The link Mama Texan gave to the CDC was very good. They stated that in women who had been exposed to one of the four HPVs covered by the vaccine that they were slightly less protected than the virgins. I wouldn't say that makes you wrong, but it's based on exposure. If a woman had only one partner prevaccine, or had the luck of no exposure, then the sexual activity would be irrelevant.
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.