Posted on 02/05/2007 7:13:36 AM PST by Froufrou
Bypassing the Legislature altogether, Republican Gov. Rick Perry issued an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer.
By using an executive order, Perry sidestepped opposition in the Legislature from conservatives and parents-rights groups who fear such a requirement would seem to condone premarital sex and interfere with the way Texans raise their children.
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade -- meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 -- will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.
Perry also directed state health authorities to make the vaccine available free to girls 9 to 18 who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover vaccines. In addition, he ordered that Medicaid offer Gardasil to women ages 19 to 21.
Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion 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 from the one that protects children against polio.
"The HPV vaccine provides us with an incredible opportunity to effectively target and prevent cervical cancer," Perry said.
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the country mandating Gardasil 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.
Perry has ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry's 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.
The governor also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
The order is effective until Perry or a successor changes it, and the Legislature has no authority to repeal it, said Perry spokeswoman Krista Moody. Moody said the Texas Constitution permits the governor to order other members of the executive branch to adopt rules like this one.
Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing affidavits objecting to vaccines on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children.
And by that restriction, it guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.
The Second amendment is an expressed (or written) right which must, by default, comes with the implied (or unwritten) right to self defense.
-----
Some people think Texans shouldn't be vaccinated; the duly-elected government of Texas, operating under its constitution, the legislation of its representatives, and its governor, disagrees.
That's the kicker. So many people have hissy fit over a judicial fiat, but don't blink an eye at an Executive one.
Perry deliberately bypassed the Texas legislature and issued an EDICT, even though there were bills in both the House and the Senate.
-----
It is universally acknowledged that HPV is not the sole cause of cervical cancer, but greatly increases the risk. You seem to be arguing that because it is not the sole cause -- or because not everyone with HPV gets cancer -- then anti-HPV measures are not anti-cancer measures. Is that right?
No, it is not. I'm arguing that having an untried vaccine injected into our children when it has no long-term track record for safety or efficiency. You can consider 22,000 women a case study if you like, but IMHO, a much larger study is needed before we risk damaging an entire generation of women.
-------
They perform a trial with over 20,000 participants, and determine that it's over 98% effective in protecting even the most zealous widget-washer from wumps.
And the grand number from the non-wump protected group? One half of one percent.
-----
Would you then say that Wardasil is not a true wump ward, based on the imperfect (although universally accepted) understanding of widgets, or do you just have issues with the washers?
No, what I have trouble with Is the Widget Washer Patrol that decides when, where and how my widget will be washed whether I wish it washed or not.
Werck and it's wump-buddy Wick Werry better keep their wascally widgit digits off my kids, too.
And good luck! Hope your choice doesn't cost your daughter(s) their lives!
I dont give a damn if he sends me the *(&^*&^%^%&* forms himself, MWT...THE FACT THAT HE SHOVED IT THROUGH WHEN IT WAS STILL BEING DEBATED IN THE CONGRESS.
As for choice, I hope your socialism doesnt CHOKE you when you go to vote again. How GOOD it must make you feel to agree that *I* don't get to decide for myself!!! You arent really the FReeper that you claim to be if you AGREE that I, a parent, need to have the government TELL me what is good for my daughter or not. How SUPERIOR you must have felt in typing that. Is that kind of bullying how YOU get things done in your little world?
If the government keeps a list. It has not been demonstrated that it does. And even if it does, well ... it already has a list of public school students. What is the harm in keeping a bit of demographic data about them?
Duh! Why do you think Im PO'd?!
I suspect the tin foil might be too tight. Take it off and check your forehead for a red line. If you see one, loosen the foil about the crown.
I KNOW this particular vaccine has not gone through enough testing...
Please provide a citation to an authoritative source, or your medical or immunological credentials. I'm interested in how you know this, when it seems the FDA and CDC disagree with you. I've already provided links to FDA and CDC statements that I consider authoritative, I just wonder why you think they are not.
HE ISSUED A STATE MANDATE REQUIRING THAT THIS BE FORCED ON SCHOOL CHILDREN PLAIN AND SIMPLE - WHAT PART OF "REQUIRED" DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?! [She goes on like this for some time.]
I guess I don't understand how everyone misses the part where anyone who doesn't want their child vaccinated for practically any reason can opt out with little to no work at all. Really, getting a driver's license or non-driving state ID is much more difficult than this and presents a much greater threat to personal privacy. No one thinks requiring state-issued ID for driving on public roads is an onerous requirement. (Democrats and illegals, maybe.) But make some sort of requirement for sending your kid to school, and some people are up in arms -- either reacting to the vaccines, or the lists shared with military recruiters, right or left, it's the same thing. It's a sense of entitlement to government facilities and services without playing the government's game. Even when that game is beneficial or, at worst, mostly harmless.
I also dont give a ding dong d**n what all the doctor evidence says -
Earlier, you said it hadn't been tested enough. Now you say that you don't care what "the doctor evidence" says. Exactly what kind of evidence would satisfy you? Most people consider doctors -- whether used as a first professional degree or a terminal degree -- fairly well-informed professionals within their field. What does Alkhin require that those doctors, no matter what they say, cannot provide?
LOL!
"Having said that, if the argument is to be made that the potential public health benefit is worth it, then boys should absolutely be getting this vaccine as well -- since not being able to spread HPV will enhance herd immunity very much."
BINGO! It's fishy not to include males. Way fishy. This is a move by Merck to 'corner the market.'
"You can consider 22,000 women a case study if you like, but IMHO, a much larger study is needed before we risk damaging an entire generation of women."
DOUBLE BINGO!
As long as it's available for those who fear no evil from the government or Merck, what's the problem?
If poor people can manage to pay for piercings and tatoos, they can sit one out for these shots if they want them.
Not to mention that if anyone's child has an adverse affect, tough noogies!
After all, it was 'voluntary'.
YOU don't understand how the fact that Perry BYPASSED a Legislature that was still debating the bill with a state version of an executive order to mandate something that should be parental choice? This confusion that you and others exhibit over Perry's unconstitutional tactic speaks VOLUMES of a lack of concern for the citizens of the state.
I *MIGHT* have been willing to get the vaccine for her if it had gone through NORMAL channels...but instead, Perry gets to invoke Lanny Davis "stroke of the pen, law of the land, pretty [sic] cool!" - IS THIS WHAT YOU THINK IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO?
WHY ISNT THIS CONCERN BEING EXHIBITED FOR ALL THE ILLEGAL ALIENS THAT ARE BRINGING TUBERCULOSIS AND OTHER ILLNESSES INTO THE STATE? WHY DOESNT HE HAVE VACCINATION STATIONS AT THE BORDER?
Smegging hell...Im not intimidated by the soft condescension of medical advocates. PERRY F'ING BLEW IT.
You guys can stand around and commisserate over why people are so pissed, but until you get it through your drug-centered brains that PERRY DID THE WRONG THING, you have no place for debate with me.
I used to consider them fairly well informed - UNTIL PERRY SHOVED IT THROUGH WITH AN EXECUTIVE MANDATE FOR THE STATE. Now the medical field is DISCREDITED because they use SOCIALIST TACTICS.
As I said, *I* homeschool, so I dont have to deal with the hellholes that are Texas public schools now. And if there is any question now of whether or not I shoudl put her back in, I can now not only say "no!" BUT HELL NO.
Go ahead. Medical people can shake their heads and wonder why. PERRY BLEW IT.
No, but I remember a fat stupid engineer who I fired (er, excuse me, caused to leave) who looks a lot like you.
Which really reeks, but in no way justifies vaccinating girls from whole, loving homes that have never been 'used' in their life.
"You and Perry have no right to tell me and mine to take medication that is not for a communicable disease."
Well, you are a man, so I think you're OK. Did you miss that part at Fannin?
But again, no one is mandating anything. All you have to do is check "opt out" on a box that the school nurse has.
I understand how that can be hard for someone like you.
MeanWestTexan isnt a Real FReeper since he/she/it fails to understand the basic implications of Perry's actions. Guess he/she/it is one of those trolls we shouldn't feed, eh?
What are the basic implications?
Why should every taxpayer have to pay for every girl whose family wants and who can't afford the vaccine? Why should girls 'n the system' be forced to take it just because they're in the system? You don't see how that's wrong? They don't get to opt out.
Everything ELSE I want, I pay for it. I can do the same with the vaccine. Drinking is legal but I don't want it forced on me, same with smoking and fatty foods.
Yeah, they do get to "opt out." If the kid's parents don't want the kid to get the vaccine, then the kid doesn't have to get it.
AGREED!!!
You might want to pose that question to durasell as well...they cant figure out this basic implication.
Check again.
You cannot get a form from a school nurse. You have to request an official form from the state and specify several things (which may or may not be returned to you from the State) which then has to be filled out AND notarized before being given to the school.
This 'conscientious objector' form is good only for 2 years, and if the school 'looses' it, it is up to the parent to replace it.....and if you think the school will notify you that it has been 'lost', your kidding yourself.
You missed what we've been saying about kids 'in the system.' Foster homes. They don't get to say no. They're Merck's new sample group. The state and the taxpayers pay for their shots.
The answer to the question is this:
A)If the person can't afford it and comes down with cancer, then there's a good chance taxpayers will end up paying for the very expensive cancer treatment, anyway.
B)By eliminating the virus in a significant portion of the population, you slow the spread, so fewer people are likely to come down with this particular type of cancer --
This is basic public health policy. If you believe there should be no such thing as "public health policy," then that's a different debate.
Look at the trend some restaurants have taken toward 'no trans fats.' There are worse things they can do in the name of removing trans fats, but what the hey? The sheeple will think something 'good' is being done 'just for them!'
Marketing is designed to make everything seem positive, regardless. If it's so great, let's have boys take it, too. They don't need to get genital warts any more than girls.
22,000 samples is not enough.
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.