AGREED!!!
You might want to pose that question to durasell as well...they cant figure out this basic implication.
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.