Posted on 02/06/2007 8:45:52 AM PST by Froufrou
Gov. Rick Perry stood firm Monday against a political firestorm ignited by his order that sixth-grade girls be inoculated against a sexually transmitted disease that can cause cervical cancer.
Social conservatives from Austin to Washington joined some state lawmakers in calling for Perry to reverse his executive order making Texas the first state to mandate the human papillomavirus vaccine for girls entering sixth grade in September 2008.
Several legislators expressed outrage that Perry circumvented the legislative process. Several bills had been filed to make the HPV shots mandatory for school enrollment.
"This needs closer examination. How much will it cost the state?" Senate Health and Human Services Committee Chairman Jane Nelson, R-Lewisville, said at a news conference.
"Most importantly, as a mother of four daughters I want to make sure our daughters' health is protected and parental rights are preserved."
Another senator, Glenn Hegar, R-Katy, said he'd file legislation to reverse Perry's order, which he said was not in the best interest of the state.
Parents will be able to opt their 11- and 12-year-old daughters out of the program, as they can for other required vaccines.
As speculation swirled about why Perry risked angering his conservative base, political observers said the governor is showing newfound independence and may be trying to raise his national profile as a potential vice presidential candidate.
The governor's spokesman also indicated that first lady Anita Perry's strong support for the vaccine might have played a role in the decision. A former nurse and the daughter of a doctor, Anita Perry works for an organization dealing with sexual assaults.
"I know they have discussed it, and it's something they both feel very strongly about," the spokesman, Robert Black, said.
In a statement, Perry addressed criticism that the vaccine could send a message that teenage sex is permissible.
"Providing the HPV vaccine doesn't promote sexual promiscuity any more than providing the Hepatitis B vaccine promotes drug use," he said.
"If the medical community developed a vaccine for lung cancer, would the same critics oppose it claiming it would encourage smoking?"
Perry's office said it would cost the state $29 million for its share of inoculating students who are uninsured or on government health programs. Federal funds also will be available for children on Medicaid or the Children's Health Insurance Program.
Federal health authorities last year recommended girls and young women get the vaccine, which prevents infection by four common strains of the HPV virus, which can cause cervical cancer years after infection.
Cervical cancer accounts for 3,700 deaths a year in the United States, including nearly 400 in Texas.
House Ways and Means Chairman Jim Keffer, R-Eastland, said he supports the vaccine but noted that other state legislatures have decided not to make it mandatory.
"What kind of deal was made?" asked Keffer, referring to comments by Cathie Adams, president of Texas Eagle Forum, that Perry's political ties with drug company Merck may have influenced the decision.
Perry's office has denied he was influenced by anything other than health concerns. His ex-chief of staff, Mike Toomey, is a lobbyist for Merck and Perry got $6,000 in contributions from the drug manufacturer's political action committee.
Black said Perry and Toomey never discussed the issue, and noted the Merck campaign contributions were relatively small.
"The governor is very pro-life, and he views this as protecting life," Black said. "The human race has never had an opportunity to prevent cancer. Not to pursue that opportunity, the governor believes that would be morally reprehensible."
Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and House Speaker Tom Craddick both said Perry did not consult them. Craddick said he didn't have a position on the issue. Dewhurst said he would prefer a voluntary vaccination program.
GOP consultant Royal Masset said he thinks Perry wants to be considered as a national leader. Perry talked about international terrorism and immigration reform in his inaugural address.
"Health care is one of the most powerful issues we're going to be dealing with nationally," Masset said.
Meanwhile, a Christian group knocked the Texas governor in a Washington update mailed to supporters Monday.
Tony Perkins with Family Research Council said, "By commandeering this issue, Gov. Perry, who has championed family values, has only succeeded in arousing more mistrust."
Males get genital warts. Why shouldn't they be protected?
This is an STD vaccine, not a cervical cancer vaccine. Or, perhaps most correctly, it is both.
And at that price, it darn well should be.
I wasn't aware. I thought this was an attempt to prevent cancer.
I never get checked for yellow fever when I see my Doctor.
I don't get cvhecked for mumps measels and other diseases I was vaccinated for either.
It follows, that a woman who THINKS she is vaccinated against HPV, will forgo a pap smear as well.
Further, women who are slutty, will forgo more frequent pap exams, thinking they are safe. However, they are more likely than professional hookers to spread disease, because hookers are more likely to use protection.
He is paying back the people at Merck that bankrolled his election. And he did this by executive order to avoid this going through the normal legislative (open debate) process. I do not need any politician, liberal conservative or too stupid to choose (independents) telling me that I have to get my 11 year old little girl vaccinated for a sexually transmitted disease! That is a decision that should be made by parents with advice from their pediatrician.
I am the one with the nephew. My oldest child also had a sever reaction to a vaccine, and that was the last one my children have had, except for tetanus.
Why don't people understand that the state has no business forcing vaccines for an STD?
It's not the vaccine they are worried about, it's the asshat Perry mandating they do it that is making people mad.
He has overstepped and people are tired of it.
And, at $360 per series per female, it's not something that should have been forced on the populace by executive order, bypassing the legislature or a vote.
The points you make are much more compelling than the subjective complaint about what messages it might send to children.
Long term effects have not been adequately measured. (Only a portion of the study group was actually followed 5 years. The rest were like 2 or 3 years if I correctly remember the abstract I read.) Moreover, the study group was comprised of sexually mature females age 16-26, not the pre-teens that this vaccine will be given to.
And while the efficacy of the vaccine is certainly impressive in the group that got the drug (reportedly 100% effective for that 5 yr period), the actual incidence of cervical cancer in those who did not receive the vaccine is little more than one half of one percent off that perfect mark. 53 of approx. 8600 in the placebo group were diagnosed with cancer or pre-cancer during the 5 yr study period. No way in hell is it appropriate to vaccinate everyone for something with such a low incidence rate. Especially making it mandatory.
Oh, but proponents say, that's only small part of it. The actual incidence of HPV is much much higher, and the vaccine prevents HPV. (Although the HPV causes 95% of cervical cancers, only a small percentage of HPV-infected will ever get cervical cancer, hence that one half of one percent incident rate for cancer.)
And there lies the agenda. They are being disingenuous as to what this is about. It's not about cancer. It's about STDs. And that's a wonderful thing, being able to prevent this sexually transmitted disease. But they're marketing it as anti-cancer and won't be honest about it. Because if they were, it would be much harder to justify having the usurp parental authority.
STD prevention. It's a chicken/egg thing. Who got it and who gave it to whom. That's why I say, you want to mandate the vaccine? Give it across the board, that makes sense.
"Zachary is correct, this will stop some women from having a test that is both painful and embarassing for many. If they think they are protected many will forgo pap smears and you are the ludicrous one for thinking otherwise."
Why would it stop them when neither Merck, their gyno, their GP, nor the state of Texas would make the ridiculous claim that they should stop getting pap smears because they are vaccinated against four kinds of HPV?
Maybe after I get a tetanus shot I'm going to assume it's okay to step on rusty nails and never see my doctor again, but that's no one's fault but my own.
I think it was the CDC site on HPV/cervical cancer, said that most of the women that die of cervical cancer have never had regular pap smears or had them in the past 5 years.
If they have regular pap smears, then it is caught early and they can start treatment.
I think the risks of this vaccine are too high, and it should not be mandatory. If a parent wants to give it to their child (or an adult wants to take it), then fine. Just don't make it mandatory.
What's the point of a vaccination against a relatively harmess STD then? The cure for any cancers it MAY, in rare cases cause, already exists. And you have to have it ANYWAYS. If you don't, there are 238 other strains of sexually transmitted HPV you will pass around, and which MAY, isn rare cases, cause cervical cancer IF left untreated.
A lot of people have 'stood up' for Perry because of the 'opt out' option. But I think Perry is just displaying the same kind of nanny-statism conservatives generally detest.
Since neither HPV nor HIV can be passed through 'casual contact' (i.e. by breathing the same air or touching a doorknob), I don't think the government has any right to require the vaccine.
You get a checkup. If that checkup is abnormal, the doctor will attempt to whittle down the suspects and determine the cause of your problems. Although you may be sure the underlying cause of your medical issues is not yellow fever, you still go for a checkup because there are many other things that might make you sick despite the fact that you got that yellow fever vaccine. If I am vaccinated with Gardasil, there are still other problems that can affect my cervix; thusly, I still get a pap test just like you still get a check-up.
There is no evidence that condoms are effective in preventing the transmission of HPV. So whether a woman is a slut or a hooker (can I take a third option?), and insists on condoms or doesn't, she can still get and transmit HPV.
I wonder how many parents know they can opt out and how to do so. After all, even Governor Perry is calling it a mandatory vaccine.
If this is truly 'voluntary', then that's the language that should be used by Governor Perry and every other official.
Hep B can't be transmitted through casual contact but I know at least my state demands that school children have the vaccine.
That's pretty much what I'm saying. Except add "Don't ask me to pay for it" to that.
Women should not treat this as a cure all, and should go for at least yearly pap smears, more if they are sleeping around alot. Prevention is the best cure.
The money that would be spend on this could go into sponsoring breast exam clinics instead. That would save a lot more lives of the 40,000 or more women who die from breast cancer yearly, than thuis money making scam vaccine.
Exactly. It doesn't protect all who take the vaccine, and it's not designed to protect against all forms of HPV.
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.