You might as well declare that treatment of syphilis or gonorrhea with antibiotics is wrong because it will give a false sense of security and not everyone will be cured. Or how about the eyedrops that every newborn gets to prevent chlamydia trachomatis and blindness?
I said “repeat paps and treatments.” Not “screening paps.” Even if we continue every year paps, we should see a dramatic decrease in the “come back in 2-6 month” paps. The big savings and health benefits will be found in reduced conizations, freezings, and biopsies that are needed, since these are caused by the aggressive strains (16 and 18) which can cause their pre-cancerous and in situ changes in one or two years.
The implication that the vaccine will impart false security is just as hypothetical as the supposition that the vaccine won’t have an effect because “not everyone will be immune.”
Totally ignore the evidence that we might cut lung cancer in smokers as well as non-smokers, that we have strong evidence that we will cut anal and esophogeal cancers and cauliflower” genital and anal warts that interfere with fertility and can only be treated by painful, repetitive, and often futile therapies:
Even if the vaccine fails to impart immunity in twice as many patients as flu shots, 90% of those who receive it will be immune.
Remember that the girls at most risk of cancerous changes are the ones who catch the disease before the cervical tissue changes around 17 or so.
Estimates are that 99.7% of girls and women who are immune in the US will not have HPV changes on their pap smears. There is strong evidence that the vaccine provides cross-immunity for other strains and in our 8-10 year records, the other strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer haven’t increased.
How many young women do we need who will not repeatedly miscarry because the vaccine prevented them from weakened cervices? How many cervical deaths prevented?
We may never know. However, we should be able to measure the savings from repeat paps, colposcopies, conizations and genital wart treatments within 2 to 5 years.
Where do you get that I said that medical treatment for disease was wrong? That's quite a leap from a statement that the vaccine will lull people into a false sense of security.
That's already happening judging from comments made by politicians etc.; it's not just an implication. One politician who is eager to force this on others was bragging that now she doesn't have to worry about her daughter getting cervical cancer now that she got her vaccine.
Pol has plan to nix cervical cancer
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1782347/posts
"This is a revolutionary opportunity to eradicate a disease that kills many, many women. As a mom, I'm grateful my daughter will not have to fear having cervical cancer," said Paulin, whose 18-year-old daughter just received her first shot.
So, as a doctor, you've never encountered the mindset that now that there's treatment for something, people don't feel obligated to be more conscientious about preventing it or taking better care of themselves?
In searching for that thread, I did a keyword search for *hpv* and was appalled at the number of threads detailing the deaths and side-effects connected with this vaccine. There's so much outrage at the number of kids who contracted polio from the vaccine when it was something like one in a million and here we have reports of deaths and other serious side effects with this new vaccine and those opposed to the risk girls who get the vaccine are faced with are faced with so much derision.
This vaccine is supposed to prevent cancer deaths. If people are dying from this, that's defeating the whole purpose of the vaccine; that is to prevent deaths.