Posted on 08/26/2009 5:11:05 AM PDT by Kaslin
I sat at a picnic table listening to various mothers discussing their hectic schedules trying to keep up with teenage daughters, all on the same sports team. When one mother told of squeezing in an appointment that morning to get her daughter the HPV shot that her doctor recommended, the conversation turned to the necessity to "protect" their girls in such troubling times. I stayed quiet, hoping to learn the values guiding these parents' decisions. Predictably, they had not thought through the issues, nor did they know the facts.
Those mothers were merely following doctors' recommendations and that of all the experts. Gardasil, the HPV vaccine, was approved in 2006 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for females as young as nine and up to age 26. It has been marketed as a protection against four types of the human papillomavirus (HPV). Merck, the company that makes Gardasil, claims that the drug will protect against two types of HPV that cause 70 percent of cervical cancers and two types that cause 90 percent of genital warts. Every federal health authority recommends the shots and, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), about a quarter of the nation's 13-17 year olds have received the immunizations. The vaccine is on the CDC's vaccine schedule for 11- and 12-year-old girls, and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends it.
Even so, some physicians remain wary of the trend to give young children a new, largely untried drug. A study in a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research revealed that about half of the doctors in a survey of over a thousand physicians in Texas did not routinely recommend Gardasil for their pre-teen patients.
What those Texas doctors suspected, we now know for sure - that serious concerns are legitimate regarding the use of Gardasil. The highly-promoted, so-called breakthrough vaccine that was recommended for all girls and given to numerous children and teens to prevent possible future cases of cervical cancer, is related to "adverse events" experienced by thousands of girls after taking the vaccine.
In a just-released article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, federal researchers report that after analyzing 12,424 "adverse events" [out of the 13,758 reports of problems as of May 1] voluntarily reported by girls vaccinated with Gardasil that two problems are common. One - fainting - is not inherently serious, but can be if the girl falls and hits her head. The other side effect - "dangerous blood clots" - is quite troubling. Most of the problems with Gardasil (93 percent) are minor: headache, nausea, and fever. But a disturbing seven percent included hospitalization, permanent disability, life-threatening illness, or death.
"Adverse events" is a terribly clinical sounding description of such tragic outcomes. Perhaps more people should read the personal account of Jenny, a University of California, Berkeley professor's daughter who lost her life after getting the shot. (See Jenny's blog here)
Few parents would want their child to be among the 39 deaths to girls who had just taken the Gardasil shot. Nor would most parents want their child to take the risk of hospitalization, disability, or a life-threatening illness. Accurate information has not been forthcoming, including the fact that many additional reported cases of "adverse effects" had too few details. Thus, those cases were excluded from the study.
Even with the new information, numerous questions remain about the safety as well as the efficacy of the drug. Further, there are questions about the marketing of the drug. In fact, cervical cancer is relatively uncommon in the United States. The American Cancer Society reports under 4,000 deaths per year compared to the 250,000 deaths in other areas of the world, primarily in poor countries.
Plus, there are questions about Merck's grants to professional medical associations who promoted the vaccine's use without fully explaining the risks involved with taking the drug. Some doctors ask if the big push to sell Gardasil is Merck's method of making up the lost sales after their popular anti-pain medication Vioxx was banned. These facts raise questions about the appropriateness of recommending such a high-risk drug for widespread use among American children and teenagers.
In the wake of all the side effects, Merck has added warnings to the label on the drug. The warnings on all the labels state that some children receiving Gardasil have subsequent problems, such as autoimmune diseases, musculoskeletal disorders, paralysis, and seizures. Further, some doctors worry that not enough young girls were included in the clinical trials of the drug; they believe that there is really no way to know how pre-teen and teenage girls will react to such a high-powered vaccine. Merck acknowledges that the drug is effective for only five years, so giving the drug to 11 to 12 year olds hardly seems warranted.
Critics are especially concerned about the risk-benefit ratio of taking the HPV vaccine. Gardasil is very costly and most physicians recommend that women continue to get Pap smears, even if they have taken Gardasil. The known benefit of the regular Pap smear screening in preventing most cases of cervical cancer makes the benefit of the HPV risk uncertain.
In fact, Those mothers around that picnic table and the thousands of other parents concerned about the well-being of their daughters need to have all the facts and know the risks involved before subjecting their little girls to this new vaccine. States need to have these facts before discussing the possibility of mandating the vaccines for all pre-teen and teenage girls.
prevents SOME kinds of cancer. sorry your sensibilities are offended by reality, it says so right in the commercials for it, it’s not a failsafe.
And does absolutely NOTHING to prevent a whole host of deadly STDs that many young women will put themselves at risk for when the assume that this “vaccine” is protecting them.
i have zero problem with those who want to vaccinate their children, but i will not sit still to be talked down to by yahoos who think they know better, when my husband and i, both educated and intelligent people, have researched this and reached our own conclusions. my nearly 21 yo daughter has made her own decision not to have the vaccine.
I agree completely.
Unfortunately, there are a great many young women who definitely NEED this vaccine. However, there are also quite a few young women who have NO REASON to get this vaccine (if, God forbid, they are raped the emergency room can take precautions for HPV). Unlike polio, chicken pox, mumps, measles and other viruses for which children are normally vaccinate, HPV does not spread through normal contact. It is a sexually tranmitted virus which women can CHOOSE NOT TO GET.
So, when xsteen turns 21 does she get to be xsadult?
bump!
Comparing Polio with HPV is a bit of a stretch of examples.
Why not compare it to small pox while you are at it.
This vaccine, is not 100% effective, does not stop “cervical cancer”. In fact not one study ever done on it proves it can stop cervical cancer.
What it can do, when it works, is prevent certain types of HPV infections, when it works.
The devil is always in the details.
Yes certain HPV infections if they infect the vagina etc can cause Cancer later in life. However, these are not the only causes of cervical cancer.
There are about 11,000 cases of cervical cancer diagnosed in the US per year. The 5 year survival rate of cervical cancer is 71%. If detected in the earliest stages, its 5 year survival rate is 92%. With both of these rates increasing annually.
Cervical cancer is also something that generally develops later in life, rarely seen in women under 20 years old and generally are mid life when it develops.
So, knowing your child could be permanently disabled or drop dead from a side effect for vaccine a disease that even if she contracts it, likely will not happen until she’s about 40, and she’ll likely survive by 70-90% or more depending on when its detected, is it worth the risk??
I hope I never have to bury a child, but if I do, I hope I’m hoping they are in their 40s, rather than in their teens.
Honest risk/reward on this vaccine doesn’t equate to a “no brainer” when its properly analyzed.
Let women make up their own minds on this, but don’t think screwing with a 9 year olds autoimmune system, like this vaccine does, doesn’t come with some very searious and real long term risks. Not all reactions will be known for years, there are long term risks especially when given to young girls, that won’t be known for years.
she can go by whatever she likes in her real life, but on FR she will be xsteen in perpetuity! ; )
That seems a little mean! :-)
she looks young for her age anyway ; )
This has been my concern all along. Why the rush to vaccinate millions of girls (many of whom ARE NOT AT RISK) against a virus (which IS TREATABLE) that sometimes causes a TREATABLE form of cancer?
NOBODY can say what the effects of Gardasil will be on these girls in 10 or 15 years.
Thanks for posting this, Kaslin. People really need to take a very close look at the risks versus the potential benefits of this new vaccine.
Ping
I agree with the above (post #1). An attempt at another shortcut for folks. It is much harder job for parents to teach and guide their children in chastity. Boys and girls. As well as it is a tough job to supervise them, knowing where and whom they are associating with. I reckon many buy into this and think a shot is the prudent thing to do and well “nowadays all teenagers experiment and have sex” so they surrender half way through the child’s life. In the meantime my husband & I will do many things to continue to counsel and raise our children to care for themselves and others with the utmost respect.
Seven percent permanently harmed is still pretty high for the skank vaccine. It's disgusting they are pushing this on young girls, too young and misinformed to understand the dangers. They are going to have to track these girls for weird reproductive, fertility, and gynecological problems, as well as automimmune diseases.
Population Control
Exactly! Thank you for articulating this so well.
Tetanus Vaccines, Spontaneous Abortions, and Population Control
(1) The vaccine only protects against some strains of HPV that cause cancer, not all of them.
(2) It lasts only five years.
(3) You only get the virus from intimate contact. You can't get it from casual contact.
No, sorry, it's not a "NO BRAINER," not even close. Especially not for 11 yo girls.
Cervical cancer is very treatable IF it is caught early. But if it's not caught early, it can be deadly.
Sounds like a pretty damn smart thing to do. But like I said...I'm waiting to make sure the vaccine is safe when my daughters reach puberty.
Getting the shot doesn’t say anything about their virtue.
My niece got married a little over a year ago, 2 months after she got married she found woman walking out of her home. The woman had been sleeping with her husband even while my niece was engaged.
My niece had to get all kinds of tests to see if she had a STD.
I have 12 year old twin girls. I think they are a bit young to get the vaccine. One of them has a brain injury and seizures and some other medical issues. I was talking to her cardiologist about vaccines and even she said to wait a few years on this one. (My gynecologist was encouraging me to get my daugnters vaccinated, but she doesn’t know their medical history.)
I know my daughters aren’t having sex at this time. They barely even talk to boys. I would like to wait until they are 18 so they can make an informed decision about this vaccine on their own.
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.