Replies

(1) The vaccine only protects against some strains of HPV that cause cancer, not all of them.

That's true, but beside the point. Do you drive without a seatbelt because SOME kinds of accidents will be fatal anyway? I sure don't. Strong protection against SOME cancer is still a big win in my book.

(2) It lasts only five years.

Does that make the vaccine worthless? Is five years of protection worthless?

(3) You only get the virus from intimate contact. You can't get it from casual contact.

And, of course, we all know that children who are raised in good homes and taught abstinence will NEVER have intimate contact. Just like we know that our kids are taught to drive safely, so there's no point in telling them to wear their seat belts.

Let me put it this way: Do you feel that cervical cancer is an appropriate punishment for a daughter who messes up and goes too far? Better to leave her unprotected so she gets what she deserves?

Let me put it this way: Do you feel that cervical cancer is an appropriate punishment for a daughter who messes up and goes too far? Better to leave her unprotected so she gets what she deserves?

I think you are pushing the envelope a bit much here.

The majority of those of us who are not having our daughters vaccinated are making the decision based upon research.

I think the vaccine is a wonderful idea and could prove to be a great medical break through. However, I am not satisfied with the research done on girls that are still children in all sense of the word and that is where I draw the line in regard to the mandates.

In a few years, when she has actually reached adolescence, and there has been more study done, then we will discuss it. However, at the age of 11 I see absolutely no reason to subject her to it at this time, state mandate be damned.

Let me put it this way: Do you feel that cervical cancer is an appropriate punishment for a daughter who messes up and goes too far?

Wow! This sounds EXACTLY like Zero's rationalization for murdering a baby every 24 seconds.

Do you feel that cervical cancer is an appropriate punishment for a daughter who messes up and goes too far? Better to leave her unprotected so she gets what she deserves?

Cervical cancer is not caused solely by HPV.

Cervical cancer has EXCELLENT outcomes with early detection. It is one of the most treatable cancers. Of the 4000 women who die from it each year, over 50% of them have NEVER had a Pap smear. Of the remaining percent, there's no data... so we don't know if it's been 2 years, 4 years, 20 years since their last test. The mortality from this disease gets lower and lower each year.

Fully 85% of women contract HPV asymptomatically and clear it from their bodies with no intervention.

Is it a wise thing to vaccinate millions of girls with a vaccine that is poorly tested, has serious side effects, is not tested for carcinogenic, mutagenic, or reproductive effects, has short-lived and somewhat dubious efficacy, for a VERY remote chance of a very treatable cancer? Are you aware that this vax CAUSES cancer in some women who receive it if they already are carrying HPV?

The seatbelt analogy is poor. Does a seatbelt inject you with toxins, adjuvants, and animal DNA? Does putting on a seatbelt cause seizures, fainting, birth defects, and cancer?

Well said.

But apparently the islamists-by-a-different-name here want their children to die for misbehavior of themselves or a future spouse.

You know, because they deserve it.