Posted on 05/05/2011 12:43:42 PM PDT by mlizzy
NEW YORK, May 5 (C-FAM) The UN is about to ask governments to fund the vaccination of every girl in the world against the sexually transmitted disease HPV, human papillomavirus. The controversial campaign could cost as much as $300 per person, totaling billions.
Dignitaries who launched the campaign at the UN in mid-April included a prominent African first lady, leaders from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the American Cancer Society, and the contraceptives manufacturer PATH.
UNFPA and PATH want donor nations to buy the vaccine at $14 per shot. Three shots are required over a period of six months, totaling $42, and the treatment is only good for five years. Seven treatments would be required to cover each woman’s reproductive lifetime.
Advocates warned the assembly that the idea would be contentious. Casting the campaign as an effort to eradicate cervical cancer rather than a massive vaccination program against a sexually transmitted disease will help steer clear of political resistance, they said.
One advocate advised the dignitaries that when they are asked why children should be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted disease, the UN should use the precedent of infant vaccinations against Hepatitis B.
When American local governments tried to mandate inoculation of school girls against HPV several years ago, popular outcry quashed the initiatives.
While none of the UN speakers addressed the issue, cervical cancer is caused by HPV infection, which is spread through sexual contact. The panel lamented a dramatic increase in the cancer in the developing world, but were less clear on the reasons for its rise, sidestepping issues of sexual behavior and focusing instead on gaining political will to fund the vaccination program.
Of the half million new cases of cervical cancer each year, more than half of the patients die, usually because they did not know they had the disease until it had reached advanced stages.
UNFPA deputy executive director Purnima Mane said UNFPA would spearhead the campaign. If approved by UN member states, UNFPA stands to receive a significant boost in funding, given the fact that there are billions of women and girls who would require the $42 treatment every five years.
The funding would reverse a decline in donations for international population programs, which have fallen from a high in 2008 due to the global economic downturn and plummeting global fertility rates. The Obama administration had to marginally cut UNFPA funding for 2011 during budget battles with U.S. lawmakers, but promised to increase it to $50 million in 2012. PATH likewise received $50 million, about a fifth of its funding, from the U.S. government in 2009.
Critics are concerned that the vaccination scheme will subsume the fight against cancer into the already well-funded reproductive rights agenda at the UN. They warn that because UNFPA aggressively promotes “sexual rights” for minors, the effort will not address sexual behavior or parental rights regarding medical decisions and could lead to an increase of the disease rather than its cure.
UN member states will deliberate the issue September 19th and 20th at the UN High Level Meeting on Non-communicable Diseases.
why do you hate women and chillrun?
Hey UN, get the f’n money from China. They are holding 2.3 trillion of ours.
About 10% of that money would actually get spent on vaccine.
So they got tired of other nonsense issues such as “climate change” funding and now they turn to another cash cow...
I am sure Big Pharma was expecting some pay back for supporting the Health Care Reform Act.
Propose vaccinating boys, since women generally aren’t contracting HPV from one another. Any chance that men could be affected will stop the effort cold.
Exactly. Roughly the same percentage of the stimulus money that got spent on stimulus rather than political favoritism.
You beat me to it!!!!
Propose vaccinating boys, since women generally aren’t contracting HPV from one another. Any chance that men could be affected will stop the effort cold.Very interesting, and I'm sure you're right.
“Sell it as a way to eradicate anal and oral cancers among men who will boink *anything* including the water buffalo ...” and (just as a side benefit) prevent some infections among women.
Thus, evenually, we'll wind up back exactly where we are today. Instead of strains W, X, Y, and Z infecting a large percentage of the populace, Strains Y and Z just will expand to cover the new gap.
"But, but, but...if it can help, 'just a little', isn't it worthwhile?" In this case, I'd say "what's the difference?". The end result will be the same, people will have wasted an enormous amount of effort to no gain, and, I'd imagine that human behavior being what it is, the 'non resistant' strains will spread like wildfire, since people think that they're "covered".
Wonder what the law of unintended consequences will bring to this particular party? What if strains W and X didn't cause cancer, but Y and Z did?
I agree with you (I think), this is a bad idea all-around.
Big pharma is surgically embedded in Washington DC politics. Extracting it and the financial roots it's wrapped around politicians is, IMHO, one of the primary "active" players in America's debt fiasco.
Toyota 52 deaths, Gardasil 49. Toyota recalled
Gardasil causes 400 percent more deaths than other common vaccine
CDC to STD vaccine maker: 'Back off'
Death toll linked to Gardasil vaccine rises
Gardasil deaths (NZ list with photos)
Sen. Harry Reid key player in Big Pharma's control over Washington
Last summer, Billy Tauzin, then President of the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), visited the White House to work out a deal on the health care bill. Mind you, PhRMA is the largest single-industry lobbying group in the nation. According to reports, he negotiated with government officials to make sure all existing drug industry favors would remain intact in any proposed health care legislation.
But this wasn't all. Tauzin was able to convince Democrat politicians -- many of the same ones who promised during the Obama campaign to rid Washington of special interest control -- to add to the bill additional drug industry perks including subsidies, mandates, and a complete monopoly on complex drugs that will last 12 years. So much for transparency and reform, huh?
Couldn’t they BUILD a local factory and MAKE the product at local wages for about 3 cents each?
i think the only way to help a country with money is to build roads and bridges- hire people locally to build them , ship in the equipment and management
slowly build up towns, stores, homes, the people building things get the wages and then pay for the houses when the items are sold... it seems like it would be self sustaining once you bring in the intial equipment
handouts only put the current farmers out of work
Now THAT is funny!!!!!
It’s astounding what they can get away with, isn’t it?
Of course the first reaction of liberals when I refused to subject my daughter to this vaccine was that I was some sort of religious fanatic who denied the possibility of my child ever having sex.
Sorry about their idiocy, but I refused it because of the lack of science there is to back up its efficacy. Our GP agreed with me and was impressed with my knowledge about Gardisil.
Yes, it is a bad idea all around, and I agree with the poster who observed that only a tiny fraction of whatever was spent would actually contribute to vaccination, so that even if the vaccine were incredibly effective, it would reach only a small portion of the most needy population.
A much better value would be getting more Africans to accept polio and tetanus vaccines.
Better yet, bring back DDT.
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.