Posted on 09/13/2011 11:03:51 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Gov. Rick Perry's 2007 attempt to require that girls in Texas be vaccinated against the human papillomavirus, commonly known as HPV, has become a political hot potato. But Dr. Ronald DePinho, the new president of MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, says the vaccine is not just sound but "one of the great scientific advances in the history of medicine."
In last night's GOP presidential debate, Perry faced repeated criticism from other candidates for his HPV push. Michele Bachmann said it was “flat out wrong” to require that “innocent little 12-year-old girls be forced to have a government injection through an executive order.”
Part of Bachmann's critique was that Perry's executive order, which he now says he would handle differently, was the byproduct of cronyism. Perry's former chief of staff, Mike Toomey was a lobbyist for the drug company Merck, maker of the vaccine, at the time. In interviews following the debate, Bachmann reportedly went even further, suggesting that the vaccine was a ""a very dangerous drug" and could cause "mental retardation."
But today, in an interview with the Tribune, DePinho said that as a physician, as the president of a leading cancer research institution and as a father of two young girls, "there's only one path here, which is to support vaccination."
"To do anything else would be unethical," DePinho said.
His recommendation for anyone who opposes the vaccine: "Visit one patient with cervical cancer in an advanced state."
Bless your heart.
I’ll visit a cancer patient when he visits my 27 year old nephew, who was severely damaged by a DPT shot. He functions at the level of a three year old, doesn’t speak, and has a terrible seizure disorder because of a vaccine.
Nobody decides what’s “ethical” for my family but me.
You seem to be addressing someone else’s argument, I am talking about the ethics of the doctor quoted in the article.
You know what DO, I'm sick of listening to you SP koolaide drinkers. We've got an election to win here.
For the sake of our online friendship, maybe we shouldn't discuss politics until we have a nominee.And if you can't line up behind that person, maybe not even then.
It is true that life is not full of guarantees. Doesn't change my position, however. Guardasil should be given to children by choice of the parents, not the state.
Dittos!
So you'd be fine with Michelle Obama dictating to you how you should feed your children, how much to feed them, and how much exercise you must make sure they get everyday - just as long as you had the ability to fill out a form to "opt out"?
Is there anything at all you think is over the line for the government to require as long as you have the ability to actively "opt out"?
Obviously you missed my point.
Parents have abdicated their rights to the school to the State to the Feds.
If (horror) they might have to actually raise their children WITHOUT some beauracrat telling them what to do most would roll up in the fetal position.
I was watching AFV and they had a vid of a little boy that lost a camera. His sister asked him what was wrong. He said Mommy is going to kill me. He kept saying it over and over.
I thought my word what have we done to our children.
If they manage to survive the womb, do they have to spend their childhood worried that Mommy/Daddy will kill them?
How we have destroyed our own house.
Not unlike Rioters that destroy their own neighborhood.
Agree.
Of course it was a flop. That was the whole point. Texans are interested in picking fights with non-Texan FReepers. I didn't ask fellow Texans to "get you." I pinged them to your rant about how arrogant and obnoxious we Texans supposedly are and even when goaded Texans didn't gang up on you.
So your original claim is bunk. Texans don't roam around FR ganging up on non-Texans. If you ever encounter such behavior, ping me. Until then, high school is out.
BTW, congratulations on that win in NY!
are interested = aren’t interested
Well, I’m going through the refresher course to get my human subjects research certificate renewed.
There IS controversy and debate about the influence of big Pharma’s profit motive on medicine. And I think a Merck bought president of MD Anderson would be a problem. However, I don’t KNOW that President Pinho is bought and paid for. I probably was talking out the wrong end on that one. Moreover, I think a great deal of the rabid anti-pharma sentiment is misplaced - they’re doing like they’ve done with energy - someone does something stupid, or careless, or illegal and instead of focusing on the offender, and looking for others, they try to shut down the whole industry.
Anyway, no hard feelings I hope.
You're absolutely right about the rabid anti-pharma sentiment. The drug industry has done some unfortunate things but, in most cases, they've done these things because of some government interference. Government would love to kill the golden goose. That would be a travesty. Too many folks who call themselves conservative support policies that would ensure the demise of this industry. The US is one of the last markets where the drug industry can make a profit. Profit drives innovation. I want more innovation, not less. Price controlled markets do not produce new drugs. That's why so many of all the new drug discoveries happen here in the USA.
The problem, whatever it might be, will always stem from government, not industry. Thanks for the debate.
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.