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."
“So if such parents had the kind of moral scruples parents should have, Perry’s policy would require them to essentially swear to a lie about the nature of their objections. “
It is generally the case that government likes to define our conscientious objections for us: you may say you object to this if you object under these grounds, but not on these. This essentially denies the role of conscience for the individual, unless he has enough money and or will to fight the entire system.
You may object to Social Security if you are a minister, and if you believe that ministers should not be beholden to the governing authority, but for no other reason (such as an ethical objection to participating in a Ponzi scheme).
You may not object to vaccination on the grounds that many of them require you to submit your children to a greater individual risk in order to provide possible benefit to the whole.
You may object on religious grounds if you know that many vaccines are grown in cell culture lines from aborted babies (not avian eggs as we were misled to believe) - specifically HEK-293, WI-26, RA-273, MRC-5, WI-38 - but not in some cases if you are Catholic, because some writings from some Catholic sources seem to justify their use in such circumstances.
Courts have used the acceptance of Polio Vaccine as an indication of acceptance of the practice of using Fetal Cells, while ignoring the fact that the public at large, and many doctors, is unaware of what it is “accepting.”
Freedom of conscience, indeed.
Additionally, off topic:
There are court cases (!)and studies disproving an autism-vaccination link based upon mercury, but the following article raises the question of a link between vaccination and autism based upon dramatic spikes in incidence coinciding with introductions of new vaccines containing fetal cells, and questions of whether they may contribute (in combination with genetic factors) to the condition.
Journal of Immunotoxicology, January-March 2011, Vol. 8, No. 1 : Pages 68-79
Theoretical aspects of autism: Causes—A review
Helen V. Ratajczak
(doi: 10.3109/1547691X.2010.545086)
of relevance:
The human DNA from the vaccine can be randomly inserted into the recipient’s genes by homologous recombination,a process that occurs spontaneously only within a species. Hot spots for DNA insertion are found on the X chromosome in eight autism-associated genes involved in nerve cell synapse formation, central nervous system development, and mitochondrial function (Deisher, 2010). This could provide some explanation of why autism is predominantly a disease of boys. Taken together, these data support the hypothesis that residual human DNA in some vaccines might cause autism.
This article is available in several places on the web, but being unsure of the copyright of any of them, I’ll cite it and let you follow it up (access at the source is 43 per day).
Gosh, thanks for the kind words. /s
Your brain should be telling you that this guy is one of the top cancer specialists in the world so what he has to say about a particular vaccine/product is of importance. He's earned more than a little credibility.
If you're going to be accusing folks of wrongdoing, who are as accomplished as this guy, you'd better have something more than feelings for proof. You can't prove conflict of interest because you don't understand what it is or how research is conducted in this country. Given the fact that you have no knowledge of the industry or its processes, it is impossible for you to know what is considered ethical and what is not. This man is one of the best in his field. He has HUGE credibility when it comes to the safety and efficacy of this vaccine. Apparently, for some unknown reason, you don't like that fact so you scream mindlessly about some alleged conflict of interest that exists only in your head.
It's really sad when people who don't know on which side their bread is buttered complain about the people who are dedicating their lives to curing complex and heinous diseases like cancer.
HPV test might be better predictor of cervical cancer than Pap smear
I thought that all of the smart New Yorkers had already moved to Texas?
Sorry, I’m not going to take an argument from authority in the context of a culture where the office of the President himself is a festering pit of lies and corruption. Sell me another line.
The conflict of interest is clear. That you are choosing to dismiss it is the issue at hand, not me point out that it exists.
Only the ones who are smart enough.
I’m pretty sure they all went to Florida. Both the smart and not so smart.
You can't resist the insults, can you? That is a traditional liberal ploy and I never considered you to be one.
Are you saying that Gardasil went to market without testing and without FDA approval? I was not aware of that and, in fact, I did not know it was possible.
I have since researched it and was FDA approved for use on young girls. In fact, since it is vaccine rather than a cure and the disease is spread through sexual contact, it is imperative that the vaccine be given before the girls, and even guys, become sexually active. That belies your assertion that it was developed for promiscuous older women.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommends vaccination before adolescence and potential sexual activity.[11][12][4]
I suggest that you do as I did and research this rather than just rant at Perry supporters.
You call yourself a conservative while spreading misinformation? Sounds like a liberal to me, or a Ron Paul supporter. I shall ignore your information in the future as it is totally unreliable.
Autism is such a burden, and one that is much bigger in numbers today than I saw as a kid and young adult. I’m talking true autism.
What is the cause? So many tie it to vaccines. Despite the denials of the industry, vaccinations remain as likely suspects.
Public health vaccination policies today need wholesale review and re-boot. It also goes to the professional medical and drug class action industry, and juries of citizens who simply should not be juries for intellectual incompetence and moral weakness.
WE DO NOT NEED TO VACCINATE SO MANY WITH SO MANY! A targeted vaccination policy would be so much better and reduce the lifetime toll on those who come down with autism and other lifetime disorders whose initiations occur coincidentally with vaccinations.
The Public Health Laws regarding vaccines were made in an era of true very serious public health risks: Smallpox, Polio, Whooping Cough, Tetanus, Typhoid! Each a dread slaughterer of a disease. It is right to compel vaccination for these.
Measles? Mumps? Warts? Hep-B? These are not mass slaughterers like the others. Dangers and sometimes deadly. All except high-risk sub-populations should be allowed easy opt-out on these, without compulsion on threat of lack of access to some establishment fearing lawsuits.
Yes, but those strains were responsible for over 70% of cervical cancer cases.
I've dismissed nothing except your accusation, without evidence, that there exists a conflict of interest. As a scientists myself, I am only interested in your evidence. Either put up or admit that you wrote a check you cannot cash.
If you are having sex, or heavy petting, you can contract the disease. I probably have a different concept of what is taking place with our ten year olds these days, but you know I could be wrong.
This is not a generally accepted highly communicable disease, because it cannot be transmitted through the air or from surfaces. You have to engage in certain behaviors to contract it.
Simply saying it’s highly contagious doesn’t make it so.
Thank you for the link. The whole article seems littered with data intended to scare people into taking action to protect themselves. None the less, here are the real go-to factoids.
Out of roughly 160,000,000 women in the U.S., roughly 12,000 come down with cervical cancer each year. Of those 12,000 women, only a percentage of them will come down with a cancer related to what Gardasil corrects.
Anotherwords, 0.00075% of the nation’s women will come down with Cervical cancers related to 100% of HPVs, but Gardasil only protects against some of them. That would reduce even this miniscule percentage even further.
And I quote, “HPV is so common that at least 50% of sexually active men and women get it at some point in their lives.” Okay, so this isn’t exactly new is it. We don’t have a new rampant epidemic out there. Despite the fact half of sexually active people have HPV, they are not actually dropping dead in significant numbers, and it’s questionable how many lives would actually be saved, if Gardasil were given to everyone.
Then there’s this.
“Cervical cancer is most treatable when it is diagnosed and treated early. But women who get routine Pap tests and follow up as needed can identify problems before cancer develops. Prevention is always better than treatment.” Another-words, what most women already do, is darn near as effective as getting the Gardasil shot. No, let me correct that. It’s more effective, because it guards against all HPV cancers.
Well, the company I talked about made $120 million in profits in a little over 12 months. It’s actions were so egregious that a $30,000,000 dollar fine was levied against the company. At a later date, the fine was either severely reduce or waved altogether.
This product passed FDA review. It was released to the public. The bad side effects were never included in reports to the FDA or included in the PDR.
Once again, the PDR is a fine source. I’m not advocating against using it. I am only advising folks to use as many resources as they can.
BTW: Your dad’s physician should have known better. Looks to me like he was quite careless.
In the interest of accuracy, I wanted to mention that I placed too many zeroes after the decimal place on that percentage. 0.00075% should have read 0.0075%.
Sorry about that transcribing error.
I did just that in the very first post you started arguing with me on and even gave you a link so you could read the whole story. He has an existing and presumably ongoing business relationship with Merck; his is not an independent opinion.
And as for you, I would take some time to think about the approach you have laid out here and what conclusion one would come to by following it in another "soft" science - climatology. If I followed your mode of thinking that would compel me to believe in AGW, because the "experts" agree. Or heck, that would compel me to believe in tarot, fortune telling, or any other flavor of shamanism, because those who make it their living are the experts on the subject.
Medicine - and cancer medicine in particular - is no exact science that these kind of statements can be made with certainty, as if they were somehow mathematical laws, for the same reasons that the climate doomers couldn't make their claims with certainty. All the experts in any subject have a bias to make the subject appear more important than it is, because to them in particular, it is.
When it comes down to recommending a vaccine that only really matters if your kid is a slut, is it really the responsible thing to say take this vaccine, instead of teaching her not to be self-destructive? Seriously, this treats young women like herd animals - it is properly their choice to make, and mandating it from government is politicians practicing medicine. Coerced medicine is the practice of coercion, and not that of medicine.
I'm not either but, kids at very young ages do sexual things you and I probably, maybe never did. They substitute anal and oral sex for actual intercourse because they think it's safer. I have two daughters who have told me this.
Aside from the dangers or con tractability, politicizing this as something evil Perry wanted to do to young girls is below what I would consider a level of good taste.
You might not care for the guy but, don't stoop so low as to insinuate that absurdity.(and for a $6000 contribution, Please)
I completely agree with you that no medication, old or new, should be forced on anyone, period.
Our choice to use Gardasil Vaccination was voluntary and done after talking it over with our doctor.
As for the Rick perry issue with Gardasil, was not there an
“opt-out” provision in his executive order? I do not know the details.
I am thinking one can be exposed to HPV even after marriage.
Unless both partners have been virgins before marriage and never have sex outside of marriage.
Will you resign from posting if it is proven?
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.