Tuesday "HOT TOPIC"-Join
Find a Conversation
Tuesday "HOT TOPIC"-Join
| Tue, 02-20-2007 - 8:18am |
Our Hot Topic Conversation for this week is regarding the HPV vaccine for young girls!
| Tue, 02-20-2007 - 8:18am |
Our Hot Topic Conversation for this week is regarding the HPV vaccine for young girls!
Pages
Against it. Here's why:
1. The vaccines that are currently "required" for ps attendance halt the epidemic spread of diseases that most certainly lead to grave illness, permanent physiological damage, and/or death. We have seen in history how quickly diseases like Tuberculosis and even mumps and measles can spread throughout a community. In the case of HPV, sexual contact is (I'm pretty sure) required for transmission to occur. Unlike Hepatitis that can be contracted simply by sharing a sandwich with someone who is infected. This greatly curtails the possibility of a widespread epidemic, even among teenagers. A lot of sexual contact with multiple partners would be required for widespread infection.
2. HPV is one of several causes of cervical cancer, not the only cause. Wiping out HPV would not wipe out cervical cancer. Not every woman who contracts HPV ends up developing cervical (or any other) cancer. Additionally, cervical cancer is one of the more rare forms of cancer in women. We're talking about a major expense for vaccination with a small return on the overall investment. For this reason, people who want the protection the vaccine provides should access it themselves, not receive it as part of a "well child" type of vaccination program.
3. HPV is not limited to transmission through the female population. If only girls are being vaccinated, boys are continuing to at least be carriers of HPV if not victims of its effects. I've heard almost nothing about how this virus affects men, but the very idea that legislation would require something of girls that is not required of boys smacks of discrimination.
I agree with what you said Mindy except when you say it is a sexually transmitted disease and obviously Kayleigh is not sexually active yet--however.....if you wait and then she becomes sexually active and don't realize this--then you have missed the window.
Powered by CGISpy.com
I was watching the news today and a young lady was on the news, she is currently in her early to mid 20's(can't remember what her exact age was) and seh got this I believe when she was 19----she said had this option been there when she was a young girl, her mother would hve immunized her and she wouldn't have had to go through all she went through!
Powered by CGISpy.com
See and I have heard that argument too and I think it is ridiculous!
Powered by CGISpy.com
Powered by CGISpy.com
Powered by CGISpy.com
I completely echo Nan_hart's post as well as Mindy's post. I was against it before Texas' government issued the executive order, and I am still against it. In fact I have my letter to my reps waiting to be sent out as we speak. I think that this is a parent's decision, not the government's, there have not been long term studies done on this vaccine and the fact that, as one poster mentioned, a large contribution was made to the governor's campaign fund by the drug company that does these vaccines stinks beyond belief and in my opinion is a total conflict of interest considering the governor issued an executive order mandating this, he wouldn't even let the legislature debate on this issue at all.
On the other question someone asked about whether they would tell their child what the vaccine was for and people's opinions that giving them the vaccine may make the girls more sexually promiscuous (sorry, can't spell). First, yes I would discuss with DD what it is for, we have actually already discussed it. Second, they specifically have said, this vaccine only covers, I think, 4 out of about 20 strains of the virus, so even if you are going to explain to the girls what it is for, I think it would be just as important that this isn't a "cure all" vaccine, it doesn't cover every strain of the virus. Kind of like the flu vaccine only covers the most popular strain of the virus, just because you get the flu vaccine doesn't guarantee that you won't get the flu that year. Also, as one other poster said, boys can carry the virus and pass it around, even if they aren't infected by it. So why are we completely focused only on girls being vaccinated?
I actually have to disagree with this comment...."A lot of sexual contact with multiple partners would be required for widespread infection." This is not true!
Powered by CGISpy.com
I don't think it should be made manditory because it isn't like TB, Mumps etc.. that can be passed on by association, however I think it is a great medical advancement that has been made!
I will more than likely have Emily get it! I believe that through all the trials and such these drug companies have to go through, it isn't like this drug was just created last year!
Powered by CGISpy.com
Pages