I'd be curious to know just how many 45 y/o virgins we have, anyway!
Anytime you hear the words "double the market size", I hope that any reasonable person would consider that the actions being contemplated don't necessarily have the interest of public health in mind.
I think that offering Gardasil to girls/women aged 9 - 26 years makes sense.
If it was subsidised here I would definately take my girls at some stage for this vaccine.
The extended age groups on the other hand just sounds like a money making scheme. One that stands to be highly profitable for the company that is marketing the vaccine.
I'll re-post this, it was from a different thread.
"It is the persistent infection, not the virus, that determines the cancer risk". (Sources: FDA document, PDF format
*** This is a very interesting area for me.
"I think that offering Gardasil to girls/women aged 9 - 26 years makes sense."
Why does it make sense?
I'm not sure what you mean. I don't recall saying that those that weren't virgins wouldn't get it. Read the article from Dr. Harper (inventor of Gardasil) to understand. Gardasil (HPV - dubbed Help Pay for Vioxx) is NOT a cancer vaccine (even the newer ads say that).
i assume, though, that some people see a problem in trying to not die of cancer.
*** What does that mean?