[size=18]Texas Requires Cancer Vaccine for Girls[/size]
By LIZ AUSTIN PETERSON
AUSTIN (AP) -- Gov. Rick Perry ordered Friday that schoolgirls in Texas must be vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, making Texas the first state to require the shots.
The girls will have to get Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV, that are responsible for most cases of cervical cancer.
1) How is a study, sanctioned and funded by big pharma, about this, or one sanctioned and funded by insurance companies about seat belts/ teen drivers, any more credible than one sanctioned by big tobacco about smoking costs or by big oil about global warming?
2) If men can be HPV carriers, why not them have the vaccine as well. The disease may not cause them cancer but it would still be good to eliminate.
From the Breitbart article above:
Perry, (is) a conservative Christian who opposes abortion rights and stem- cell research using embryonic cells...snip
But he has said [u]the cervical cancer vaccine is no different than the one that protects children against polio.[/u]
"If there are diseases in our society that are going to cost us large amounts of money, it just makes good economic sense, not to mention the health and well being of these individuals to have those vaccines available," he said.
[b][color=blue]Texas allows parents to[/color] [color=red]opt out of[/color] [color=blue]inoculations by filing an affidavit stating that he or she objected to the vaccine for religious or philosophical reasons.[/b][/color][/quote]
Sounds like a man with good common sense, to me.
[url=http://www.asmainegoes.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=372023&highlight=hpv#37... a previous thread[/url]:
Technically speaking (from a scientific point) this HPV vaccine does not directly prevent cancer, but indirectly, by preventing the infection resulting from a few particular types of HPV which potentially may lead to cellular changes which cause cervical cancer (in rare cases, as previously cited).
It has it's limitations, to include not preventing infection resulting from the other types of HPV which also have the potential of leading to cervical cancer.
There is some concern that women will think that this is a 'cure-all' or '100% preventative' and if administered, will prevent ALL cervical cancer - when in fact, it doesn't:
[url=http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/HPV]4. Are there specific types of HPV that are associated with cancer?[/url]
[quote]Some types of HPV [are] â€œlow-riskâ€ viruses...rarely develop into cancer.
HPV types that are more likely to lead to the development of cancer are referred to as â€œhigh-risk.â€
Both high-risk and low-risk types of HPV can cause the growth of abnormal cells, but generally only the high-risk types of HPV may lead to cancer.
Sexually transmitted, high-risk HPVs include types *16, *18, 31, 33, 35, 39, 45, 51, 52, 56, 58, 59, 68, 69, and possibly a few others...important to note, however, that the majority of high-risk HPV infections go away on their own and do not cause cancer (2). [/quote]
[*The HPV vaccine is highly effective against contracting high-risk HPV types 16 and 18 that cause most infections which may lead to cervical cancer (70%) and low-risk HPV types 6 and 11 which cause most (90%) of genital warts. It does nothing if you've already been infected by these types. And no one knows how long the vaccine remains effective.]
~I'm sure many will argue that 'some protection is better than no protection' against HPV and the potential of cervical cancer. I would hope that they would study the statistical data regarding contracting HPVs prior to choosing vaccination. It's not a panacea by any means.
Here's some additional info on the viruses:
[quote]Studies also suggest that HPVs may play a role in cancers of the anus, vulva, vagina, and some cancers of the oropharynx (the middle part of the throat that includes the soft palate, the base of the tongue, and the tonsils) (1). Data from several studies also suggest that infection with HPV is a risk factor for penile cancer (cancer of the penis).[/quote]
[color=blue][b]Stavros[/b][/color], this may help answer your Question #2:
~Considering that males can become infected and transmit HPVs, I'm suprised there is no audible outrage from the NOW gang as to why there's no collective, equal push to get all boys vaccinated, too. Apparently [b]in a USA Today article dated Oct. 20, 2005 Merck mentioned they will lobby for this if not enough girls are vaccinated![/b]
You're correct that the public needs to know this isn't a cure-all.
I also agree that if the vaccine will help men stay free of the disease, why not? If it prevents them from unknowingly transmitting the disease to their wives or partners in later life, vaccinate them as well.
As for NOW, since I'm not a member (and have never been), no can answer for their lack of input.
[quote="nascarfan207"]Bob E - I actually agree with you. [/quote]
Do I hear a shocked tone in your voice?
I am actually easy to agree with. :lol:
On a more serious note, this is the kind of thread that actually seems helpful for people trying to understand an issue instead of just debating one. I hope the legislature takes some time to think this through before a vote.
[quote][b]HPV vaccine good for sixth grade, even with parental opt-out[/b]
Maine Sunday Telegram Sunday, February 4, 2007
The Legislature is considering two bills that would offer sixth-grade girls a vaccine to protect them against the human papillioma virus, which can cause cervical cancer in older women.
One of the bills would offer the vaccine to all 11- and 12-year-old girls in the state without charge, but not link it to public school attendance. The other would make it mandatory for schooling, but would include a provision that allows parents to decide against the inoculation.
I'm going to expand a little on George Rodrigues' post on the previous page, citing data included in the TPTSNBN edit Naran posted and a little bit of research and calculation. I shall present my conclusions first:
THIS PROGRAM LOOKS GREAT ON PAPER. IN REALITY, IT'S INCREDIBLY STUPID.
Here's the facts:
[list]-Nationally, there are approximately 10,000 cases of cervical cancer diagnosed each year. Approximately 1/3 of them prove fatal, meaning that nationally about 3333 women die of the disease each year.
-The US population is approximately 300 million. Let's assume that gender is equally distributed (in reality, women outnumber men about 51%-49%, but let's keep it simple and stipulate that there are 150 million women in the US.
- this means that the chances of a woman dying of cervical cancer (as opposed to other causes) in any given year is .002 percent . If we assume a 50 year time period over which women COULD die of cervical cancer, that indicates that that any woman's chance of dying of cervical cancer is 0.01, or 1/10 of 1 percent.
-Data extracted from the 2000 census indicates that there are approximately 7,000 12 year old girls in Maine, and approximately an equal number of 11 year olds. Let's, for purposes of argument, overlook that the first-year of this program would mean vaccinating approximately 14,000 girls (less a handful who opt out) and say that 7000 per year, after the first year, is a reasonable assumption on the number of girls vaccinated.
-This is a three-dose vaccine, with a total vaccination cost of $360 (source: TPTSNBN)
-Total annual cost of the vaccine: $2,520,000 per year (not counting the cost of the doctor's visit).
-Now: Assuming national incidence is indicative of cervical cancer is the same as that in Maine, the vaccine program would theoretically save a grand total of 7 lives in Maine per year. Cost of saving each life: $360,000. Which, btw, assumes that the vaccine is effective in stopping ALL types of cervical cancer, which it is NOT. If it effectively stops HALF the cancers, that means that 3.5 lives will be saved per year, at a cost of $720,000 per life saved.[/list:u]
Feel free to use the above data and check my math, and challenge the assumptions. But I'm left with the conclusion: ridiculous waste of taxpayer resources.
By all means, folks, vaccinate your daughters if you feel it improves their odds. As a state program, this is a complete and utter scam. There are MUCH better ways to save MORE lives at significantly lower cost.
Interesting - from Maine Legislative Bill Status Page:
An Act To Decrease Cervical Cancer in Maine Girls
Committee of Reference: Health and Human Services, Tue Jan 30, 2007
Latest Committee Action: Voted, Wed Feb 7, 2007, ONTP
Public Hearing: Wed Feb 7, 2007,
[b]No Public Hearing[/b]
Committee Report: Thu Feb 8, 2007, ONTP
I also read an interesting article about this matter....
"The National Vaccine Information Center yesterday warned state officials to investigate the safety of a breakthrough cancer vaccine as Texas became the first state to make the vaccine mandatory for school-age girls.
Negative side effects of Gardasil, a new Merck vaccine to prevent the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer, are being reported in the District of Columbia and 20 states, including Virginia. The reactions range from loss of consciousness to seizures."
[quote="bob emrich"]Committee Report: Thu Feb 8, 2007, ONTP[/quote]
So, you think it's dead in the water?
[quote]...from loss of consciousness to seizures.[/quote]
Sounds like standard operating procedure for government - Somnambulists who take things.
It better not be mandatory in Maine..if so, I am going to help fight it.
Rep. Marrache has another bill to deal with this (LD 137). It looks like a more reasonable approach at first glance. I would guess that the committee thought it a better approach than Rep. Faircloth's mandate. It is likely "dead in the water", but it is still in the water.
You and The Distributist could ride together to the public hearing if they were having one. That would draw a crowd!
You and The Distributist could ride together to the public hearing if they were having one. That would draw a crowd![/quote]
AMG fundraiser idea? :)
Sure...Just remember, I am the one who supports diversity...heh.
I call shotgun!
"Sure...Just remember, I am the one who supports diversity...heh." Are you suggesting that TD might be gay?!!?
[quote="bob emrich"]no weapons!
"Sure...Just remember, I am the one who supports diversity...heh." Are you suggesting that TD might be gay?!!?[/quote]
Not being entirely secure, I have stayed away from the gay quiz. After more than a quarter century of marriage and child-rearing, I would hate to find out I have been wrong all these years. :wink:
There are MUCH better ways to save MORE lives at significantly lower cost.[/quote]
Yes, like a yearly PAP exam of all women. I have never had any STD, yet at the very young age of 27, my yearly exam showed irregular cell growth in my cervix, due to that yearly exam, at a cost of just $45 for the test and $60 for the dr's visit, I was able to detect it before it could turn to cancer, thus being able to have them removed before they could turn to cervical cancer. I haven't done the math, but I'd say that, concidering the fact that all women starting at the age of 18, younger if sexually active, should have an anual PAP exam done, could save a lot of money with simple early detection.
On another note, I can understand the need for mandatory vaccinations for such things as measels, chicken pox, even the hep B virus, as those are contagious diseases that can be spread from one person to another just by comming in contact with them, yet with this vaccination, to make it mandatory in order for your child to be allowed into a school is obscure as it requires unprotected sex to be transmitted. If you are mandated to inocculate your child for this, then perhaps those with other STD's like crabs, which can be picked up off of a toilet seat from another infected person using it before you, not be allowed to attend schools either. HIV and Hep. B are blood born disease's as well and can be transmitted from one person to another via other methods than just sex, and yes if there was a vaccination for HIV, you can bet your behind that I'd have my whole family vaccinated against it ASAP, but this one is equivilent to the tetnus vaccine in my opinion, only you are more likely to pick up tetnus than HPV on a daily basis.
Hopefully, these vaccines are not "contaminated".
[quote] Apparently the WHO has been developing and testing anti-fertility vaccines for over two decades. Without this HCG hormone the growth of the fetus is impaired. Consequently, the laced vaccine served as a covert contraceptive device. Commissioned to analyze the vaccine, the Philippines Medical Association found that 20 percent of the WHO tetanus vaccines were contaminated with the hormone.
[size=18]Proposed legislation would give access to controversial vaccine[/size]
February 13, 2007
BANGOR, Maine --Proposed legislation would promote access to a vaccine that combats the virus that causes cervical cancer, but it would not mandate that young girls be inoculated against the disease.
Other states that have proposed laws requiring the vaccinations have met with opposition from parents and religious groups. The bill in Maine attempts to sidestep that controversy by focusing on education and funding and making the vaccine optional.
New York Times
Furor on Rush to Require Cervical Cancer Vaccine
By STEPHANIE SAUL and ANDREW POLLACK
Racing to embrace a new vaccine, at least 20 states are considering mandatory inoculation of young girls against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.
But a roaring backlash has some health experts worried the proponents, including the vaccineâ€™s maker, Merck, pushed too far too fast, potentially undermining eventual prospects for the broadest possible immunization.
Groups wary of drug industry motives find themselves on the same side of the anti-vaccination debate with unexpected....allies....
The Coastal Journal this week published a verbatim press release from [i]Family[/i] Planning Association extolling the virtues and critical nature of the need to mandate young girls get this vaccine. Media tools on the local level.
[quote]Racing to embrace a new vaccine, ...[/quote]Industry estimates are $2.0 to 2.5 billion USD per year, so long as the patent lasts. The clock is ticking.
[b]$6,000,000 per [u]day[/u][/b] in "lost revenue" is powerful incentive to rush this along.
[quote] press release from Family Planning Association [/quote] This is the same group that performs most of the abortions in Maine.
I'm surprised that the newspaper would publish their release uncritically. Don't they know that [b]abortion is a serious problem? It leads to lying.[/b]
This is not about the dollar. An honest dialogue with the children would benefit society as a whole.
And leave Maine Government in the hole.
from The Wall Street Journal
Feb. 20, 2007
Merck said it will stop lobbying states to pass laws requiring that preteen girls be vaccinated against cervical cancer in the face of a growing backlash among parents, physicians and consumer advocates. Merck's aggressive lobbying campaign was intended to boost sales of its Gardasil vaccine.
(FYI - Just posting this similar article because of the available link):
[url=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aU9kKqclspgc&refer=u... Stops Campaign to Mandate Gardasil Vaccine Use (Update2) [/url]
By Shannon Pettypiece and Angela Zimm
[quote]Feb. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Merck & Co. will stop lobbying state officials to require that girls receive the company's Gardasil cervical cancer vaccine before they can attend school.
Merck made the decision after groups including the American Academy of Pediatrics said [b]there wasn't enough state funding to pay for the $360 vaccine or public acceptance[/b], said Rick Haupt, director of medical affairs for Merck's vaccine division, in a telephone interview today....(con't)[/quote]
[quote="Bottom of the Bloomberg Story"]A group called the National Vaccine Information Center said yesterday that its analysis of reports to U.S. regulators found cases of serious [b]side effects to Gardasil. One was Guillain- Barre Syndrome[/b], a disorder in which the body's immune system attacks part of the nervous system. [/quote]
[quote]On June 8th 2006, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the approval of GARDASIL, and on June 29th the Advisory Committee on Immunizations Practices (ACIP) voted to recommend adding GARDASIL human papilloma virus vaccine to the Centers for Disease Control's national childhood recommended immunization schedule. On July 14th the first report of a serious reaction to the vaccine was filed with the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).
[b]A 16-year-old Illinois girl was vaccinated July 7th and 13 days later developed symptoms eventually diagnosed as Guillian-Barre Syndrome[/b]
Six months later, 82 reports of GARDASIL reactions have been submitted to VAERS.
[quote]Guillain-Barre (ge-YAH buh-RA) syndrome (GBS) is an inflammatory disorder in which your body's immune system attacks the nerves outside the brain and spinal cord (peripheral nerves) and, rarely, parts of the brain itself. [b]Severe weakness and numbness in your legs and arms characterize GBS. Loss of feeling and movement (paralysis) may occur in your legs, arms, upper body and face.[/b]
Merck will be concerned. States would be insane to make this mandatory before the early reactions are sorted out.
February 28, 2007
Higher Rate of Cervical HPV Found
By GAUTAM NAIK
A [url=http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/297/8/813]U.S. study[/url] suggests the prevalence of a sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer is greater than previous estimates suggested. The data also indicate the prevalence of the two main cancer-causing strains of the virus, for which thereâ€™s a new Merck & Co. vaccine appears to be relatively low.
Richard Haupt, executive director of medical affairs in Merck's vaccine division, agreed the virus strains that Gardasil protects against are relatively rare....
Source: Wall Street Journal, February 28, 2007; Page D8