|
Feedback ForumShould papillomavirus (HPV) vaccinations be required for schoolgirls?Submissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space. Poster: LA Comment: This argument should be reframed. If your daughter were to have sex without consulting you or doctor is the appropriate punishment death from a known cancer, infirtility or a horrible and expensive medical treatment? Its like leaving a gun out with just one bullet in it and expecting that it will never get picked up or played with, because you believed it shouldn't, and you warned against it. Possible yes but the slightest possibility of what could happen is enough for me to lock it away in order to protect my child. The Vaccine should be made AVAILABLE, very available, not mandatory, all the research information, political and medical disclosures should be made AVAILABLE, so that parents and doctors can make an informed judgement about it. If there is no mitigating medical risk, and if parents for whatever reason choose not to allow their child to participate and the child goes on to contract this disease. I believe these parents should be willing to be punished for failing that child with the same neglect charge they would get for leaving that loaded gun where they can get it? They are responsible for something that was equally preventable in the same way the parent whose child shoots himself with the loaded gun is responsible. This is an opportunity a parent can't get back if you misjudge the time of that first sexual encounter. Half or more of all the guys out there ARE spreading this virus around, more than half of the current adult population is already infected, this vaccine does not work or is less effective, if the child becomes sexually active before it is recieved. Teenage sex is usually an unplanned spontanious event or it can be the by product of a criminal activitiy. Woops, and that chance at prevention is no longer available. No one is advocating that pre-teens become sexually active, only that we can not reliably predict when that first encounter will happen. Brovo for you if you waited until your wedding night, but what about your husband, and exactly how could anyone prove otherwise? IF you didn't wait did you plan it and did you discuss it with mom before it happened? I think the teenage pregnacy stats prove that an illogical assumption. In a perfect world even if all of the women were to remain virgins until marriage, what exactly are you going to do about all of the infected men? If you are telling me you are expecting all of them will remain virgins. HERE IS YOUR SIGN: Bridge in Brooklyn for Sale. Poster: EHLDer Comment: Well, why is there no vaccine for males? Poster: Brent Comment: How about we try education for once....educate the girls and boys of every consequence having sex can cause. Oh, and maybe put some sense of responsibility back on the parents...does the government, taxpayers and drug companies have to solve every problem this country has? First mental problems, then cigarette addiction, later on sleep, now getting an erection...when will the medication of america stop? We already have a Walgreens, Eckerd or CVS on every street corner, are they wanting to open shops in school too just to make sure our kids are getting drugged up every day!?! Oh, and to the point very nearly everyone here has made, DO NOT set a precident using the kids as your research agents Merck! Poster: Brent Comment: How about we try education for once....educate the girls and boys of every consequence having sex can cause. Oh, and maybe put some sense of responsibility back on the parents...does the government, taxpayers and drug companies have to solve every problem this country has? First mental problems, then cigarette addiction, later on sleep, now getting an erection...when will the medication of America stop? We already have a Walgreens, Eckerd or CVS on every street corner, are they wanting to open shops in school too just to make sure our kids are getting drugged up every day!?! Oh, and to the point very nearly everyone here has made, DO NOT set a precident using the kids as your research agents Merck! Poster: SPW Comment: I do not believe the vaccine should be mandatory; more research needs to be done. Poster: Daisy Williams Comment: I am totally against this drug becoming mandatory for young girls and young women. There is no guarantee that the girls will be protected. It is just a possibility that they will be protected according to the commercial that has been advertised on Washington DC tv. The only guarantee is to abstain from having sexual encounters. This is the message that we should be telling our daughters and granddaughters. There is not enough information about the side effects of this drugs. It took over 20 years before they realized the effects of hormone therapy causing cancer. Will this be the same way. I say No, No, No. This is only giving the drug companies a lot more money to create some other drug that will destroy us. A former adminstrator for the governor of Texas is now the lobbyist for this company. Now look at what the governor of Texas has done. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that somebody is getting paid for the implementation of these actions that could possible kill a lot of young women and girls. I am totally against this drug. It should not be mandatory for anyone except the drug company's children who has made it. Let them be the testor for this product. After they have used it for 20 years then let us see how it has effected them. The food and drug companies have devastated the health of American's in the name of profit for themselves. I believe in the biblical principle that you reap what you sow. They have a lot of reaping to do. I believe in the biblical principle of abstainance until marriage. Is a 9 year old capable of getting married? If she isn't then there is no need for her to get these shots. Poster: Shirley E. Hastings Comment: The answer to those who don't want mansdatory vaccination is that the man who gives your daughter that virus could be her husband. Who can make absolutely sure he's never had sex with anyone else? And if you're going to made vaccination mandatory, what age do you suggest? This debate reminds me of the Reagan reaction to AIDS. Just a disease of gay men - serve 'em right. I've even been told it was God's punishment. Tell that to the millions who have it now. if we'd acted then, we could have stopped it in its tracks. Good luck to those who want it mandatory. But why not also pressure Merck to bring the price down - the present price is outrageous. Poster: Vennie White Comment: NO! I'm dismayed that even NOW continues to portray opposition as coming from social conservatives. I am a progressive. Too often, women have been victims of the pharmaceutical industry. Remember Thalidomide? Remember DES--the sons and daughters of women who used it are suffering the consequences. More recently, remember the wonder drug--hormones that were supposed to protect women from numerous diseases but in fact, were causing so many problems that they were withdrawn after years of study? This vaccine was been studied on very few women--not on girls! Listen to the language used to sell the vaccine. Suddenly 11-year-olds are called adolescents; 15-year-olds are called women. The long-term effects are not known. If our legislators and Merck really want to save women's lives, they'll be sure that every single women in this country gets free, regular pap smears. As the American Cancer Society tells us, the majority of the 3,700 women who die of cervical cancer in this country did not get regular pap smears. Gardasil does not protect against all causes of cervical cancer. NOW should have presented more information about the very limited studies that have been done, the very real concerns that medical professionals have about the lack of information we've received regarding those studies. Why should we trust the FDA? It's a political organization. It took a whistleblower to bring attention to the Merck-Vioxx scandal. Please don't dismiss those of us who are concerned as simply being conservative, overly protective of our daughters, naive. There are legitimate reasons that this vaccine should be studied more thoroughly before it is given to little girls. Do your research. Who will take responsibility 30 years from now if this generation has medical conditions caused by a vaccine that was rushed onto the market? Poster: Annica Comment: Making it mandatory will make sure all girls are vaccinated. I don't exactly want it mandatory, but many girls wouldn't get it otherwise ,but would still be having sex where they would be at risk. If it weren't mandatory many girls wouldn't have the nerve to approach a guardian about getting it because that would be about as incriminating as asking for birthcontrol. Poster: Mary Young Comment: Does the HPV vaccine also work for males? If so, we should vaccinate boys as well as girls. Perhaps we should just vaccinate males, thereby laying to rest fears of a generation of promiscuous young women. The day the news broke in Tacoma's The New Tribune, the paper also reported the repeated rapes inflicted on two little girls by an intruder the night before. This isn't about promiscuity, it's about health. Poster: Jessica Martinez Comment: My thoughts that are if it truly can prevent HPV, in a unharmful way then it should be available. But it should always be a choice, I don't feel like it should be pushed upon the public. Because honestly males are the carriers of the HPV virus. Young girls just need to be more careful when practicing sexual activity, reducing their risk of getting the disease. Poster: E.Simon Comment: I am a staunch believer in personal rights, especially about our bodies. The government is ruining enough things. I want them to let the parents decide about the vaccines. ....How about side effects?.....How about allergies?......The FDA has made a mess of that department. How can we trust their decisions? Poster: Sheila Comment: I believe the vaccine is a great breakthrough and most conscientious parents will opt to have their teenage daughters immunized when fully informed. However, it is a personal right of choice and should never be mandated. When are we going to respect and acknowledge a person's right to make their own choices and quit legislating moral and personal issues and thereby forcing the opinions of the government on the masses? Poster: Jessica M Comment: I don't understand what the fuss is about. If there were a vaccine that would prevent lung cancer, wouldn't you want your child to have it? Because this is a sexually spread disease people seem to attach an undue importance on the morality of it, when it is actually more of a question of life and death for numerous women. I think it should be mandatory. I was diagnosed with HPV a few years ago. I wish there had been a vaccine when I was young. I never would have had to go through the pain and emotional agony of having an STI. And yes it is unfair and discriminatory that it is only women who have to get this vaccine. But it is also only women who are dying. There are little to no consequences for a man in his physical health if he contracts HPV. Most will never even know. Unfair, definitely. But we can empower our girls with this vaccine. If you could wipe out a horrible form of cancer with a simple vaccine, why wouldn't you? There is also a way for parents to opt out of the vaccine. So I don't understand why anyone would stand in it's way. Poster: Jean Comment: Yes! At the hospital emergency room I listened to a woman cry in pain, noone to comfort her (don't expect compassion in a hospital). I went over to talk to her and she asked me to pray for her. She was dying from complications of radiation therapy which she received for cervical cancer. She got it from her husband who was unfaithful. He actually had a baby girl by another woman and named the baby after his wife. (You can't make this stuff up!) So why is this debate solely focused on the daughters? The parents should wake up and face the fact that someday, sooner or later, the daughters will have sex and even if they are virgins when they marry, how can they be sure the husband will be? Poster: Alice Paul Comment: I believe the young girl and her parents should have to option of having this vaccination series, but it should not be mandated. When you require it to be allowed to attend public school, you are saying it is more important that girls get this vaccination than they learn to read or to do math. Every time we use a free public education as a club to force a policy, we place the policy as the priority. That is inappropriate and an abuse of government power. It also assumes that family doctors are not capable of follwoing through on this public health policy without force. That is hardly the case. 40% of people in this country are not covered by health insurance. MIlllions more have a high deductiable, so the insurance would not cover the cost. Plus, a parent will have to miss work 3 times to take their child to complete the series. Poster: Linda Davis Comment: Now our young girls are being targeted.Fear is being spread with statistics, and slick advertising campaigns, so the parents will be convinced that this guardosil is the best thing for young womens health. How low can the profiters go. What a scheme and a scam. That's why they backed off with the advertising about initiating it through the schools. Another man from Texas politics attempts to mandate women. I believe we are ingesting ingredients in the foods that are approved and marketed to consumers. That is why we have cancer on the rise. The sad part is the current system is such that, land owners, growers, retailers need money to support themselves. They are receiving a minimum percent of the profit, because the big money is with the top 1 percent. There is a reason for the name Mother Nature. Think before you act! Do your research, you are what you eat, ask any nutritionist. The body is a laboratory. Poster: Shelly Young Comment: After having the HPV virus and a Leep procedure I think the vaccine would be something every parent would want there daugheter to have. If boys were susceptible to HPV I am sure all the male congress and senators would be cheering this vaccine on. Poster: doreena Comment: I feel that HPV needs to be presented in a manner that describes what percentage of woman who contract the virus will then develop cancer of the cervix. I also question Merck's real motive: concern for woman or concern for their pocketbooks. And what about looking into the sideeffects of vaccine? How are they made? What is the mercury content?Lets look at how many vaccine's are out there for every young person that actually weaken the immune system. The show just skimmed the surface. Poster: Larry Glanzer Comment: The vaccine should be required. Without it, girls and women may be at risk for cervical cancer, no matter how they live their lives. Abstinence and monogamy are not shields against cancer or HPV. What is truly frightening, and not a little disgusting, is the smug attitude of those who claim that by practicing abstinence until marriage women can avoid the virus and cancer. The unstated implication of this stupid idea is that women who do not practice abstinence until marriage actually deserve to get sick and die horrible, painful deaths. In the eyes of people like that, illness and disease are divine retribution for sins real or imagined. Properly handled by the government (and unlike the Medicare drug program), the price of the vaccine can be brought down. In any case, what is the significance of the cost of the vaccine when compared to the cost to society, families and individuals of losing women to preventable cervical cancer? Poster: Larry Glanzer Comment: The vaccine should be required. Without it, girls and women may be at risk for cervical cancer, no matter how they live their lives. Abstinence and monogamy are not shields against cancer or HPV. What is truly frightening, if not a little disgusting, is the smug attitude of those who claim that by practicing abstinence until marriage women can avoid the virus and cancer. The unstated implication of this stupid idea is that women who do not practice abstinence until marriage actually deserve to get sick and die horrible, painful deaths. It is not unlike the moronic Pat Robertson who claimed that Ariel Sharon suffered a stroke as punishment from god for trying to trade land for peace. In the eyes of people like that, illness and disease are divine retribution for sins real or imagined. Properly handled by the government (and unlike the Medicare drug program), the price of the vaccine can be brought down. In any case, what is the significance of the cost of the vaccine when compared to the cost to society, families and individuals of losing women to preventable cervical cancer? Poster: Selma Nelson Comment: Since the virus is passed on via sexual contact, what might the profile be of a carrier and why do the opponents of the vaccination appear assured that a marital partner is not a carrier. Poster: Texas Gal Comment: Absolutely NOT. The vaccines should NOT be mandatory. We have no idea what the long-term effects are. Perry's action is unconstitutional and Texans should be outraged. Poster: Dennis Miller Comment: I feel the vaccine should be mandatory. If it is not, I fear only girls from wealthy families will get the vaccine while those from poorer families will likely not get it. If it were mandatory, local health departments would have to make it available regardless of the ability to pay. Poster: Larry Gordin Comment: As a health care professional, I believe that the HPV vaccine should be mandated for boys as well as girls with the option of a parent or guardian to opt out upon signing that they understand the dangers, facts and consequences. While I realize that further testing may be needed on males, this is the best and most complete way to eliminate or minimize risk. Even women who practice abstinence before marriage may be exposed to this virus from their mate or from rape. Poster: Mary Z Comment: I am the mother of four adult daughters, and have two granddaughters (ages 18 and 24). I am absolutely in favor of mandatory vaccination against HPV. Poster: jesse Comment: I really don't see how vaccinating your child against CANCER is a bad thing, and unfortunately I thing making it a requirement is necessary for the kids whose parents are too ignorant or poor to take care of them. As far as Merck's profits go, I wonder how much money they might actually lose in the long run when the number of people who need their cancer treatment drugs drastically falls. Forget the side issues - the issue is CANCER, and this is an important step in fighting it. Poster: Bob Schroeder Comment: The assertion that the availability of this vaccine will make girls more promiscuous is idiotic. It will not make girls any more promiscuous than the availability of condoms. At least the vaccine can be mandated. Using condoms cannot be. Secondly, the objection of the vaccination being mandated by schools is absurd because the precedent of mandatory vaccinations has already been set. The administration of the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines were in fact mandatory. And indeed, a child cannot be registered in school without proof of basic required vaccinations. Such objections are much ado about nothing. Poster: Joyce Braunscheidel Comment: This is another example of government sharing their bed with corporate America i.e. pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies. If my memory serves me, didn't the NY Times run an article about Governor Perry's direct and indirect relations with Merck and pharmaceutical lobbying groups? That in itself makes the motives suspect. And if a family opts out for their daughters - what will be the consequences - no medical coverage if the daughter contracts cervical cancer? Can the family be charged with negligence? These too would be prime examples of too much government in our families. Not to mention - it may be far more dangerous to our daughters to give them this untested drug than to risk cervical cancer. I believe this relationship has to end. Joyce A. Braunscheidel Poster: cynthia in texas Comment: I was diagnosed with HPV in 2001. I didn't know what it was but when I was diagnosed I was told the cancer was in two spots on my cervex and it had to be removed. I lost over 50% of my cervex and the doctor told me that if I got pregnant that it could cause me to lose the baby or my life from now on due to the amount of cervex I lost. I have been with my husband since I was 14 but had other partners before him. The doctor also told me it could have laid dorment for many years. I wish there was a vaccine back then. To all mothers we were once teenage girls and we should remeber how it felt to be there. Sometimes the body takes over and the mind goes to sleep. I think the vaccine should be given to all teenage girls. I have two girls 10 and 8 and i will be the first in line for them to get it because i know 10 years later i regreted everything i had done before but i couldn't change. Remember that it is up to us to protect our daughters from the hell that I have been threw and many others like me they are too young to know better and need the guidence from us. Everyone in the world has asked for a cure to cancer at one time or another - this is the first step here and now it can only get better. Poster: Ariel Dougherty Comment: No, it should not be mandatory. The age group Merck, etc have targeted has not been adequately tested. The odd thing about all this on HPV, is that evidence shows while some numbers of women and men get the strains that cause HPV, 90% of the time the infection clears up from one's own immune system. That's what should be studied!! No a blanket vaccination is unncessary, costly in the vaccination (making Merck much money), and is like the Emperor with no clothes. Poster: Lynn Comment: I don't believe it should be mandated at this point but I do feel it is an important vaccine. As a public health nurse, I encourage young girls to get the vaccine as I know how cervical cancer can devastate a woman's life. Not to mention the discomfort of genital warts. I don't think the argument that it is only fitting for those who are sexually active, most people will become sexually active at some point, even if they wait until marriage they could be exposed unless their husband is a virgin as well. No one fusses over the requirement for Hepatitis B vaccine and the 2 ways that it is spread is through sexual intercourse and blood. You don't anticipate your child needing a transfusion, being an IV drug user or having unprotected sex with multiple partners...so whats the difference? Poster: penny Comment: A strong regular good-sized dose of probiotic daily would take care of the problem, without intrusive vaccinnes Poster: Sal J. Giardina, Jr. Comment: It should be recommended and made available free of charge, but it should not be manditory. Poster: Elissa Comment: As a public health official as well as a woman, I don't understand the controversy. Why not protect girls from a serious and sometimes fatal disease? If they want to have sex, the will - always have - whether they are taking risks or not. The vaccine won't MAKE girls have sex. Other factors may encourage sex, such as the unbalanced media images of sex being carefree and cool. Music can be bad for that as well. But not a vaccine. Poster: Kim Comment: I had Level 5 dysplasia, pre cancer before anybody knew what HPV was. My cervix was saved thank god and I have two beautiful children, but after hearingl all sides of the argument, I am for it. Poster: Emily Kullmann Comment: Sounds like great business for Merck. Go Drug Companies - go make tons of $$ and lie to us about research. Poster: Judy Allen Comment: This issue, to me, is like wearing seatbelts in your car. I believe you're an idiot if you don't wear a seatbelt, but I don't like my government legislating that I MUST wear a seatbelt. I should hope every parent of a daughter would consider giving them this vaccine, but I don't like my gov. passing laws that they MUST. Poster: Beth Bush Greenstein Comment: I can't understand why this vaccine should be made compulsory, since it is not for the prevention of communicable disease outside of sexual activity. It looks like Merck has overreached in lobbying to bolster its profit margins. I would have no objection to public schools participating in an information campaign about the virus and the available vaccine, however. Poster: Selma Goldberg Comment: Vaccinations should NOT be required! This drug has not been sufficiently investigated and it is just a way for Merck to make (badly needed) money. Poster: Janine Comment: They just keep adding these ridiculous shots to the list! Wake up America. I was angry 10 shots ago. Keep adding more and more until each and every citizens says 'Enough is enough'. Let's put the health of future generations before profit. Poster: Patricia S White Ph.D. Comment: This should not be a mandaated vaccine. It introduces viral strains or other foreign matter into a girls system and there is always some risk when vaccines are given. A girl sould be in charge of her own body. Why is it that all young girls and women are even being considered for such mandatory intrusion when many wish to refrain from sexual encounters until marriage or reaching the age of majority, etc. This is another form of sexual discrimination and impinging on the morals of all girls. This vaccine should be available for those parents and girls who seek it out. Poster: Claire Fairchild Comment: No, (1) The vaccine has not been out long enough to prove it's safety and (2) It is not a contagious disease that the vaccine is protecting people from. Therefore it should not be manditory. |
Who's Helping Our Wounded Vets?
Elizabeth Warren on the Economy
Nurses Needed
Electric Car Dreams
PBS Special Report: Health Care Reform
