Texas governor orders STD vaccine for all girls
BAC'sMom wrote: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16948093/
amynicole21 replied: I saw that. It's for cervical cancer, which can be transmitted through sexual contact, so I guess it's technically an STD  I'm not sure I agree with it being mandatory, but I think the vaccine itself is great.
gr33n3y3z replied: I think its a good idea
but made to get no way no how
my insurance wont even cover it bc its to new
Old Mom Hubbard replied:  RIDICULOUS! This has not even been PROPERLY TESTED! There have ALREADY been severe side effects from this. This is just assuming girls are automatically going to be having sex at ages 11 or thereabouts. Yes, MANY cultures of girls are in fact having sex at that age, many becoming mothers by 14 and 15 especially from Latin America and Mexico. But to force this, ridiculous! Where did parental rights be considered for one, and for two again the most important thing of all, the long term safety? What if one day they "suddenly discover" "Oh, this causes deformities, mental and physical handicaps?" Great, and they FORCED this upon us. So glad I don't live in Texas and glad NOT to have a daughter. This is a very sad state of affaris and yet even more infringments upon parental rights.
Okay so there are those that are all for it because all of the media being paid by this pharmaceutical company spouting ONLY the good news and how they are here to help and save you and your daughters! Well, the truth is, the REAL side-effects and safety that is yet to be known are being swept up under the rug in their quest to make yet more money! SICKENING! 
This drug has not been proven to be safe. The drug company is pushing it to make money regardless of the risks to our children. Don't be gullible and believe every feel-good commercial on television. Our girls should not pay the price for an experimental vaccination that will make millions for the drug companies and the politicians who hold out their hands behind their backs.
All we hear about are the benifits. Parents should be informed of all the facts when it comes to decisions about our kids.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 1, 2007
HPV Vaccine Mandates Risky and Expensive
Vaccine Safety Group Finds Serious Reactions, High Costs
Vienna, Virginia - /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ - The National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), the nation's leading vaccine safety and informed consent advocacy organization, is urging state legislatures to investigate the safety and cost of mandating Merck's HPV vaccine (GARDASIL) for all pre-adolescent girls before introducing legislation amending state vaccine laws. In an analysis of reports made to the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) since the CDC's July 2006 universal use recommendation for all young girls, NVIC found reports of loss of consciousness, seizures, joint pain and Guillain-Barre Syndrome. In a separate evaluation of costs for young girls being vaccinated in private pediatrician offices, NVIC discovered that parents living in the Washington, D.C. area will be paying between $500 and $900 to have their daughters receive three doses of GARDASIL.
"GARDASIL safety appears to have been studied in fewer than 2,000 girls aged 9 to 15 years and it is unclear how long they were followed up. [1] VAERS is now receiving reports of loss of consciousness, seizures, arthritis and other neurological problems in young girls who have received the shot," said NVIC President Barbara Loe Fisher. "At the same time, parents who take their daughters to private pediatricians are going to be shocked to find that they will be paying two to three times the widely publicized $360 cost for the three-dose series. The cost is going to break the pocketbooks of parents and break the banks of both insurance companies and taxpayers, when the reality is that almost all cases of HPV-associated cervical cancer can be prevented with annual pap screening of girls who are sexually active."
Between July 2006 and January 2007, there have been 82 reports of adverse events filed with VAERS following receipt of GARDASIL by girls and boys ranging in age from 11 to 27 years. Reaction reports have come from 21 states, including Virginia and the District of Columbia. All but three of the reports were for adverse events which occurred within one week of vaccination and more than 60 percent occurred within 24 hours of vaccination."The most frequent serious health events after GARDASIL shots are neurological symptoms," said NVIC Health Policy Analyst Vicky Debold, RN, Ph.D. "These young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness, temporary loss of vision, slurred speech, fainting, involuntary contraction of limbs (seizures), muscle weakness, tingling and numbness in the hands and feet and joint pain. Some of the girls have lost consciousness during what appears to be seizures." Debold added "The manufacturer product insert should include mention of syncopal episodes, seizures and Guillain-Barre Syndrome so doctors and parents are aware these vaccine adverse responses have been associated with the vaccine."
VAERS reports also indicate the doctors are administering GARDASIL to girls and women at the same with Tdap, DT, meningococcal (Menactra), hepatitis A, and other vaccines, even though the Merck product insert states that, with the exception of hepatitis B vaccine, "Co-administration of GARDASIL with other vaccines has not been studied."[2] There is no publicly available information about how many of the 9 to 15 year old girls in Merck's pre-licensure clinical trials received GARDASIL simultaneously with hepatitis B vaccine.
Again, most have only heard, "Oh how good this is for you" while the FACTS are being shove aside and under the rug. NOT worth the risk IMHO.
BAC'sMom replied:
Well I do LIVE in Texas and I DO have a daughter! Although it probably is a good idea to have the vaccine, I certainly do NOT feel it is OUR Governors place to tell ME or anyone else to vaccinate OUR daughters especially since the vaccine is still new.
Old Mom Hubbard replied: I am sorry for sounding anti-Texas...It is a BEAUTIFUL PLACE and have been to the Houston and Dallas area many times, albeit only small fly-over catch connecting flight visits) but as for the governor and that passing law...THAT is what I meant. And I would have LOVED to be able to have a daughter too.
Okay just wanted to clarify this...
skinkybaby replied: I live in Texas, and while I think the way he went about doing this is nothing short of shady, I'm going to be optimistically cautious. Luckily for me, my daughter won't be "required" to have the vaccine for another 8 or 9 years and that's far enough away for the kinks to be worked out. But if my daughter were already at the age its being required, I'd fill out the paperwork saying thanks, but no thanks and wait a few years to see how everything plays out before having her vaccinated. I definitely think this vaccine is a step in the right direction to eradicating an awful disease.
Calimama replied: If only they hadn't made it mandatory. 
Ellie replied: I live in Texas. There is an "out" for any parent that doesn't want their daughter to have the vaccine.
And I have read the studies and have not seen any reason NOT to get this vaccine. Not only do 80% of women get HPV, but the vaccine is 100% effective against the strains of HPV that it vaccinates against.
They have done 5 years of study. the vaccine works for those 5 years. they are still researching whether a booster is needed. i have read the actual study documents, not just some anti vaccines fact sheet.
MyBabeMaddie replied: When I was in HS I participated in a study at my Dr.'s office to test the HPV vaccine - it still wasn't approved by the FDA (this was a few years ago). I never had any bad side affects from it - I am very happy I received the vaccine and I got paid to get it!
Cece00 replied: Even though I think the vaccine is great & I dont understand why someone would not want their child to get it (JMO)- I DO NOT agree with them making it mandatory. That's just wrong and not the govt's place.
lgood22573 replied: Well I have HPV strains 18 and 20 the lucky two that cause cervical cancer (or is it 16 and 18? I can't remember! but my OB told me I have them both!). I have only had 2 sexual partners in my entire life in the last 39 years. So I have Paps every 6 months. So if I had the OPTION I would of gotten the vaccine. I do believe the pharmaceutical companies don't give a rats patootie about people and are only in it for the money so it's a sticky subject.
Lisa
Ellie replied:
it's not really "mandatory" because any parent that doesn't want their child vaccinated can fill out a form to exclude the vaccine, or they can put their child in private school, or they can homeschool
but for any vaccine to work, the vast majority of the population must be vaccinated.
Cece00 replied:
Yeah, its unfortunate that boys will not get this, because then they will still be able to spread it frequently to girls who are not getting the vaccine.
3_call_me_mama replied:
Hind sight is always 20/20 huh?
On teh subject of teh vax.. no way no how not for us. like everything else.. there is an exemption.
amynicole21 replied:
The reasoning for doing this early is to get the girls vaccinated BEFORE they start having sex so that they don't contract the virus.
DansMom replied: I don't think they should be mandatory and I'm glad to hear that one can get exemptions.
Old Mom Hubbard replied: It is the side-effect and long term issues that would greatly concern me. Sure they are talking over and over about the benefits...but what about the REAL risks that have yet to be discovered as they have not tested it for long enough or the severe side-effects already discovered that they will attempt to hush up? This topic can go back and forth and as for pro-vaccines and anti-vaccines this one is just too risky IMO. Physical and/or mental deformities/challenges? What about what had already been reported such as siezures and others?
And again, if uncircumcised males are carriers then why not mandate they be circumsized or given the shot as well?
This governor-..HMM let us see what he has to gain from all of this...what he has ALREADY gained-
Perry has several ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, his former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.
Toomey was expected to be able to woo conservative legislators concerned about the requirement stepping on parent's rights and about signaling tacit approval of sexual activity to young girls. Delisi, as head of the House public health committee, which likely would have considered legislation filed by a Democratic member, also would have helped ease conservative opposition.
Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say mandates take away parents' rights to be the primary medical decision maker for their children.
The federal government approved Gardasil in June, and a government advisory panel has recommended that all girls get the shots at 11 and 12, before they are likely to be sexually active.
The New Jersey-based drug company could generate billions in sales if Gardasil _ at $360 for the three-shot regimen _ were made mandatory across the country. Most insurance companies now cover the vaccine, which has been shown to have no serious side effects.
(They hide these by the way, would not want to lose those profits now would they?)
Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave. (Seems a bit of conflict of interest here to me)? But just MO...
A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government.
So okay, those who want the shot or have already had it I just hope all for the best and if no side-effects then I am truly happy for you. I hope that if years down the road that you have no adverse effects from this, or any other drug given by the pharmaceutical companies.
Yes pharmaceutical companies do so much good; but the greed, well it is power...and we all know what the saying is about power..."Power corrupts but Absoluter power currupts absolutely"...and in this case, I see a lot of questionable dealings in regards to this drug.
Again, best of luck and of health to those who choose to go for it. Peace and blessings to all and that is all I shall say about this matter.
Have a GREAT DAY/AFTERNOON/EVENING everyone...
lgood22573 replied: <<And again, if uncircumcised males are carriers then why not mandate they be circumsized or given the shot as well? >>
I don't understand this statement. What does that have to do with it? (not being sassy... I just honestly don't get it)
Lisa
BAC'sMom replied: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/headli...ro/4532274.html
Cece00 replied:
It my understand that it is not offered to males...anyone know for sure?
lisar replied: I do not agree with the governer MAKING anyone do it. I think the vaccine is a good idea. But I dont think he can make people do it. I think that is wrong. I think it should still be a choice for the parents to make.
|
