From MSNBC, it seems the Human Papillomavirus vaccine being offered at taxpayer expense in South Dakota is particularly painful and often causes fainting in the young girls who get it.
Officials at Merck & Co., which makes the vaccine, acknowledge the sting. They attribute it partly to the virus-like particles in the shot. Pre-marketing studies showed more reports of pain from Gardasil than from dummy shots, and patients reported more pain when given shots with more of the particles.
Meanwhile, U.S. health officials have noticed a rise in reports of vaccine-associated fainting in girls. From 2002-2004 there were about 50 reports of fainting; from 2005 until last July, there were about 230. About 180 of those cases followed a shot of Gardasil, which came on the market in 2006.
HPV is a sexually transmitted disease that can cause cervical cancer.
I'd rather teach my daughter the value of being responsible than expose her to this new, painful drug and give her the mistaken impression that it's going to protect her from the consequences of premarital sex.
3 comments:
Someone named Elais left a comment that I'm not publishing because it contained profanity, but I'll include part of it:
So, all vaccines are a way to avoid responsbility of getting sick?
I'm sick and tired of Republicans whining about people not taking responsibility.
A vaccine for CANCER is a great thing.
Claiming that teenage girls will go from zero to slut after gettiing one shows how little faith Republicans have in parents teaching their daughters.
Where did I say all vaccines are a way to avoid getting sick? The HPV vaccine is not a vaccine against cancer, as you said but a vaccine against most forms of the HPV virus, which can cause cervical cancer. HPV is a sexually transmitted disease. People who only have sex within marriage don't get STDs.
Simply living within God's design frees us from disease and the need for painful, expensive and sometimes dangerous vaccinations. So why would we rather choose the hard, painful expensive way when there's a better way?
A relative of mine recently learned that she had contracted HPV--much to her surprise, considering that she had been faithful in her marriage of several years. Turns out her husband had multiple extramarital affairs and had passed the virus on to her. She did exactly what you are saying people should do and yet still contracted the virus. Don’t you think she would have been better off being immunized against something that may end up giving her cervical cancer?
P.S. I would have given my name here, but since my comment involves personal details about a relative, I’m remaining anonymous.
Your point is valid, Anonymous, but one of the "exception rather than the rule" type.
But what medical authorities still say, but has seldom been repeated by the media since the advent of the HPV vaccine, is that pap smears are still the best way to detect and prevent cervical cancer--especially since (a) the vaccine doesn't stop all strains of HPB, and (2) not all cervical cancer is caused by HPV. For more information, check here for an article on Diane M. Harper, one of the researchers who helped devlop the vaccine: http://www.kpcnews.com/articles/2007/03/14/online_features/hpv_vaccine/hpv01.txt. She says it's not the be-all and end-all of HPV cures.
Post a Comment