Cancer vaccine being forced on girls

[jillian]

THAT'S what I was waiting for!

Suppose the ones with the "backward Puritannical attitudes" have it right after all. Suppose the best way to minimize the risk is to practice abstinence-monogamy - particularly during the age span of the highest prevalence. I haven't seen any hard proof to the contrary - have you? Suppose young girls are given good, sensible information, by parents who love them, and have not been stripped of their right to raise them as they see fit. The old "they're going to do it anyway" copout might not be such a foregone conclusion, then.

It's not about whether they "have it right" or not. It's about the fact that you don't deprive someone of a vaccine that can prevent cancer in an effort to "discourage" sex. Or should we just make sure the harlots are punished for their indiscretions if they have sex anyway? Cancer works, right? It's up their with boils, pestilence, killing of the first born... all that kind of thing.

But thanks for not denying that it's all about the abstinence-only thing. I appreciate that. At least it's honest.

 

[musicman]

It's not about whether they "have it right" or not. It's about the fact that you don't deprive someone of a vaccine that can prevent cancer in an effort to "discourage" sex.

You've got it backwards. The sexual revolution was a lie. We're not built for promiscuity; religious people always knew it was bad for us, spiritually; medical science is beginning to find that it makes us sick, physically - and sometimes even kills us. I'm not talking about deprivation and discouragement; I'm saying, let's give good information. If Parents A want to vaccinate their daughter so she'll be safe when - not if - she begins engaging in harmful behavior, I guess that's their privilege. Why force that mindset on Parents B? Don't you ever get tired of using government as a club?

Or should we just make sure the harlots are punished for their indiscretions if they have sex anyway? Cancer works, right? It's up their with boils, pestilence, killing of the first born... all that kind of thing.

Take a breath, now, jillian. I'm not the ogre of your fevered imaginings.

But thanks for not denying that it's all about the abstinence-only thing. I appreciate that. At least it's honest.

No - like many of our discussions, this comes down to our differeing opinions on how people should be governed. And, again, I say, as much by self-determination as possible.

 

[sitarro]

Maybe every double-super-sized-cheeseburger and cigarette pack should come with the same contract? Hmmm.... this idea has legs!

You want to ride a bicycle(with or without a helmet).... sign a contract, you want to hike or climb mountains(sprains, poison ivy, bears, spiders,etc.)....sign a contract, you want to swim in the ocean(sharks, jelly fish, sting rays, drowning)..... sign a conract, you want to try your hand at farming( wide variety of accidents)......sign a contract, run a marathon(pulled muscles, dehydration)...sign a contract, camping or snow skiing...sign that damn contract, drive a hybrid car(dangerous in an accident)...sign a contract. I, as a taxpayer don't want to pay for your rescues, severe injuries, finding lost idiots, avalanche problems,etc. etc. You want to open the "who is the bigger risk" pandora's box jasen?

 

[Gem]

Since this is a fairly new vaccine...is anyone who is sure it should be mandated concerned about possible side-effects or ill-effects later on?

I mean, what was that medicine that was ripped off the shelves after it was found to cause death or heart issues or something (I'm having a total brain fart on this one, I apologize) even though it was out there being prescribed to patients etc.

Perhaps this is just because my husband is going through law school...but it seems to me that by MANDATING that all young girls get this vaccine is asking for big trouble if it ever turns out to have ill-effects on "our" girls?

Why not simply allow parents to make this determination?

Would some parents opt out? Sure. But not most.

I think that we walk a very fine line when we take rights and choices away from parents and put them into the hands of the government. Its very easy to say "its the right thing," when it is something like a vaccine...but it opens the door to one less power for parents...one more power for the government...and the government NEVER lessens powers...in only increases them.

Since HPV is unlike polio and hepatitis in the fact that you can not get it from simple contact with other children...it seems pretty clear that this one should be left up to the parents. Schools and doctors can educate parents...but taking that role away from parents simply because YOU feel a minority of parents are going to make the "wrong" choice seems a bit "hyper-government intervention"...in my opinion.

 

[musicman]

Well and reasonably stated; classic Gem!

 

[Gunny]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070312/ap_on_re_us/cancer_vaccine_n_m



They want to give a vaccine of an STD to sixth graders. If the parents want their kids to get them great, but I dont think they should be forced to get them. Especially when the virus can be avoided without a vaccine.

Texas has already signed this into law. For those of you who are against it. let me draw you a REAL CLEAR picture.

My wife somehow contracted the HPV virus. If you knew my wife, the stigma that is carried with the term "STD" is unjust.

Anyhow ... about every 18 months for the past 5 years, she had to have the top couple of layers of skin lasered off, just exactly where you might suspect would be the absolute worst place to have that done would be. Each time, it takes 2 weeks for her to be able to walk, 4-6 weeks for her to get back to normal activity, and about 6 months to regain all of her feeling in the area.

If THAT is preferable to a vaccination that will prevent the virus, by all means, don't get the vaccination. But once you have contracted HPV, it's too late for the vaccination. You can have the surgery or take your chances.

 

[musicman]

Texas has already signed this into law. For those of you who are against it. let me draw you a REAL CLEAR picture.

My wife somehow contracted the HPV virus. If you knew my wife, the stigma that is carried with the term "STD" is unjust.

Anyhow ... about every 18 months for the past 5 years, she had to have the top couple of layers of skin lasered off, just exactly where you might suspect would be the absolute worst place to have that done would be. Each time, it takes 2 weeks for her to be able to walk, 4-6 weeks for her to get back to normal activity, and about 6 months to regain all of her feeling in the area.

If THAT is preferable to a vaccination that will prevent the virus, by all means, don't get the vaccination. But once you have contracted HPV, it's too late for the vaccination. You can have the surgery or take your chances.

I'm terribly sorry, Gunny. All the best to your wife. Someone very dear to me, from my past, went through the same thing. You and the Mrs. will be in my prayers.

The compulsory nature of the vaccination still riles me, though. I don't trust government as far as I can throw it.

 

[Gem]

Gunny,

That is horrifyingly unfortunate. I can't imagine what your wife goes through and can't do much but admire her strength. My mother goes through similar procedures for cancerous cells on her face...its painful and the recovery is difficult, I can't IMAGINE having to go through this sort of thing in the area your wife has to!

This is the kind of information parents should be given by their doctors when they take their daughters in for a physical and the vaccine is brought up...it must be mentioned that women can contract this disease without being sexually promiscuous and that the "treatments" for it are painful and ongoing. They should be given all of this information...

And then they should be allowed to make their own choice for their own children.

 

[Gunny]

I'm terribly sorry, Gunny. All the best to your wife. Someone very dear to me, from my past, went through the same thing. You and the Mrs. will be in my prayers.

The compulsory nature of the vaccination still riles me, though. I don't trust government as far as I can throw it.

We've been taking compulsory vaccinations all our lives. I don't particularly trust government, and definitely not that liberal in conservative clothing Rick Perry, but having seen the alternative, I'd take the chance on the vaccination.

 

[musicman]

We've been taking compulsory vaccinations all our lives. I don't particularly trust government, and definitely not that liberal in conservative clothing Rick Perry, but having seen the alternative, I'd take the chance on the vaccination.

I don't doubt it a bit.

On another subject - what's your take on Perry's relationship with Merck? Something askew there?

 

[wiggles]

Right, but - again, from your link - the highest degree of prevalence occurs in women 20-24. It is certainly possible that multiple sexual partners IN THAT SHORT SPAN could have an effect - a measurable one, taken side by side with monogamous girls of that age. Again, we're not given to know - not in this particular article, at any rate.

So this is about controlling sexual behavior for you? Because I think you were telling Jillian earlier that it wasn't.

 

[musicman]

So this is about controlling sexual behavior for you? Because I think you were telling Jillian earlier that it wasn't.

About WHOSE controlling sexual behavior? Because I think equipping a young girl with the means, the confidence, and very sound medical reasons for exercising SELF-control is a course woth pursuing. I think Jillian was telling me earlier that they're all going to screw around anyway.

 

[wiggles]

I mean, what was that medicine that was ripped off the shelves after it was found to cause death or heart issues or something (I'm having a total brain fart on this one, I apologize) even though it was out there being prescribed to patients etc.

Vioxx and Celebrex. Those aren't the same as vaccines.

 

[wiggles]

About WHOSE controlling sexual behavior? Because I think equipping a young girl with the means, the confidence, and very sound medical reasons for exercising SELF-control is a course woth pursuing. I think Jillian was telling me earlier that they're all going to screw around anyway.

How about equipping her with the means, the confidence, the very sound medical reasons, and the vaccine? Then she's protect all around.

 

[Gunny]

Gunny,

That is horrifyingly unfortunate. I can't imagine what your wife goes through and can't do much but admire her strength. My mother goes through similar procedures for cancerous cells on her face...its painful and the recovery is difficult, I can't IMAGINE having to go through this sort of thing in the area your wife has to!

This is the kind of information parents should be given by their doctors when they take their daughters in for a physical and the vaccine is brought up...it must be mentioned that women can contract this disease without being sexually promiscuous and that the "treatments" for it are painful and ongoing. They should be given all of this information...

And then they should be allowed to make their own choice for their own children.

Thank you for your sentiments. And no, it's hard to imagine what she goes through. Just being the powerless male holding her hand is about as much as I can take. I've got half the staff at the cancer treatment center at BAMC terrorized.

And yes, all information should be made available. It was not here. It was presented as an arbitrary decision made by the Governor without explanation. He did himself and the vaccine a disservice with his heavy-handed approach.

 

[Gunny]

I don't doubt it a bit.

On another subject - what's your take on Perry's relationship with Merck? Something askew there?

Got a link? Seems I heard something, but have not actually seen anything.

 

[musicman]

How about equipping her with the means, the confidence, the very sound medical reasons, and the vaccine? Then she's protect all around.

Can she, her mother, and I have a say in it as well? That would be keen!

 

[Gunny]

So this is about controlling sexual behavior for you? Because I think you were telling Jillian earlier that it wasn't.

Just to contradict that theory, my wife has had a total of 3 sexual partners in her life. The last two being myself and her former husband. While it seems reasonable that sexual promiscuity would increase the likelihood of exposure, it is not required.

 

[musicman]

Got a link? Seems I heard something, but have not actually seen anything.

Just a quick reference in paragraph 7 of Avatar's posted article - the thread opener. It sure didn't smell good to me, though. Definitely worth a deeper dig, I think.

 

[Gunny]

Just a quick reference in paragraph 7 of Avatar's posted article - the thread opener. It sure didn't smell good to me, though. Definitely worth a deeper dig, I think.

I'll look at the info, but barring a miraculous turnaround, I won't vote for Perry again. If I wanted a Democrat governor, I'll just vote for one outright.