Posted on 08/21/2009 9:01:31 PM PDT by CMoran325
The Washington Post had an article today about how schools in D.C. and Virginia are "requiring" girls entering 6th grade to receive the HPV vaccine (Gardasil) There is an opt-out: In Virginia, you can just not get the shot, but in D.C. parents must fill out a form.
But of course, "opt-out" has already been lost on some. A quote from the article:
"It wasn't really a choice," Haggans said while waiting in line at Kelly Miller Middle School during one of the District's free immunization clinics Thursday. Lanise received her second of three doses of the HPV vaccine at the clinic. "The school said she needed it, so I got her it," Haggans said.
So even though it isn't actually required, some parents will still think it is, or simply go along with it, and get the three shots -- kaching! that's another $375 in Merck's pocket!
Well, my daughters will not be getting the HPV vaccine, even though I am a big advocate of vaccines -- for easily communicable diseases. My daughters don't need a shot for something that is sexually transmitted.
I believe that there should be some mandates to protect the public at large -- but only for diseases that can be spread by casual contact and are potentially deadly. The government has no right to require protection from something you can only catch from sexual contact, potentially risking a bad reaction which has included paralysis and some deaths that can't be explained.
Jessica Varga of Nevada became paralyzed hours after receiving a dose of Gardasil.
I'm not so worried that my daughters will become promiscuous if they get this shot. Whereas, I think young women do avoid sex for fear of getting pregnant and some for fear of getting AIDS, I can't imagine too many are thinking about other sexually transmitted diseases or cancer when they're deciding whether or not to have sex.
But I do take exception to the notion that our schools and our government are assuming that young girls will inevitably become sexually active so soon that they feel that girls as young as nine need this shot. Even entering sixth grade these girls aren't even twelve -- and they're already being set up to have sex at a young age?
These proponents of Gardasil actually think they are empowering young women to take control of their sexual health. Not from where I stand.
My daughters will be truly empowered. They will be taught that it's best not to have sex until marriage, and all the reasons why. They will unequivocally believe that their sexuality is so special it is not to be trifled with, that no boy should ever be allowed to attack their self-esteem or trick them to think otherwise. A truly empowered young woman would never have sex unless under the best of conditions, practically, spiritually, mentally, emotionally, physically, etc etc -- and not before they're at least eighteen.
If they do decide otherwise -- after they're out of high school, in a long-term monogamous relationship with someone whose health history they are fully aware of, and after full discussion and consideration of possible repercussions -- I will have taught them that they should be examined by a doctor first, and then they can make any health care decisions for themselves. (They will also be encouraged not to use an abortifacient to prevent pregnancy, and they will base their decision knowing that sooner or later they will get pregnant... but that's another blog post.)
What's really going on here is the bigger agenda of sex without consequences. Gardasil, birth control, abortion -- all being shoved down the throats of young women while trying to convince them they are "taking control of their sexuality." Sounds more like certain sexually liberal advocates are trying to convince everyone -- most importantly themselves -- that recreational behavior that can damage you both body and soul, and potentially can create another human being, can be alright if you simply get shots, pop pills, and undergo "procedures."
I'm not buying it -- and neither will my daughters.
Gardasil can also vaccinate men, though it has not yet been approved by the FDA to be marketed as such. Isn't it interesting that once again the responsibility of preventing sexual consequences is placed on young women? Why don't radical feminists have a problem with this, like traditional feminists do?
"Radical feminists"? You mean like those NOW women who stayed silent over Bill Clinton's rapes?
They do what they're told.
Hmmm...in DC...I say give all of them double doses.
If a teen girl is not sexually active, there is absolutely no reason for her to get the vaccine.
Just another way for Big Pharma to make big money.
It was never tested on minors who are still growing. These “mandates” are using kids as gineau pigs. Perry wanted every girl in Texas to get these shots, of course some of his advisors and staff worked for that company too.
Never trust a politician.
How about we make it “opt in”?
Our pediatrician offered to immunize my daughter with the Gardasil vaccine last month during a sports physical. I said no thank you, there hasn’t been enough time to see if it is safe AND I am expecting her to abstain until marriage. If not she can make that decision when she is 18 years old. But not now.
I'm curious... do you have a problem with it for older teens? If so, it based on medical concerns?
By the way, I think its the parent's right to opt out for younger kids who aren't sexually active.
I wouldn’t get it for my daughters when it came out and decided to let my oldest daughter (18) make the decision for herself. She talked at length with the doctor about the vaccine and after much discussion, including the fact that even though she abstains, her future husband may not have. In that regard, he could be carrying the “virus” and transfer it to her. She decided to go ahead and get the shot.
I’ve heard that this vaccine contains a compound called “Tween 80” or “Polysorbate 80”, which has been linked with infertility.
I would choose to “wait and see” on this (and any other) vaccine before giving it to my children. Incidentally, my daughter is almost 18 and has refused any new vaccines. She’s asked me to get the forms to “opt out” of vaccines here in Texas for reasons of conscience.
I told her that I feel strongly that children get vaccinated against polio, measles, mumps, rubella and the diseases that target babies when they’re young. I have no problems with parents doing research and choosing to get individual shots rather than the 3-in-1’s.
The thing that chaps my butt is that we have no real choices any more. A mom can’t say, “I don’t have a problem with vaccines in general, but I don’t want to give my kids unnecessary shots or anything under 5 years old.” No, we have to say, “NO SHOTS, NEVER” or “all shots are fine”. Where’s the individual choice? Where’s the power for the parent to do what *they* think is in their children’s best interests?
Years ago we had a family doctor who thought as I did. He also believed in Gulf War Syndrome long before it was vindicated. (He was a military doctor.) I miss him. He would *really* discuss these things with me and support my desire to err on the side of caution. (He was the one who told me to stay away from the Chicken Pox Vaccination.)
I had an interesting chat about this vaccine with our doctor this past week (our daughter starts 6th grade next month) he has nothing against the vaccine, just the mandates because as he said "they must think we're ALL stupid."
Just let them TRY to make it mandatory with no opt out!
That is exactly what the VA legislature tried, with the only opt out being for religious reasons. About the only decent thing I can credit Gov. "hinky eyebrow" Kaine for during his term is having amended the opt out section of the legislation.
I am truly sick of getting crapola in the mail from Merck about this damned vaccine.
“I wouldn’t get it for my daughters when it came out and decided to let my oldest daughter (18) make the decision for herself. She talked at length with the doctor about the vaccine and after much discussion, including the fact that even though she abstains, her future husband may not have. In that regard, he could be carrying the “virus” and transfer it to her. She decided to go ahead and get the shot.”
Good reasoning — but I think the idea is, when my girls each meet their own special young man, before they ever have sex, she is going to know whether or not he has already done anything — and there will be plenty of time for them *both* to go to a doctor and for *him* to be tested for whatever, if necessary. *Then* if she needs the shots, just in case...
Young men should be just as much a part of a healthy sexual relationship as young women.
It sounds like, even if the infertility thing is true, that vaccines would be a minor source compared with many processed foods:
"Polysorbate 80 (commercially also known as Tween 80, ...) is a nonionic surfactant and emulsifier derived from polyethoxylated sorbitan and oleic acid, and is often used in foods." ...
If that is true, "Polysorbate 80 is often used in ice cream to prevent milk proteins from completely coating the fat droplets. This allows them to join together in chains and nets, to hold air in the mixture, and provide a firmer texture, holding its shape as the ice cream melts." - Wikipedia
Sorry about the editing error.
Then the question has to be asked: Is there a difference between ingesting and injecting a substance? There are many things which are perfectly safe to apply topically, but not ingest. I’m sure that it’s OK to eat many things that you wouldn’t want injected.
I’ll go back to the mouse study that proved the link between Tween 80 and infertility to see how they conducted it.
Here’s a link describing the study. Yes, the rodents were injected with one dose at 4-7 days old.
http%3A%2F%2Fdrtenpenny.com%2FDocuments%2FGardisil_2-09_NYC.ppsx&ei=HQeQSoGyJKKQtgfw1cDOBA&usg=AFQjCNEEe0ccD8AfrZLLtDdhYC2EObAKYA
It’s a powerpoint slide show. I’m trying to find a less-biased source...
Found many sources, but all biased. I only have a little more time to FReep, then I’ve *got* to get on with my day! :-)
I’ll look into this more later.
I think it should be “opt in”
There is no way I would give this to a child. NO WAY!
I don’t think there is enough known about this vaccine at this point. Why would anyone want to inject their child with something they know very little about?!
Exactly!
Not enough is known about this vaccine for anyone to make an intelligent decision.
I am right there with ya’. That is what I suggested for my daughter as well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.