Posted on 09/17/2011 7:29:48 AM PDT by Askwhy5times
The short answer is no. The long answer is also no. It is true that trying to implement this vaccine regime by EO was wrong. Perry readily admits that mistake. However, the vaccine is actually a good idea. It is not an assault on innocent 12-year old girls as Michelle Bachmann claimed. It also does not cause retardation as Michelle Bachmann misinformed the American public. The misconception in many people's mind is, since HPV is a sexually transmitted disease, the government is preparing 12 old girls for sexual activity at an early age. That is false. In order for this vaccine to work correctly, it has to be given at that age. The protection they get is a few years down the road. Waiting until the girls are adults and can make their own informed decision will not work. It will be too late for them to take advantage of this potentially lifesaving vaccine. Heather Borden Herve over at Wilton Patch explains:
HPV is also the most common sexually transmitted disease today.A better approach for Gov. Perry would have been to offer the vaccine for free and promote it to parents through a public education program, but hindsight is always 20-20. BTW, the story about Rick Perry sitting at the deathbed of a friend dying of cervical cancer is true. Here name was Heather Burcham.A-ha! Is that what makes this issue hot and—pardon the media parlance pun—sexy? Because somehow when the topic of “innocent little 12 year old girls” gets mixed up with protecting them from a virus that gets transmitted through sexual contact, it suddenly gets to be co-opted by politicians on the basis of protecting moral values—and it gets them airtime.
In full disclosure, I grew up in a household that was comfortable talking about science, medicine and fact. My dad is an OBGYN, so we weren’t afraid of using correct anatomical terminology or talking about human sexuality. It’s formed the basis for the way I approach issues like this one.
The science shows that in order for this vaccine to work it needs to be administered before a person becomes sexually active. According to a statement released by the American Academy of Pediatrics following the media uproar after Bachmann’s comments, they “recommend that girls receive [the] HPV vaccine around age 11 or 12. That’s because this is the age at which the vaccine produces the best immune response in the body, and because it’s important to protect girls well before the onset of sexual activity.”
That recommendation was echoed by the CDC and American Academy of Family Physicians....
"The American Academy of Pediatrics would like to correct false statements made in the Republican presidential campaign that HPV vaccine is dangerous and can cause mental retardation. There is absolutely no scientific validity to this statement. Since the vaccine has been introduced, more than 35 million doses have been administered, and it has an excellent safety record."
This isn't just a woman's issue. HPV is also a major risk factor for penile cancer.
It doesn't have to be that way, of course. Any health insurance company worth its salt would gladly pay for something that cost-effectively prevented diseases across a population, that is their business model.
If this comes down to who pays for it then we're back to socialism again, because when that is the question being evaluated by government the answer is that you and I end up paying for a lot of things that other people wouldn't spend their own money on.
The same is probably true in EVERY state, as coverage depends on the insurance company.
So Does My Insurance Cover Gardasil?www.healthinsurancerates.com/59-health-insurance-and-gardasil.htmlIt probably does. At this point more than 96% of health plans in the nation have provision to cover Gardasil for girls. You should check with your specific provider, but if it turns out that they do not cover you, and you have a hardship in paying for the vaccine, there are programs available directly through Merck and Co. that can help you get the vaccine for free. There are other programs available as well - some from the government - which can assist with paying for this vaccine.
Is it covered by insurance?health.msn.com/womens-health/the-faq-on-the-hpv-vaccineThe uncomplicated answer : Yes
"Right now, there are 120 different insurance plans in the U.S. that have agreed to cover Gardasil," says Wambold. This means that 96 percent of the nation's insurance companies offer some coverage for Gardasil, she says.
But the complicated answer: Maybe
Even if your insurance company offers coverage for Gardasil, this doesn't automatically mean your immunization is covered. Everything depends on what type of plan you've chosen, says Wambold who encourages people to call up their insurance companies and see. If your provider didn't cover Gardasil last year, check with them again. "Many insurance companies updated their coverage at the start of the New Year," says Wambold.
The same is probably true in EVERY state, as coverage depends on the insurance company.
What is true, is that when the state of Texas makes a vaccine mandatory, then ALL insurance companies doing business in Texas MUST pay for the vaccine, as a condition of being allowed to issue health insurance policies in Texas.
The coincidnce of cervical cancer with HPV is a crap shoot.
For every one million women who are infected with oncogenic HPV:www.nocervicalcancer.org/hpv_cc_faqs.html
- ~= 100,000 will develop precancerous cervical cell changes
- ~= 8,000 will develop early cancer confined to the outer layers of the cervical cells
- ~= 1,600 will develop invasive cervical cancer
The role of government is not to prevent any conceivable bad outcome.
The incidence of cervical cancer in the US in 2011 was 12,720 persons. According to the population clock the population of the US is 312,236,169. A little handy dandy math shows that in the odds of a person getting this disease is approximately 1 in 24,547, or 0.041%.
That incidence level doesn't justify jabbing everyone with a vaccine (it's not even close).
Vaccines are not risk-free, and the medical research is neither exact nor complete. Based on what we know today it is outrageous to be jabbing every 12 year old girl with a new vaccine for this. This is not polio or smallpox, and if we react this way to every rare disease then we will be pumping everyone full of biomedical stew "just in case".
Now that I've done the math on this particular one, I can see that it's ten times worse the decision to force this vaccine on girls than I'd imagined it to be earlier. It's not even a good medical decision for any given individual to take on the vaccine risk if the manufacturer gave the vaccine away for free.
Here is a Texas-specific cite that represents a counter-example to this.
4. If you have UT Select Blue Cross Blue Shield PPO, the HPV vaccine is covered. (Some UT students who are also UT employees have this health insurance.) Before you schedule an appointment at UHS or any other healthcare facility, contact Blue Cross Blue Shield for information about potential charges.
Odds of getting hit by lightning in an 80 year lifetime: 1 in
10,000
Odds of a female getting cervical cancer: 1 in 12,500
http://www.lightningsafety.noaa.gov/medical.htm
Just bringing some proportion into this conversation here.
You forgot to divide (the US population) by two, seeing as about half of the population does not have a cervix.
We have over 12,000 new cases of cervical cancer diagnosed every year.
Are you saying we have about that many people getting hit by lightning every year?
You might want to consider that half of the population wasn't likely to get cervical cancer, due to the fact they don't have a cervix.
Also not when figuring the odds, those were odds per year.
Most people live significantly longer than one year.
Not to mention that there has been one guy in the news recently who's been hit three times. Apples and Oranges, IOW. Odds don't mean it will or won't happen.
These are tiny odds, and every person affected can make a voluntary and informed choice on their own.
There is absolutely no reason for government to be involved in this at all. This should strictly be between individuals and their medical providers.
WHY would we do that? We’re looking for income, not more spending. We want those kids money going to support our college and university system. What do you think was the purpose of the bill?
Actually muawiyah, you’re starting to sound like Obama...let’s give them all free tuition, and feed, buy there books and give them a cash for clucker while we’re at it.
Okie dokie, when you get those buses gassed up and full of illegals headed south, let me know.
That scholarship with all those goodies is available in MEXICO, not TEXAS.
They gots to go there to get it. And then they don't come back!
I suggested doing that because it was cheaper ~ not because it was right. Left up to me they'd just go back! Let mom and dad foot their bills.
Think of it as a "twofer" ~ Texas doogooders get what they want (another way to waste American money on Mexicans) and Americans get what they want ~ Mexicans IN Mexico!
Yes, dear, I did get it. Why would want to send money off to Mexico, when we can get those kids to pay into our system instead. It’s revenue not expense. You can’t seem to wrap your head around that can ya?
Why do you think every state in the union takes foreign students? Because it’s revenue.
Why do you say that? It’s not going to hurt one Texan for those students to PAY into our college and university system. In fact, it’s revenue we wouldln’t otherwise get.
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.