Skip to comments.Cervical Cancer Shot May Be Standard In 6th Grade
Posted on 09/13/2006 4:14:30 AM PDT by Abathar
A bipartisan group of Michigan lawmakers wants all sixth-grade girls to be vaccinated against cervical cancer.
A Republican state senator who is the lead sponsor said it's the first legislation of its kind in the U.S.
The vaccine was approved by federal regulators this summer and hailed as a breakthrough in cancer prevention. The shots prevent infections from strains of a sexually transmitted virus -- human papilloma virus, or HPV -- that can cause cervical cancer and genital warts.
At the time, conservatives expressed concern that schools would require the vaccine for enrollment. They argue that such mandates infringe on parents' rights and send a message that underage sex is OK.
If approved, the measure would go into effect for the next school year.
The vaccine was approved for females between ages 9 and 26. In studies, it was credited with preventing disease from the two types of HPV that are responsible for approximately 70 percent of all cervical cancers, according to Detroit television station WDIV.
The legislator who proposed the requirement noted that, as with all other school-required vaccines, parents may opt out of this requirement for medical, religious or philosophical reasons.
see # 20
My daughters won't be getting it.
"The government schools encourage the girls to act like sluts. This is just to elimiinate some of the side effects."
The I got new for you and you better sit down for it. Nearly every girl will have sex at some time in her life.
The vacine doesn't work nearly as well when given later in life so what's the problem with her having it whe it will actually be most effective at preventing her from getting cancer?
In Arkansas hospitals, they are already giving hepatitis-c shots to NEWBORNS - no consent required.
They are assuming everyone is a hooker, drug addict, homosexual?
It's an extremely common virus, prevalence over 20% in the larger population and over 30% in teenage girls. Of course exclusive lifetime mutual monogamy is a great way to prevent it, assuming one's partner never ever cheats. While infections usually clear by about nine months, sometimes infection can last one to two years, so it's possible a woman's fiance could still be infected at the time they get married, thus infecting her. Even if a person trusts his daughter to behave, are you going to trust her fiance have been always abstinent? And unfortunately a woman doesn't always have a choice, as there is also the possibility of rape.
HPV is not well-known in spite of being very common, and doesn't really serve as a deterrent to premarital sex in teenagers at all. I don't think there are any grounds for saying that this vaccine encourages promiscuity, but it definitely can serve as a means to protect girls who are monogamous.
"I am not familiar with this disease. It is obviously transmitted by promiscuity. Can it also be transmitted in (real) monogamous relations?"
I'm not sure how men become cariers of the virus, but staying a virgin until married won't protect a woman from getting it on her honeymoon night.
I would feel pretty bad if my chaste young daughter contracted this cancer at age 40 because I failed to protect at age 6.
Any daugher of mine would definitely be getting the vaccine. I'm a very big proponent of disease prevention via any disease and get all vaccinations possible. A multi-level approach is the best. ANd the arguement that a vaccine against one STD is going to increase likelihood of engaging in sexual activity doesn't hold water when you that to the sex drive intensity of teenagers. That's where the sexual activity comes from, not a needle in the arm.
I think it's a wise thing to do - I just have the strongest objections to the gov't requiring children to be immunized against a disease that is not casually transmissible in the schools.
The immunization confers a long-term resistance to HPV. That also means the girls are less likely to get cervical cancer from something their husband will bring home (after all, the odds are they will eventually marry). Don't forget, promiscuity has been a largely male domain.
I don't think any infant is getting a Hepatitis C vaccine. There is no such thing. They may be getting a Hepatitis A or B vaccine. Hepatitis B is a nasty liver diease that will seriously affect your health for years and can be fatal. It is good to be protected from these diseases.
These nanny state types expect our daughters to be whores.
Not for my girl it won't. She will not have sex until she is married (my husband and I pray) and if she goes against our teachings and does choose fornicate, she will have to go out and get her own shot when she is 18.
I don't know for sure if the immunity will be lifelong, but so far there's no apparent loss of immunity at five years. I guess further studies will give more information. Certainly coverage into the early twenties would cover the time that many women are becoming engaged and married (the husbands of whom the odds say many are not virgins!)
And just why is this VD/STD cancer so common but so unknown?
Because the sex addicts who are cramming sex education down the kids' throats refuse to be honest with these kids about the consequnces of promiscuity.
They treat it all as if having sex today is good as long as you do it the right way, while hiding the truth about how promiscuity is almost certain to cause some major catastrophe in a typical promiscuous woman's life (VD/STD, pregnancy, abortion, loss of self-esteem due to fully justified lack of self-respect that leads to abusive relationships, loose behavior that attracts date-rapsists).
I totally agree.
What is the logic of rejecting a treatment that prevent CANCER?
To me the logic for rejecting the shot is that they want you to immunize the child when she is 11 years old. Basically stating to the child "that you are going to have sex soon and we don't want you to get genital warts". In my opinion its like taking a child to get on birth control pills.
More because it wasn't known for a long time that HPV is linked to cervical cancer. For men it appears to have no negative effects at all.
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.