Posted on 02/06/2007 8:46:59 AM PST by HuntsvilleTxVeteran
Actually, the ACP is not merely saying you don't need the vaccine if you're not having sex. They also say that the studies are far too short to provide adequate data on either duration of protection or efficacy. "Because the average time between initial HPV infection and death from cervical cancer is 20 years, definitive conclusions about HPV vaccine efficacy will take years to establish."
80% of women will have contracted HPV at least once by their 50th birthday. Now only a small percentage of those will develop cervical, vaginal, etc. cancers related HPV, but the actual spread of the virus is enormous.
Actually, the vaccine does not give life-long protection. So far, it is only 5 years. So it makes sense to wait until a girl is older.
At 10, she probably is not going to have sex in the next 5 years. At 15, she is much more likely to have sex the next 5 years.
Yes, but saying the vaccine will need a booster doesn't mean you shouldn't get it.
It means that you shouldn't give it to someone who is positive they won't be at risk for the next 10 years, because in 10 years they might have a better vaccine and so you won't have to do it twice.
The American College of Pediatricians is a solidly conservative activist group, anti-gay marriage, pro-life, two-parent family kind of group.
Thanks for clarifying this. I was surprised at first because it seemed an odd postion. After a search, I realized the main pediatrician group was the American Academy of Pediatricians. An indication of their take on Gardasil: "The Committee on Infectious Diseases (COID) of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) believes this vaccine provides a significant advance in preventive health care of girls and women and thus should be incorporated into the routine immunization schedule as soon as recommendations become finalized."
The American College of Pediatrics disagrees with you.
"The American College of Pediatricians is opposed to any legislation which would require HPV vaccination for school attendance. Excluding children from school for refusal to be vaccinated for a disease spread only by penetrating vaginal intercourse is a serious, precedent-setting action that trespasses on the right of parents to make medical decisions for their children as well as on the rights of the children to attend school. In addition, this vaccine prevents a disease which is exclusively sexually transmitted; mandating it as early as 9 years of age places the medical provider in an ethical dilemma."
http://acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=12&art=95&BISKIT=1956999049
Cite?
Teenagers are the most likely to contract HPV. But the point is that the vaccine is not effective if given after exposure. The odds that an 11 year old has been exposed are effectively nil.
There's about 3 more threads on this subject, and they contain links to other sites. I don't know where I read the 5 years. However, FR has the info someplace.
How does it disagree with me? I'm not for mandating this vaccine either.
I don't think it has been tested enough, so I am not even sure about what I'll do with my own daughters.
I think parents should make the decision (or women when they are 18).
I think pap smears are the way to go to get early detection of cervical cancer.
My guess is that what you're referring to is the fact that no study has examined the longevity of the vaccine beyond 5 years. But that's different from saying that there's any reason to believe that the vaccine loses effectiveness at that point. In fact, the FDA at least believes that the vaccine will stay effective.
In all of the many studies conducted, there has yet to be a SINGLE serious adverse reaction. You could inject people with salt water and still occasionally get a serious adverse reaction -- not only is the HPV vaccine safe, but it astonishingly safe.
Here's a table of serious side effects. The first column is for Gardasil, and the second is for the Placebo
Table 10
Summary of Subjects Who Reported an Incident Condition Potentially Indicative of Systemic Autoimmune Disorder After Enrollment in Clinical Trials of GARDASIL
Potential Autoimmune Disorder GARDASIL
(N = 11,813) Placebo
(N = 9701)
Specific Terms 3 (0.025%) 1 (0.010%)
Juvenile arthritis 1 0
Rheumatoid arthritis 2 0
Systemic lupus erythematosus 0 1
Other Terms 6 (0.051%) 2 (0.021%)
Arthritis 5 2
Reactive Arthritis 1 0
N = Number of subjects enrolled
I don't think it has been tested enough.
5 women who took Gardasil developed arthritis, as opposed to 2 women who took a placebo. This is out of a study group of nearly 20,000. Do you realize how statistically insignificant the difference is?
>>>The problem is that I would prefer doing this to avoid health care cost issues years from now.
In a perfect world, kids would remain virgins, but that's not going to happen. >>>
I agree. So sad the children of the 'perfect world' parents just might have to pay for it with their lives. My mother died from cervical/ovarian/uterine cancer and tested positive for HPV. She was the daughter of a preacher and not a slut. But to hear these folks (some anyway) tell it, she deserved it.
I for one have told my pediatrician that I want to be on the list and when it's approved for my daughter's age groups, all three will be immunized.
>>>The problem is that I would prefer doing this to avoid health care cost issues years from now.
In a perfect world, kids would remain virgins, but that's not going to happen. >>>
I agree. So sad the children of the 'perfect world' parents just might have to pay for it with their lives. My mother died from cervical/ovarian/uterine cancer and tested positive for HPV. She was the daughter of a preacher and not a slut. But to hear these folks (some anyway) tell it, she deserved it.
I for one have told my pediatrician that I want to be on the list and when it's approved for my daughter's age groups, all three will be immunized.
It tells me there is a higher incidence of auto-immune diseases after this vaccine, and they don't probably know why.
What happens when a million women have taken this vaccine? How many girls between the ages of 9&18 have been tested?
My daughter are 10, and I think I have a good 6 years before I really have to think about this vaccine. I'd personally like to wait and see what has happened during that time frame.
I sure as H*** don't want someone mandating that my daughters have to take this vaccine.
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.