Posted on 02/06/2007 8:58:03 PM PST by Marie
I agree. This vaccine was tested on fewer than 2,000 girls, and has been on the market for less than a year. Too soon, and too much drug money and influence being used to force this on our daughters.
And did I thank you for YOUR important information???
I just faxed Rep. Villarreal, Jane Nelson and Rep. Delisi. I'll do education next.
What happens if I overdose with Gardasil?
An overdose of this vaccine is not expected to produce life-threatening symptoms.
In other words, Uh, we don't know.
What should I avoid while receiving Gardasil?
There may be certain other vaccines that should not be given at the same time as the HPV vaccine. Until you have completed the series of 3 Gardasils, do not receive any other vaccine (including a flu shot) without first asking your doctor.
Again, uh, we don't know.
LOL! Maybe we should call it even.
-----
I just faxed Rep. Villarreal, Jane Nelson and Rep. Delisi. I'll do education next.
GIT 'em!
:-)
GARDASIL is the only vaccine that may help guard against diseases that are caused by human papillomavirus (HPV) Types 6, 11, 16, and 18.
GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone and does not prevent all types of cervical cancer, so it is important to continue regular cervical cancer screenings.
Anyone who is allergic to the ingredients of GARDASIL should not receive the vaccine. GARDASIL is not for women who are pregnant.
GARDASIL will not treat these diseases and will not protect against diseases caused by other types of HPV.
It only MAY help guard? This stuff is junk medicine.
As best I can tell, the 80% figure comes from a 1986 study in the Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases by by some guy named K.J. Syrjänen. Their "random sample" was in fact 1,000 female 22 year olds who visited a single gynecology clinic in Kuopio, Finland in 1985. They found that between 7 and 8 percent of Finnish women had HPV, then guesstimated that this translates into a lifetime infection risk of 79%!
To put it mildly, that kind of guesstimation is nothing short of absurd.
Other studies have found similar samples in the 8% infection rate suggesting this number is probably accurate, only to follow through with unscientific guesstimations that produce absurd risk rates in the 70-80% range.
A 1988 study in Epidemiological Review by Koutsky, Galloway, and Holmes tested for the presence of HPV-related nucleic acid - an indicator of present or prior HPV infection - in men and women between the ages of 15 and 49. The nucleic acid was detected in between 10 and 20%, depending upon how the results were interpreted. They too jumped from that into the guesstimation game for a figure of 60% even though no real evidence and no actual statistical samples support doing so.
Realistically, it is absurd to suggest that more than 7 or 8% of the population has HPV right now and more than 20% will ever be exposed to it. The 7-8% figures all come from studies taken of patients in their early 20's when they are the most sexually active, so even this figure is probably high. Something in the 5% range is probably more accurate for the entire adult population, about a third of them being cases of visible genital warts - the most common of the HPV strains.
Studies have also conclusively linked its incidence with "high risk" sexual lifestyles. For example a 1988 study in Pediatrics by Martinez and Farmer found a 24% HPV infection rate for sexually active inner city teenagers. That's three to five times the infection rate for the whole population. STD clinic patients are also at higher risk. A study from a regular gynecology clinic on genital warts found an infection rate of 1.5%, while clinics that specifically treat STDs reported genital wart rates ranging between 4% and 13%.
That's just it. From what I can tell, the CDC has yet to issue a recommendation.
The CDC's ADVISORY Board issued a recommendation.
That's not the same as the CDC doing so, IMHO.
FYI for #106
The vaccine in trials was 100% effective in preventing infection by Type 16 and Type 18 HPV. There are other strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer that the vaccine doesn't protect against -- Types 16 and 18 are the two most significant strains, responsible for in excess of 70% of cancer cases.
The deeper this issue is explored, the more questionable it becomes.
That is NOT what it says. It says it MAY help guard against those 4 types. It does NOT say it will prevent those 4 types. It's junk and you can't make it something it's not no matter how much you spin it.
That's all that I found but the CDC isn't saying otherwise. If they see it differently, they'd better speak up. Their silence sounds like agreement.
I am not equating VIOXX and Gardasil. I am saying that they are both made by the same company and the company has claimed at their release to the public that they were safe. It is the screw me once shame on you; screw me twice, shame on me scenario. Only now the drug is targeted at developing females, and I say that it is best to err on the side of (over)caution.
As far as whether I feel that people should stop taking Singulair and Zocor, I would say in many cases yes. The drug companies bombard consumers with commercials telling them that they need 'this' medication. This country is over medicated! Patients should not be telling their doctor that they can't get a boner, so they need Viagra, or their legs are heavy and restless so they need Requip. They should be telling their physician the symptoms they are experiencing and let the doctor tell them their treatment options. But thanks to relentless advertising, patients are now prescribing medication for themselves and going to a doctor to get his/her signature on a script. Probably not the system that Hippocrates had in mind.
Good grief!
Selected important information about GARDASIL
As with any vaccine, vaccination with GARDASIL may not result in protection in all vaccine recipients.
About HPV Disease
In the United States, approximately 20 million people are infected with HPV, and approximately 80 percent of females will have acquired HPV by age 50. For most people, HPV goes away on its own
Interesting...so the loudest supporter of the phony and unscientific 80% figure is Merck itself.
Yup. But I had to dig to find it. What came up first is posted in 105 and sounds like they're being careful in their claims so that lawsuits will be minimal.
We agree on this - direct to consumer advertising is persuading people into things they don't need. I saw ads for implantable defibrillators on cable, which struck me as a terrible idea, worse than usual.
I didn't say none. I said that 'koilocytotic atypia', now called HPV, was not a common occurrence in the cells of the vaginal tract when dysplasia was diagnosed. No, I don't believe that HPV was the cause of most of the earlier cervical cancers. Dysplastic cells frequently did not have the halos characteristic of HPV. Many of the cancers years ago were of the Keratinizing Squamous type. As far as I know this hasn't been linked to HPV. And, yes, it used to take years for cancer to develop but now, with the aggressive nature of some of the HPV strains, it can progress to invasive within a year or so.
Five rapes in one practice? I'd call that very unusual and very sad. Were any of these date rapes? I suspect that that is what's going on here.
LOL. Back when he was first running, some "Good Hair" flirty Freeperettes were all ga-ga over him and his good looks.
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.