Skip to comments.Girls to get sex virus vaccine [throughout Europe]
Posted on 06/18/2007 11:36:00 AM PDT by Sleeping Beauty
GIRLS aged 12 are to be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer under plans to be approved this week by a government committee.
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation is expected to recommend that all girls should be given the jab in the first year of secondary school to protect them against the human papilloma virus (HPV).
The committee, which comprises senior health specialists, is also expected to recommend a catchup campaign to vaccinate all girls aged 12-16.
The final decision about who will receive the vaccine, which costs more than £300 for a series of three doses, rests with the Department of Health. However, it is intended the programme should start in September 2008.
Ministers are known to be in favour although vaccinating girls against HPV will cost more than all the other childhood vaccinations put together. By comparison, the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine costs about £12 for two doses.
The committee believes the expense is justified. The vaccine has been shown to be effective if it is administered before girls are sexually active. If all 12-year-olds were immunised, which would cost more than £100m a year, the committee believes death rates from cervical cancer could be slashed. The virus accounts for 70% of cases of the disease.
There may, however, be concerns among parents about children being overloaded with vaccinations. Children already receive at least seven jabs by the age of 12. As with the MMR vaccine, parents would be free to decide whether their children had the HPV jab.
In America, where the jab has been introduced in several states, there has also been criticism from religious groups that the vaccines can encourage girls to have unprotected sex and that it sends out confused messages about when it is right for girls to lose their virginity.
However, Dr Syed Ahmed, a committee member, said: Surveys show the vast majority of parents are in favour of the vaccine. I dont think girls are thinking about cancer when they decide whether or not to have sex. They are more concerned about becoming pregnant or catching chlamydia or gonorrhoea.
The committee also says there is little evidence of any side effects, which are far outweighed by the benefits. Cervical cancer affects about 3,000 British women each year, some of whom can be in their twenties. About 1,000 women die from the disease every year.
Last week a report by the governments Independent Advisory Group on Sexual Health and HIV gave a warning about the explosion of sexually transmitted diseases in young people.
The report warned that teenagers are having sex at a younger age and are having a higher number of partners.
And according to a study by the United Nations International Childrens Fund, more teenagers in Britain have had sex by the age of 15 than in any other European country. The figures showed 38% of children have had sex by 15 compared with 22% in France and 16% in Spain.
Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Luxembourg and Norway have all recommended that the HPV vaccine is given to girls and young women.
The Australian government has also recommended that all girls are vaccinated from the age of 12.
How about you?
Are you okay with manditory sex-virus vaccinations for your daughters?
Should the government fund vaccinations?
No, but this isn't mandatory.
It will turn them into sluts overnight. /sarc
I have a problem with it too, but I’m not surprised, since Europe has even more nanny-state socialism than we do.
I notice that no one is talking about the negatives of the vaccine like it’s 100% safe. Has anyone listened to the side effects of all the garbage being sold over TV these days? I, for one, have side effects from almost all medications and have to have a child’s dose of anesthesia.
Why not boys too? If an EU boy leaves teh EU to a place where they do not vaccinate the girls, could he not be a vector?
Our Governor (R) tried to get this done here in Texas, and it was stopped COLD.
Here is only one source reporting what happened here in Texas:
No and No and No. There’s been the same kind of talk in this country. Thank God all my granddaughters are over 16. It is part of the demoralizing, dumbing down, border erasing, brainwashing, family smashing and anti-Christian God movement necessary to bring in The New World Order. No tin hat jokes please. Just look around you.
If you read the information on the manufacturer website, the vaccine was tested on girls from 16-25 for less than two years. It only covers 3 of the over 100 strains of HPV. You need to repeat 3 vaccinations every 3 years. There were no fertility tests done on any of the girls and the Pharma has determined that no one after the age of 26 or so should get the vaccination.
Someone is looking to recoup all the money they are losing on the Lipitor and Fosamax lawsuits!
Things that make you go..... Hmmmmmmmmmmmm..........
Perry had to get smacked around a bit by his own legislature.
I am a strong believer in vaccines
I am NOT a strong believer in mandatory
If you home school, it isn't. That's the problem with vaccines -- you can't get your kids into public schools without them once the ball gets rolling.
The best cure for penile human papillomavirus (HPV) infection in a man is using soap to wash his genitiles. That way the females are not going to be infected during sexual contact.
I am making a wide presumption here by predicting that if the governments put ads on the television telling us men to wash everyday and use warm water with soap there would be riots and an immediate overturning of the legislative body.
I believe I read an article here a week or two ago reporting that there had been a number of serious bad reactions to this vaccine, including at least one girl who was permanently crippled by it. I don’t recall all the details, but it sounded like enough to derail any mandatory programs.
But in the modern socialist state, the sexual revolution trumps all.
This vaccine has a potency life of five years.
That's not what the article says - it just says it isn't mandatory.
I’m sure the Taliban, or what’s left of it, find such sex vaccines an offense to Mohammad, the prophet, praise be upon him.
Don’t keep strange company, folks.
It’s a slow incremental change so that abortionists and rich drug companies can reap billions by injecting our 12 year old daughters with birth control solutions.
Someone is looking to recoup all the money they are losing on the Lipitor and Fosamax lawsuits!
Wow. Makes you wonder why some doctors are recommending it for women who are well past 26, even for the elderly. (I know women who have encountered this.) Something not right here.
I don’t care for the government doing this sort of thing, but I find it refreshing that the British press is properly calling this a “sex virus vaccine” instead of the false “cancer vaccine” label that the U.S. media has applied.
This vaccine is absolutely insane in my opinion. I cannot believe any mother would let her daughter get this vaccination with no proof of side effects and/or fertility.
The one thing I have noticed in Reno/Tahoe area is that all the OBGYNs are telling patients not to get the vaccines if you are over 26.
Why would anyone be against keeping their children safe from ANY type of virus? It’s just a precaution.
As for the government being involved: If we accept the fact that they mandate other vaccinations, why not this one?
look at the side effects, and the acceptable loss factors for those side effects, and ask if you think your daughter is worth having that side effect.
All vaccinations have side effects. All drugs have side effects. Just comes down to are you willing to take that risk?
Let’s say 10% death rate? Well maybe lower, but how about other risks, sterility, gall bladder disease, liver disease?
Are you serious? You honestly think one vaccine against ONE STD will turn a girl into a slut???
No. I was making fun of some posters on this forum who have posted comments in previous threads to that effect.
Did you read the article?
because boys die hard on cervical cancer
because unknown women dieing of cervical cancer is much better to diggest politicaly then a debate about sexual matters in that place.
I’m not sure what your point is. If boys can carry the virus and give it to girls, why not vaccinate the carrier pool?
HPV has been “implicated” in cervical cancer, and *as yet* HPV has not been found to cause problems in men, but if the vaccine is good and tested and has reasonable risk/benefit margins, I’d go for eliminating the virus from humans everywhere.
I am not sure if a vaccination works with boys because I am not sure if they just carry HPV or if they actually get infected.
It’s the drug companies, they are just out of control.
Like what ALMOST happened in Texas, glad to hear they stopped it cold.
Yes, males get the virus as an infection
Males who infect their partners have the infection
The vaccine works in men, it gets the most common cancer-causing viruses and two of the common wart-causing viruses, deliberately engineered into the vaccine as “an incentive for males to get vaccinated”.
I'm sorry but that's not accurate. First, the followup now has been for longer than two years and the vaccine is still effective. Second, the vaccine protects against the two most common cancer-causing strains of HPV, types 16 and 18, that are responsible for 70% of all cervical cancers. There are about 15 (not 100) cancer causing types of HPV in all. Third, the vaccine is contra-indicated in pregnant women because it's safety was not tested in them. Fourth, the vaccine is given in three doses over a 6 month (not three year) period.
As for the age 26 limit, first the vaccine was tested in women and girls ages 9-26 so the approval was for that age range. In addition, most women who are infected by HPV get the infection during adolescence or in their 20's.
First, clinical trials in males are ongoing and I expect that the vaccine will be approved in males in the near future. However, it might not be cost-effective to vaccinate males since they only carry and transmit the infection and are rarely harmed by it. The vaccine is expensive and it might make sense to only vaccinate the people who are actually harmed by HPV, i.e. females.
I've read most of the papers on HPV vaccination published in the peer-reviewed medical literature and none show severe side-effects due to the vaccine. All we have are a handful of unverified anecdotal reports from the media but nothing like this in the scientific literature. Until we do, I'd take reports like that with a large grain of salt.
DOJ needs to reign them in before it happens again.
“and are rarely harmed by it.”
The vaccine works on genital warts in males. That’s a benefit for sure.
I think the vaccination effort would be accepted by more people if it was for boys and girls instead of just girls.
I don’t know what the initial source I read was, but I googled it and came up with this:
Whether it’s true or not, I don’t know.
thanks for the information.
True. I didn't write my comment carefully enough. What I meant was that HPV related cancers are very rare in males so the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating males is open to question.
I’ve seen these reports as well. Until I see verification of some kind I remain skeptical. Nothing like this was reported in clinical trials and in follow-up studies of the vaccine. As for the risk in pregnancy, the vaccine is specifically contra-indicated in pregnant women. Any woman of child-bearing age who requests the vaccine should have a pregnancy test first.
As I mentioned above, it may be easier to sell to people if it were boys and girls- then, girls would get the vaccine and be protected from a known killer.
Look at the “circle the wagons”, “protect our women” approach here when it’s targeted just at girls.
I take your point. But at $360+ for every person vaccinated that's a lot of money.