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 don’t 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 government’s 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 Children’s 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.
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
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1645206&dopt=Abstract
Males who infect their partners have the infection
http://medrants.com/index.php/archives/729
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.
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.