Posted on 08/07/2008 7:13:47 AM PDT by weegee
Our parents and grandparents were not vaccinated as children. They never got it.
Quite a number of the people vaccinated now have MS. There needs to be an end to the coverup about vaccine toxins. The BS and hysteria of this campaign to force Gardasil on young girls is shameless.
I agree that it’s sad to have sex changed so much in the last 30 years. (Remember when the biggest fear was pregnancy and hellfire?)
Still, the double standard is alive and well - if not stronger and even more insidious than it was before girls who became pregnant could legally be told to “just take care of it.”
However, I still give shots and pills for STD’s, and will appreciate having one more tool to prevent them. I’m especially happy about all the repeat paps and treatments that will *not* be necessary. Can you imagine? I’m looking forward to the day that all boys and girls are vaccinated and these strains are virtually wiped out.
The lung problems for babies and children born to mothers with HPV are life-threatening. I’m not sure exactly how the virus is transmitted in people with lung cancer, but we’re only just now finding out that as most lung cancers (including those in non-smokers) may be due to the HPV strains that the vaccine guards against.
“The Association of Human Papillomavirus 16/18 Infection with Lung Cancer among Nonsmoking Taiwanese Women”
http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/61/7/2799
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/14/15/4705
http://jcp.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/extract/60/4/337
I don’t believe that having one less risk will make people less careful than they would have been.
One problem I always run into is that there’s no real way to test men and no way to treat male infections HPV 16 and 18 (which don’t cause visible warts, but are the cause of 70% to 99% of cervical cancer).
Thank you for an interesting post. For the record, I am not opposed to the vaccine, if it is safe and effective. I’m not a proponent of making it mandatory at this point.
My real point (maybe made badly) is that I dislike the fact that kids are fed *information* which is often slanted or incomplete, so they are making life decisions without good facts to back them up. Really honestly, many of my students believed that condoms were 100% effective against EVERYTHING you could get from sexual contact, oral sex was 100% safe and that the pill could protect them from STDs. Now, that’s scary. I am a proponent of abstinence, especially in younger teens, real sex ed that involves parents (my dream would be good classes parents attended WITH their kids but of course, some parents simply would not do it and some parents don’t care if their kids are having sex/babies/etc) and a society which stops promoting sex as just another fun thing everyone is doing all the time.
I’m not a prude (well, maybe I am) but sex is such an important part of human relationships, and it’s being treated as nothing more than a bodily function no more important than going to the bathroom or scratching.
BTW I didn’t know the lung cancer connection. And, do dogs get some for of HPV (obviously without the H!)? Could it account for apparent increased cancer rates in dogs?
susie
Our parents and grandparents were not vaccinated as children. They never got it.
He was vaccinated with the Sabin live polio vaccine. That's why it was eventually taken off the market. The Salk killed vaccine can't cause polio, and is the only version used in the US. It was believed that the live vaccine would cause a stronger immune response than the killed vaccine. Also the fact that the live vaccine is taken orally means that it stimulates an immune response ith the gastrointestinal tract that helps to stop the transmission of the disease. The live polio vaccine also creates a faster response by the immune system that is beneficial for protecting recients from an ongoing outbreak of polio. Also the attenuated polio viruses shed in the feces of someone vaccinated can infect and vaccinate others not vaccinated especially in third world countries with poor sanitation. For these reasons it is the preferred vaccine for use in countries where polio is endemic. It is also recommended for previously unvaccinated children who will be traveling into countries where polio is endemic.
The whole Salk vs Sabin vaccine was caught up in politics at all levels from academic politics to national politics to the international politics of the Cold War. Salk's killed vaccine became available in 1955. Sabin's live vaccine was tested in the late 1950's -early 1960 in Africa by the the Soviet Union. It became available commercially in 1963. There was controversy about whether the Soviet physicians under recorded adverse reactions to the vaccine or attributed post vaccination polio cases to previous exposure rather than from the vaccine itself.
By the late 1970's there were no endemic cases of polio in the US, but the Sabin vaccine was still the preferred vaccine. Since that time every single case of polio in the US has been caused by the Sabin polio. Not only are previously unvaccinated children at risk but others who may come in contact with their feces. It can especially be a risk to adults with compromised immune systems. By the 1990s the Sabin vaccine was taken off the market in the US and only the killed vaccine was recommended.
I don't believe anyone has made the claim that this is an unbiased news article. It is an article from a blog.
If you truly want to help people, you won't do so through lying to them to get them to believe in your cause.
Agreed, but no one has yet shown me that there are any lies in this article. They have merely expressed opinions about what they think should have been included, or personal opinions about Erin Blockvich herself. Neither of those things is a 'fact' that would dispute what is presented in the article.
That’s what I recall, but I’m feeling my age lately and can’t count on my memory. It seems to me that that was what a large part of the objection was; it was being recommended for an age group on which it had not been tested and no one knew what the consequences could be.
No, I can't imagine. This is one of the points people bring up; the false sense of security that the vaccine will give.
PAPs will always be needed because not everyone will be immune from the vaccine and the vaccine does not protect against every strain.
If a medical doctor thinks this way, the general populace certainly will. Women who stop getting PAP tests are putting themselves at greater risk.
You might as well declare that treatment of syphilis or gonorrhea with antibiotics is wrong because it will give a false sense of security and not everyone will be cured. Or how about the eyedrops that every newborn gets to prevent chlamydia trachomatis and blindness?
I said “repeat paps and treatments.” Not “screening paps.” Even if we continue every year paps, we should see a dramatic decrease in the “come back in 2-6 month” paps. The big savings and health benefits will be found in reduced conizations, freezings, and biopsies that are needed, since these are caused by the aggressive strains (16 and 18) which can cause their pre-cancerous and in situ changes in one or two years.
The implication that the vaccine will impart false security is just as hypothetical as the supposition that the vaccine won’t have an effect because “not everyone will be immune.”
Totally ignore the evidence that we might cut lung cancer in smokers as well as non-smokers, that we have strong evidence that we will cut anal and esophogeal cancers and cauliflower” genital and anal warts that interfere with fertility and can only be treated by painful, repetitive, and often futile therapies:
Even if the vaccine fails to impart immunity in twice as many patients as flu shots, 90% of those who receive it will be immune.
Remember that the girls at most risk of cancerous changes are the ones who catch the disease before the cervical tissue changes around 17 or so.
Estimates are that 99.7% of girls and women who are immune in the US will not have HPV changes on their pap smears. There is strong evidence that the vaccine provides cross-immunity for other strains and in our 8-10 year records, the other strains of HPV that cause cervical cancer haven’t increased.
How many young women do we need who will not repeatedly miscarry because the vaccine prevented them from weakened cervices? How many cervical deaths prevented?
We may never know. However, we should be able to measure the savings from repeat paps, colposcopies, conizations and genital wart treatments within 2 to 5 years.
Where do you get that I said that medical treatment for disease was wrong? That's quite a leap from a statement that the vaccine will lull people into a false sense of security.
That's already happening judging from comments made by politicians etc.; it's not just an implication. One politician who is eager to force this on others was bragging that now she doesn't have to worry about her daughter getting cervical cancer now that she got her vaccine.
Pol has plan to nix cervical cancer
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1782347/posts
"This is a revolutionary opportunity to eradicate a disease that kills many, many women. As a mom, I'm grateful my daughter will not have to fear having cervical cancer," said Paulin, whose 18-year-old daughter just received her first shot.
So, as a doctor, you've never encountered the mindset that now that there's treatment for something, people don't feel obligated to be more conscientious about preventing it or taking better care of themselves?
In searching for that thread, I did a keyword search for *hpv* and was appalled at the number of threads detailing the deaths and side-effects connected with this vaccine. There's so much outrage at the number of kids who contracted polio from the vaccine when it was something like one in a million and here we have reports of deaths and other serious side effects with this new vaccine and those opposed to the risk girls who get the vaccine are faced with are faced with so much derision.
This vaccine is supposed to prevent cancer deaths. If people are dying from this, that's defeating the whole purpose of the vaccine; that is to prevent deaths.
The number of threads has nothing to do with the number of actual injuries and do not give any credence to the stories. Someone up thread noted that the VAERs system is uncontrolled and purely anecdotal. “I heard that someone my sister knew heard. . .”
Those are 9000 reports - not actual adverse events. The reports are mostly pain, nausea, fainting, redness at the site of the injection. All of which makes the reports less than placebo.
This is a good vaccine. Made by recombinant DNA, using bacteria - not human fetal tissues like the chicken pox and measles vaccines. It’s not given at birth like the Hepatitis B vaccine - even though that virus is only transmitted by blood and body fluids.
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.