HPV Vaccine

[Tufsoles]

This vaccine does scare me a tad. Espically for 12 year olds. I can't believe that the FDA is allowing this to happen. I want to hear you all think about this issue that mind boggles me.

[homeschoolmom]

[jkaands]

There's no reason that 12 year old should not be getting it, assuming that the vaccine is safe.

It has been well established medically that access to "protection" of any sort does not increase sexual activity.

Many young boys and especially girls the world over are exposed to sex early for reasons beyond their control--should the girls die of cervical cancer-which is a std heavily associated w/ HPV--because they didn't get the vaccine? Girls forced into prostitution, early marriage with HPV-infected men.

Are 12 year olds and other young people going to abstain from sex because they haven't been vaccinated? The threat of pregnancy/HIV/syphilis/gonorrhea/other STD's/herpes doesn't appear to hold them back from early sexual experimentation. Will lack of access to a vaccine?

[cmotherofpirl]

They actually want to start giving it to 10-11 as routine, and girls as young as 9 if the docter thinks irs warrented.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1014817' date='Jun 29 2006, 09:04 PM']
They actually want to start giving it to 10-11 as routine, and girls as young as 9 if the docter thinks irs warrented.
[/quote]
What about whether or not the parents think it's warrented??

[cmotherofpirl]

That is considered a non-issue.

[Dreamweaver]

I found an interesting article on [url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13212604/"]MSNBC[/url] about the HPV vaccine, specifically, who should foot the bill. Its a relatively expensive vaccination, and since men can't get cervical cancer, they're not as likely to need the vaccine.

I do know one thing. My tax money would be better spent on education about the risks of premartial sex, instead of trying to "sanitize" the dangers of premarital sex. What's next, mandatory contraception for 12 year olds, "just in case"?

[ardillacid]

[quote name='jkaands' post='1014790' date='Jun 29 2006, 08:28 PM']
There's no reason that 12 year old should not be getting it, assuming that the vaccine is safe.

It has been well established medically that access to "protection" of any sort does not increase sexual activity.

Many young boys and especially girls the world over are exposed to sex early for reasons beyond their control--should the girls die of cervical cancer-which is a std heavily associated w/ HPV--because they didn't get the vaccine? Girls forced into prostitution, early marriage with HPV-infected men.

Are 12 year olds and other young people going to abstain from sex because they haven't been vaccinated? The threat of pregnancy/HIV/syphilis/gonorrhea/other STD's/herpes doesn't appear to hold them back from early sexual experimentation. Will lack of access to a vaccine?
[/quote]
Next time you let them stick that needle into your childs body remember that the WHO, in several countries, was giving females abortifacients and sterilizers in their vaccines without their consent or knowledge. So who really knows what is in a vaccine?

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Dreamweaver' post='1014880' date='Jun 29 2006, 09:53 PM']
I found an interesting article on [url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13212604/"]MSNBC[/url] about the HPV vaccine, specifically, who should foot the bill. Its a relatively expensive vaccination, and since men can't get cervical cancer, they're not as likely to need the vaccine.

I do know one thing. My tax money would be better spent on education about the risks of premartial sex, instead of trying to "sanitize" the dangers of premarital sex. What's next, mandatory contraception for 12 year olds, "just in case"?
[/quote]
Yes, that will be next.

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1014858' date='Jun 29 2006, 09:41 PM']
That is considered a non-issue.
[/quote]
I'll never be a non-issue in making medical decisions for my children... silly AMA

[toledo_jesus]

hm. No. Don't think I approve of this talk of mandatory vaccination.

[homeschoolmom]

My dd is due for boosters next year. I wonder if the doctor will mention it...

[MissScripture]

I would also like to point out that it does not vaccinate against all forms of HPV.
And I love how they neglect to mention the risks that accompany any vaccination

[avemaria40]

If people were taught to have more self control and to have respect for people and their bodies, this vaccine wouldn't even be necessary

[clg01]

[quote name='Dreamweaver' post='1014880' date='Jun 29 2006, 09:53 PM']
I found an interesting article on [url="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13212604/"]MSNBC[/url] about the HPV vaccine, specifically, who should foot the bill. Its a relatively expensive vaccination, and since men can't get cervical cancer, they're not as likely to need the vaccine.

I do know one thing. My tax money would be better spent on education about the risks of premartial sex, instead of trying to "sanitize" the dangers of premarital sex. What's next, mandatory contraception for 12 year olds, "just in case"?
[/quote]
Remember, Dreamweaver, our tax monies have been going toward education (how little or how much is still in question) to better warn and prepare the youth of the dangers of pre-marital sex now for the past 15 years or so. At least, that's just before I entered senior high school and I remember the issues being brought up in health class all the time.

I, personally, believe that any other alternatives (ie, HPV Vacc) is a better route to take since we've already beat the chicken over the head 1000X over with the sex education thing. Whose to say that this vaccine won't turn out to be a good thing?

Obviously, a number of phat posters.

Thanks.

[XIX]

Yeah I'm not against it.

Assuming the vaccination is safe.
Assuming the side effect are made well-known.
Assuming it's NOT abortifacient!!!

That's a lot to assume, especially the last one. But if I can get those guaranteed, I highly doubt that having a vaccination against an STD is going to cause more sexual activity. We shouldn't be saving sex for marriage based on fear of an STD, but on fear of the Lord, and respect for our future spouses. And that should be our reason for encouraging others to embrace chastity.

[CrossCuT]

[size=1][color="FF6699"]Well, if they are going to be giving it to 12 year olds, they must think that 12 are having sex and by releasing this why would they stop?
If they have a vaccine for some STD you can get, then have sex.
I think thats the message that is kinda being thrown out there.

STUPID PEOPLE!!

What happened to the world anyways?
[/color][/size]

[Deeds]

I think it's sensible. It's like 13 year old girls being vaccinated for rubella in case they become pregnant; no-one's encouraging them to get pregnant, but it protects them in the future. What if a girl is raped? Also, there is a (very rare) possibility that HPV can be transmitted through non-sexual contact.

[CrossCuT]

[size=1][color="FF6699"]Yes it is a nice saftey precaution, but it is something we should not need.
It some cases it cant be helped, but in the majority people should practice more self control
[/color][/size]

[missionseeker]

[quote name='XIX' post='1015436' date='Jun 30 2006, 09:17 PM']
Yeah I'm not against it.

Assuming the vaccination is safe.
Assuming the side effect are made well-known.
Assuming it's NOT abortifacient!!!

That's a lot to assume, especially the last one. But if I can get those guaranteed, I highly doubt that having a vaccination against an STD is going to cause more sexual activity. We shouldn't be saving sex for marriage based on fear of an STD, but on fear of the Lord, and respect for our future spouses. And that should be our reason for encouraging others to embrace chastity.
[/quote]

^
That's why "the silver ring thing" no longer gets tax money.

[avemaria40]

I'm not against the vaccine, HPV can be spread through non-sexual contact and it's always good to be protected.

The thing that makes me sad is that if people were more encouraged to wait instead of to "do what feels good" this vaccine would be a non-issue