These slimball politicians

[akarunway 1]

Hooked up w/ the pharmacutical co's. Nothing sneaky here eh? Gonna tell me what's good for my kid to line their pockets. Assholes all the way to DC>http://www.breitbart.com/news/2007/02/02/D8N1PVG80.html

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Gawain 0]

It's not like Coca-Cola scored a deal to have vending machines placed in every school in the state.

I don't know if an executive order was necessary in this case. It might have been better for the state to facilitate easier exposure for the vaccine so that parents could make the decision themselves and coordinated shot-programs in the schools.

Shit, it's a vaccine for a type of cancer. So much time, energy and money gets spent on treating it. This is an opportunity to eliminate this from the health care burden. It's one silver bullet and if a drug comes along that can contribute this type of reality to society, who cares about who makes money off it.

Buy some stock in Merck, if more states mandate this, you'll be part of the party too...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[tonyhays 86]

Of course it is going to line the pharmacutical co's pockets with money. It also might save people from dying of cancer.

Quote

Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit stating that he or she objected to the vaccine for religious or philosophical reasons.

On the other hand, it looks like they left a loophole for parents to squeeze through if they object.

“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”

[Lindsey 0]

Unfortunately, this vaccine covers 4 strains of HPV (there are many others) that are the culprits in 80% of cervical cancer. It's not a vaccine that, imho, should be mandated for anyone for a few reasons. 1) people will likely feel protected from cervical cancer and not be as careful in protecting themselves--i.e. yearly pap smears. 2) As these strains of the virus become less common in causing cervical cancer, others will likely become more common. 3) Vaccines sometimes come with a cost. This one is pretty new...new enough that I'd want to see some results before I pushed it on too many people. One of the docs whom I worked under in medical school said something that I've always kept close to me: "You don't want to be the first person to start prescribing a new medication, but you also don't want to be the last." I think those are wise words. Don't jump on the bandwagon too quickly....

Cervical cancer that is caused by HPV once had a very high mortality rate. Nowadays very few people die of HPV-related cervical cancer. I think we should welcome this new vaccine, but since it's treating something that's a problem (and potentially life-threatening problem), but one that doesn't have a tremendous number of terribly-bad outcomes, I think we should proceed with at least some caution.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Unfortunately, this vaccine covers 4 strains of HPV (there are many others) that are the culprits in 80% of cervical cancer. It's not a vaccine that, imho, should be mandated for anyone for a few reasons. 1) people will likely feel protected from cervical cancer and not be as careful in protecting themselves--i.e. yearly pap smears. 2) As these strains of the virus become less common in causing cervical cancer, others will likely become more common. 3) Vaccines sometimes come with a cost. This one is pretty new...new enough that I'd want to see some results before I pushed it on too many people. One of the docs whom I worked under in medical school said something that I've always kept close to me: "You don't want to be the first person to start prescribing a new medication, but you also don't want to be the last." I think those are wise words. Don't jump on the bandwagon too quickly....

Cervical cancer that is caused by HPV once had a very high mortality rate. Nowadays very few people die of HPV-related cervical cancer. I think we should welcome this new vaccine, but since it's treating something that's a problem (and potentially life-threatening problem), but one that doesn't have a tremendous number of terribly-bad outcomes, I think we should proceed with at least some caution.

Just like Ritalin(http://www.ritalindeath.com/ADHD-Drug-Deaths.htm You gonna force drugs on my kids? NOT. Last wife had my son on this shit. I threw the shit in the garbage. Made him like a fuckin zombie. 5-10 yrs. from now the side effects of this drug will come out and haunt those parents that played the sheep. The lawyers will have a field day w/ this one. People wake up. The big bucks all these companies have and the influence in govt. makes me puke. Coffee in the morning, beer at nite, and cigs all day. Ya gotta die sometime

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Just like Ritalin(http://www.ritalindeath.com/ADHD-Drug-Deaths.htm You gonna force drugs on my kids? NOT. Last wife had my son on this shit. I threw the shit in the garbage. Made him like a fuckin zombie. 5-10 yrs. from now the side effects of this drug will come out and haunt those parents that played the sheep. The lawyers will have a field day w/ this one. People wake up. The big bucks all these companies have and the influence in govt. makes me puke. Coffee in the morning, beer at nite, and cigs all day. Ya gotta die sometime

Here, we're in total agreement. The difference with this though was that teachers were diagnosing ADD, ADHD, etc and parents were insisting to doctors that something be done. Ritalin prescriptions were out of control, and there is still enough wiggle room out there about it.

Cancer isn't "child boredom". It's a whole different ball game.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[billeisele 130]

this seems to be an issue of personal health, if the illness is not widely contagious (like TB, smallpox, etc.) then the government should stay out of it, seems that the government role should be education and access to the meds for the financially disadvantaged thru local health clinics

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[masterrig 1]

Just another really good reason to get rid of lobbyists!!! I'm sure, this is a wonderful drug and will do a lot of good but, the way the governor is going about it is wrong. I could understand his 'getting the word out there' and being supportive of such a drug and trying to educate people about it. Making it a mandatory, must do thing because he's been bought-off by some big drug manufacturer just doesn't sit right with me.


Chuck

[Lindsey 0]

Quote

Just another really good reason to get rid of lobbyists!!! I'm sure, this is a wonderful drug and will do a lot of good but, the way the governor is going about it is wrong. I could understand his 'getting the word out there' and being supportive of such a drug and trying to educate people about it. Making it a mandatory, must do thing because he's been bought-off by some big drug manufacturer just doesn't sit right with me.


Chuck

You'd think that preaching abstinence would be enough, since it is an STD we're talking about.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Just another really good reason to get rid of lobbyists!!! I'm sure, this is a wonderful drug and will do a lot of good but, the way the governor is going about it is wrong. I could understand his 'getting the word out there' and being supportive of such a drug and trying to educate people about it. Making it a mandatory, must do thing because he's been bought-off by some big drug manufacturer just doesn't sit right with me.


Chuck

You'd think that preaching abstinence would be enough, since it is an STD we're talking about.

linz

_____________________________

These are kids, we're talking about! With all those hormones out of control at that age... it's hard for them to pass-up!
Preaching abstinence would be great. Unfortunately, only a few would listen.


Chuck

[Lindsey 0]

Isn't abstinence what they preach when the issue of sexuality in the schools is brought up? Condom use? STDs? Teen pregnancy? Texas tends to be a conservative state.... It tends to be conservatives who preach abstinence whenever these issues come up. It just surprises me that these same folks would be ready to vaccinate all of these children who they normally say should just abstain from sex.

I'd personally rather teach my daughter (if I had one) to keep herself safe rather than vaccinate her against an STD.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[narcimund 0]

Quote

I'd personally rather teach my daughter (if I had one) to keep herself safe rather than vaccinate her against an STD.

When (if?) an AIDS vaccine is created, will you feel the same way?

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Lindsey 0]

When (if?) an AIDS vaccine is created, will you feel the same way?

If you read my first response a few posts up, I think you'll understand my thoughts.

If an AIDS vaccine were only effective 80% of the time, but left people feeling that they were protected from HIV then I'd be concerned about the increased likelihood of contracting HIV due to being more relaxed about safe sex.

An important difference between HIV and HPV, is that with yearly pap smears, women can avoid significant morbidity from HPV-related cervical dysplasia (that becomes cervical cancer). Unfortunately, there's no medical intervention that can cure HIV once a person has it.

I'd have to consider how effective a vaccine against HIV would likely be before I gave it to a child, but since it would be (hopefully) preventing something as serious as HIV, I'd probably tend more towards giving it were it efficacious enough.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[billvon 3,009]

>You gonna force drugs on my kids? NOT.

You can do whatever you like, but this is not a drug - it's a vaccine, and many vaccines are already forced on your kid. This vaccine, like many others, is basically dead viral particles. You give someone the vaccine, their immune system responds to it, and the next time they see those sequences - perhaps next time on a real HPV virus - the patient's immune system fights it off before it becomes a health problem for them.

In many ways it's similar to a polio vaccination. One nice side effect of strongly pushing/mandating polio vaccinations is that polio has been eliminated in the US as a disease. While this vaccine won't eliminate all forms of HPV, it will confer protection to most of them - and if used across most of the population, could potentially eliminate those forms of HPV forever.

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Isn't abstinence what they preach when the issue of sexuality in the schools is brought up? Condom use? STDs? Teen pregnancy? Texas tends to be a conservative state.... It tends to be conservatives who preach abstinence whenever these issues come up. It just surprises me that these same folks would be ready to vaccinate all of these children who they normally say should just abstain from sex.

I'd personally rather teach my daughter (if I had one) to keep herself safe rather than vaccinate her against an STD.

linz

_____________________________

I whole-heartedly agree with you that abstinence is the better way but, sometimes you need a plan-'B'. I think, the drug shoud be available. I just don't care for the idea of the governor accepting money from a drug company then, forcing their product down our throats. I agree with the late Rusty Warren, who said; "Girls! Keep your pants up, your legs crossed and come home from school in a group!"


Chuck

[miked10270 0]

Here's the Brit / European take on this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5411038.stm

Given that under our socialised medicine system this vaccine will be free, making it near mandatory seems more like good medical practice than profiteering & corruption on the part of Merck.

OK, Merck WILL make a fortune from this, but that's what happens when you invent something that a lot of people need. In the long run this vaccination's going to be A LOT CHEAPER in many different ways than the cost of cervical smears, Cervical Cancer treatments, and deaths from this disease.

The vaccination itself is a good thing - like any vaccination program and it's universal use could see Cervical Cancer going the same way as Smallpox within 70 or 80 years.

This "scandal" is more a reflection on the way US politics works than on the evil of big drug companies.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[Lindsey 0]

I whole-heartedly agree with you that abstinence is the better way but, sometimes you need a plan-'B'.

psst....I was being a little facetious with my comment about abstinence. While I don't want kids having sex, I think it's best to educate them about being safe. My comment was just a little dig at those who preach only teaching abstinence....but now are hell-bent on vaccinating all female children against an STD.... I guess my point was lost


I think, the drug shoud be available. I just don't care for the idea of the governor accepting money from a drug company then, forcing their product down our throats.

Me too.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

My comment was just a little dig at those who preach only teaching abstinence....but now are hell-bent on vaccinating all female children against an STD

Who are you talking about? I read the article and didn't see anyone who fit that description.

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Who are you talking about? I read the article and didn't see anyone who fit that description.

Oh, they're not mentioned in the article? Then they must not exist -- in droves -- by the millions -- even in the white house -- proselytizing their unrealistic, death worshipping, religion based, science substituting, abstinence-only political position.

I'm so glad they weren't in this particular article. That means everyone's safe from them.

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[Lindsey 0]

Vaccines, like medications, are not 100% safe. Most vaccines go through years of testing before they're put on the market. Testing for Gardasil was, what, 6 months??? There have been concerns about adverse effects of several vaccines. There's MMR and autism, Yellow Fever Vaccine and several viscerotropic diseases, Meningococcal Vaccine and Guillain Barre to name a few.

While this vaccine has the potential to do some good, I think we're being a little too quick to not just advocate, but mandate its use. Then what about the cost? This vaccine costs about $300 per person for the series of shots. Is this a vaccine that you think is important enough, with such a short history of use that we really haven't seen what its effects are going to be, that we should mandate it for all girls between 12 or 13 and 18?

I think the original poster was right in that this sounds like a politician in bed with a drug company. I don't much like that when it's our children's health that's being played with in order to score a deal for Merck.

linz

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Who are you talking about? I read the article and didn't see anyone who fit that description.

Oh, they're not mentioned in the article? Then they must not exist -- in droves -- by the millions -- even in the white house -- proselytizing their unrealistic, death worshipping, religion based, science substituting, abstinence-only political position.

I'm so glad they weren't in this particular article. That means everyone's safe from them.

Death worshipping? WHICH party is it that's generally in favor of partial-birth abortion on demand, again?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[narcimund 0]

Quote

Death worshipping? WHICH party is it that's generally in favor of partial-birth abortion on demand, again?

I'm so tired of the posters who think every discussion in the world is American Party A vs American Party B. I didn't say anything about your beloved mamma republocrats or the demon demoblicans.

So I have an excellent idea. Why don't we all try not to change the subject quite so automatically. Just try, ok?

Sheesh!

First Class Citizen Twice Over

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Who are you talking about? I read the article and didn't see anyone who fit that description.

Oh, they're not mentioned in the article? Then they must not exist -- in droves -- by the millions -- even in the white house -- proselytizing their unrealistic, death worshipping, religion based, science substituting, abstinence-only political position.

I'm so glad they weren't in this particular article. That means everyone's safe from them.

What are you talking about? You sound like a paranoid, delusional moonbat.

I'm wondering where so many people get the idea that fabricated made up characatures should be treated the same as actual people.

[NCclimber 0]

Quote

Quote

Death worshipping? WHICH party is it that's generally in favor of partial-birth abortion on demand, again?

I'm so tired of the posters who think every discussion in the world is American Party A vs American Party B. I didn't say anything about your beloved mamma republocrats or the demon demoblicans.

Yeah, I have no idea how anyone could construe the quote below as being about the Republicans.

Quote

"Oh, they're not mentioned in the article? Then they must not exist -- in droves -- by the millions -- even in the white house -- proselytizing their unrealistic, death worshipping, religion based, science substituting, abstinence-only political position.

----------------------------------------------------------

Quote

So I have an excellent idea. Why don't we all try not to change the subject quite so automatically. Just try, ok?

Sheesh!

This one's off the irony scale.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Death worshipping? WHICH party is it that's generally in favor of partial-birth abortion on demand, again?

I'm so tired of the posters who think every discussion in the world is American Party A vs American Party B. I didn't say anything about your beloved mamma republocrats or the demon demoblicans.

So I have an excellent idea. Why don't we all try not to change the subject quite so automatically. Just try, ok?

Sheesh!

It must have been that "even in the White House" in your OP that threw me off...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706