narcimund 0 #26 February 5, 2007 QuoteIt must have been that "even in the White House" in your OP that threw me off... In a 50 word post about all literally millions of people, you see "white house" so you automatically react as if it were a partisan Party A/Party B distinction? Talk about kneejerk reactions! I suppose we're just lucky you didn't mention the blowjob. Small progress is good. Baby steps.... First Class Citizen Twice Over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,009 #27 February 5, 2007 >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. Yep. Yet today in CA kids are vaccinated against diphtheria, hepatitis, influenza, measles, mumps, pertussis, poliomyelitis, rubella and tetanus - even with the MMR issues. None of them are "mandatory" - they are expected to get them all, but they can be exempted if the parents feel the vaccine goes against their beliefs, or if there is a medical contraindication. That seems like a pretty reasonable tradeoff between maintaining the health of a population and allowing parents control over what happens to their kids. >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. The comeback for that in SC would be "I don't like it that some people want to propagate a disease just so doctors have more work blah blah blah." I don't think either side has such motives. There are strong arguments for vaccinating a population against any disease; indeed, some diseases have been completely eradicated by widespread vaccination. As you mentioned, I think I'd wait a few years before adding HPV vaccination to the above list, but once proven that it works it could save a lot of lives. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #28 February 5, 2007 QuoteHooked 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 When I was a kid, all the parents were scared that their kids would get polio. Over 20,000 cases a year in the US alone. FORTUNATELY some companies invested in the research that led to polio vaccines. I don't resent them their profits at all.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #29 February 5, 2007 Quote>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.Jeez. Wadda think you are telling me something I don't know? I went thru all that crap at WRAMC many moons agoI 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #30 February 5, 2007 Quote>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. Yep. Yet today in CA kids are vaccinated against diphtheria, hepatitis, influenza, measles, mumps, pertussis, poliomyelitis, rubella and tetanus - even with the MMR issues. None of them are "mandatory" - they are expected to get them all, but they can be exempted if the parents feel the vaccine goes against their beliefs, or if there is a medical contraindication. That seems like a pretty reasonable tradeoff between maintaining the health of a population and allowing parents control over what happens to their kids. >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. The comeback for that in SC would be "I don't like it that some people want to propagate a disease just so doctors have more work blah blah blah." I don't think either side has such motives. There are strong arguments for vaccinating a population against any disease; indeed, some diseases have been completely eradicated by widespread vaccination. As you mentioned, I think I'd wait a few years before adding HPV vaccination to the above list, but once proven that it works it could save a lot of lives. And then there's measles. In 1920, the United States had 469,924 measles cases and 7,575 deaths due to measles. From 1958 to 1962, the United States had an average of 503,282 cases and 432 deaths each year. (Measles reporting began in 1912; prior to this time, no statistics are available.) In large cities, epidemics often occurred every two to five years. When the measles vaccine came on the market in 1963, measles began a steady decline worldwide. By 1995, measles deaths had fallen 95 percent worldwide and 99 percent in Latin America. In the United States, the incidence of measles hit an all-time low in 1998, with 89 cases and no deaths reported. Bloody drug companies profiteering at our expense! (I had measles in 1951, it was NOT a very nice experience).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #31 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteHooked 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 When I was a kid, all the parents were scared that their kids would get polio. Over 20,000 cases a year in the US alone. FORTUNATELY some companies invested in the research that led to polio vaccines. I don't resent them their profits at all. Of course, there are some glaring differences between then and now. For example, back then the problem was of near-epidemic proportions. The general population was very concerned about it, possibly like cancer or Aids of today. The research was being done (for the most part) by non-profit entities. It was being made available, not forced upon an otherwise unconcerned population. Lastly, it was treating a virus that attacked at random, not being used as a preventitive measure, just in case girls participate in unprotected sex and become infected and miss detection (which a simple PAP smear will find) and forego any treatment. Among the women who do all of these things, about 1% of the infected women will eventually go on to develop cervical cancer. Other than these difference, your analogy is an excellent one. *************************************** This is basically about a problem that individuals can easily prevent on their own. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #32 February 5, 2007 QuoteJeez. Wadda think you are telling me something I don't know? I went thru all that crap at WRAMC many moons ago Did you know the Iditarod sled race celebrates running diphtheria vaccine to Nome, AK? Did you know that before the introduction of diphtheria vaccine there were around 20,000 deaths every year in the US from diphtheria? Damn slimeball politicians, taking business away from morticians.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #33 February 5, 2007 Damn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. I read about that last yr. whilst following the Iditarod. One of my missions before I die is to race that one. The husky I have now couldn't handle I think. Do they have a class for old timers like POPS? LOLI 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. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #34 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteHooked 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 When I was a kid, all the parents were scared that their kids would get polio. Over 20,000 cases a year in the US alone. FORTUNATELY some companies invested in the research that led to polio vaccines. I don't resent them their profits at all. Of course, there are some glaring differences between then and now. For example, back then the problem was of near-epidemic proportions. The general population was very concerned about it, possibly like cancer or Aids of today. The research was being done (for the most part) by non-profit entities. It was being made available, not forced upon an otherwise unconcerned population. Lastly, it was treating a virus that attacked at random, not being used as a preventitive measure, just in case girls participate in unprotected sex and become infected and miss detection (which a simple PAP smear will find) and forego any treatment. Among the women who do all of these things, about 1% of the infected women will eventually go on to develop cervical cancer. Other than these difference, your analogy is an excellent one. *************************************** . Obviously that 1% doesn't matter, they're probably poor and minority anyway. Wealthy Caucasian girls would never have unprotected sex or miss their annual GYN exam. Quote This is basically about a problem that individuals can easily prevent on their own Indeed it is. Of course, we generally concede in the western world that 13 year old girls (and boys) do not yet have adult level judgment. That's why even the US has recently (2005) stopped executing minors.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #35 February 5, 2007 It's great that we have vaccines against the things we need to have vaccines against....without a doubt. I think it's good that a vaccine has been developed against some of the forms of HPV that cause cervical cancer. Believing that we're jumping the gun on mandating this vaccine for school-aged girls at this time is a far cry from being against vaccinations. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #36 February 5, 2007 QuoteDamn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion... ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #37 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteDamn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion... And to think that I thought you usually took the side of rational logic and reason."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #38 February 5, 2007 QuoteIt's great that we have vaccines against the things we need to have vaccines against....without a doubt. I think it's good that a vaccine has been developed against some of the forms of HPV that cause cervical cancer. Believing that we're jumping the gun on mandating this vaccine for school-aged girls at this time is a far cry from being against vaccinations. linz Just a matter of scale and priorites. On the whole, vaccines and sewage disposal have probably been the two biggest factors in raising life expectancy in Europe and N. America over the last 150 years. Nothing else even comes close.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #39 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteDamn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion... And to think that I thought you usually took the side of rational logic and reason. You have to be an Oxford or Cambridge alum to understand.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #40 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDamn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion... And to think that I thought you usually took the side of rational logic and reason. You have to be an Oxford or Cambridge alum to understand. To understand what? PS: The Spanish Inquisition (Monty Python)"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #41 February 5, 2007 QuoteObviously that 1% doesn't matter, they're probably poor and minority anyway. Wealthy Caucasian girls would never have unprotected sex or miss their annual GYN exam. That's 1% of the women who contract certain forms of HPV. Not all women. I'd guess it's closer to one in one thousand who would be effected. Are you saying we should vaccinate all girls to protect the 0.1% who lack knowledge or intelligence to look after themselves? And then there's that portion of the population who will think this vaccine will protect them from all STDs, or think that it's a contraceptive. QuoteQuoteThis is basically about a problem that individuals can easily prevent on their own Indeed it is. Of course, we generally concede in the western world that 13 year old girls (and boys) do not yet have adult level judgment. That's why even the US has recently (2005) stopped executing minors. Leaping lizards. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #42 February 5, 2007 Obviously that 1% doesn't matter, they're probably poor and minority anyway. Wealthy Caucasian girls would never have unprotected sex or miss their annual GYN exam. One consideration that I've heard batted around is the concern that this particular vaccination could in the long run lead to MORE deaths from cervical cancer rather than fewer. You can see right here in this thread that lots of people consider this vaccine to be more protective than it is. It's only protective against 4 strains of HPV that cause 80% of cervical cancers. Dysplasia of the cervix is very, very, very common. These are very often caught on pap smears, and these women are followed. Monitoring and treating dysplasia is what keeps women from dying of cervical cancer. If a teen or young adult feels a false sense of security because she's had her vaccine I wonder what the likelihood is that she'll come in for a pap? (And I wonder if that will in turn cause even more ovarian cancers to be missed). Also, what about when the strains that cause the other 20% of cervical cancer become more commonplace? It's likely to not take long. Are people still gonna feel protected? If they do, it will be a very false sense of security. Once folks get out of the habit of getting their paps and the strains that cause 20% are causing 80%, we're gonna be in the same situation we're in now, only with people probably not being as diligent with their yearly exams.... I think we're on the right track here, but it's not time, imho, to breathe that sigh of relief and put your 12 y/o in line for the shot. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #43 February 5, 2007 But this is just as threatening as Polio, German Measles and Small Pox combined!!! Why can't you grasp this? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #44 February 5, 2007 QuoteObviously that 1% doesn't matter, they're probably poor and minority anyway. Wealthy Caucasian girls would never have unprotected sex or miss their annual GYN exam. One consideration that I've heard batted around is the concern that this particular vaccination could in the long run lead to MORE deaths from cervical cancer rather than fewer. You can see right here in this thread that lots of people consider this vaccine to be more protective than it is. It's only protective against 4 strains of HPV that cause 80% of cervical cancers. Dysplasia of the cervix is very, very, very common. These are very often caught on pap smears, and these women are followed. Monitoring and treating dysplasia is what keeps women from dying of cervical cancer. If a teen or young adult feels a false sense of security because she's had her vaccine I wonder what the likelihood is that she'll come in for a pap? (And I wonder if that will in turn cause even more ovarian cancers to be missed). Also, what about when the strains that cause the other 20% of cervical cancer become more commonplace? It's likely to not take long. Are people still gonna feel protected? If they do, it will be a very false sense of security. Once folks get out of the habit of getting their paps and the strains that cause 20% are causing 80%, we're gonna be in the same situation we're in now, only with people probably not being as diligent with their yearly exams.... I think we're on the right track here, but it's not time, imho, to breathe that sigh of relief and put your 12 y/o in line for the shot. linz OK, at what rate do poor girls with no health insurance get PAPs done? How effective has abstinence been in other areas of health?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #45 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDamn John. I never know which side you're gonna take. Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion... And to think that I thought you usually took the side of rational logic and reason. You have to be an Oxford or Cambridge alum to understand. To understand what? PS: The Spanish Inquisition (Monty Python) Cleese - Cambridge Palin - Oxford Jones - Oxford Chapman - Cambridge Idle - Cambridge Gilliam - Wierd.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #46 February 5, 2007 QuoteHow effective has abstinence been in other areas of health? Abstinence has worked for AIDS in Africa! "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lindsey 0 #47 February 5, 2007 OK, at what rate do poor girls with no health insurance get PAPs done? You might be surprised. Poor children, at least in Arkansas, are usually insured either with Medicaid or with AR Kids First (a private insurance subsidized by the state for poor children who aren't quite poor enough for Medicaid). I do a whole heckuva lot of pap smears on these kids. There are a lot of people who end up getting paps because they come in with other STDs and we do a pap as part of that exam. I think the people who would be most at risk of not getting regular paps are the kids who are sexually active but whose sexual activity doesn't leave them with a new std a few times a year, and I don't think that group can be so easily defined by socioeconomic status. linz-- A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,009 #48 February 5, 2007 >Are you saying we should vaccinate all girls to protect the 0.1% who >lack knowledge or intelligence to look after themselves? Yep, assuming the vaccine is safe enough. Just as we should protect the tiny percentage of people who might be stupid enough to cut themselves badly enough to get tetanus, and the tiny percentage of people who don't bother to wash their hands and are thus at higher risk for a host of other deadly diseases. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #49 February 5, 2007 QuoteQuoteHow effective has abstinence been in other areas of health? Abstinence has worked for AIDS in Africa! Oh yes, I forgot that.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterrig 1 #50 February 5, 2007 QuoteHere'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. ________________________________ That is why, I'm so against lobbyists. You've made a very good point about this matter. This medicine could probably equal that of the polio vaccine. It's just the idea of some bought-off politician shoving it down our throats so he can profit. Yes, it speaks volumes of our political system. I know, the pharmaceutical company will make a bundle. That's 'free enterprise'. I appreciate your in-put. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites