Mandatory STD vaccination for young girls

arbilad · Head Chef

Mandatory STD vaccination for young girls

TitusTodd · Senior Member

They're assuming that most or all girls will be sexually active even at such a young age.

Actually, they are not. The vaccine needs to be administered early but that doesn't mean they expect the girls to be sexually active at that age. It doesn't even assume girls will get sexually active as teenagers. What it does try to do is prevent a condition in those that do make that choice.

Now, from that statement one might assume that I am favor of the vaccine being mandatory. I am not. Will I choose to have my daughter vaccinated? I lean to no at this time. What I want to make clear is that you are assuming their assumptions and it doesn't appear that assumption is right.

arbilad · Head Chef

Well, then, I need to do a bit more reading on the subject - but it occurs to me that most vaccines are only good for a while, then they need to be boosted. For instance the hepatitis B vaccine only lasts for ten years - and that's one of the reasons why it doesn't make sense to me to vaccinate infants against it, since the primary means of transmission is sexual contact. They can get it from their mother during birth, potentially, but they do the vaccination as a matter of course; they don't test the mother for it before vaccinating the baby. So I was thinking it was somewhat similar with this - why give a vaccine against HPV at such an early age when it will only need to be boosted later?

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

We have a teenaged daughter, who for a specific health situation that has occured since her first starting to enter puberty (e.g. well just say she inherited some of her Mom's concerns) has seen gynecologists every so often, and we have already been presented with this scenario. A flat out telling the pediatrician and the gynecologist "No, because she is not going to be at risk for that." by mother and teenaged daughter was all it took to get them to not press further for the vaccination (the OB/GYN's office has about 1/3 of the women in our ward as patients, and the pediatrician's office knows we have not been comfortable with certain other vaccinations in the past that could (no proof either way yet scientifically) contribute to development of autism.

This reasoning behind this sort of vaccination is a farce, because it is not for a disease that has pandemic potential like measles or small pox or diptheria or polio or most of the others children are immunized against. And prevention of contracting the disease it is said to immunize against is simple... abstinence before marriage by both man and woman, and then fidelity in marriage. Simple. Live a chaste life, and marry someone who has lived a chaste life.

The Texas legislature really needs to go back and override that executive order mandating it as a condition of attending public school.

arbilad · Head Chef

Well, potentially a woman could be at risk if her husband had sinful past, even though he repented of it. Hopefully, though, enough young men will keep themselves pure that your daughter will have a good group to choose from.
The Texas legislature definitely needs to undo that executive order. You're right, there's no pandemic potential. Heck, vaccines aren't even always effective at stopping pandemics - there are cases of viruses spreading through populations 100% vaccinated against that virus.
And that also brings up the point that this vaccine is only for a certain subset of viruses that cause cervical cancer. It doesn't provide 100% protection.

palmon · Senior Member

And a pandemic is what? A disease effecting 20 million doesn't?

I am very much against mandatory vacinations. Supposedly, the company even admits that it does not know the long term side effects - that one may even be playing mother nature with DNA. Think of how many miracle drugs released in the past 15 years that have been anything but a miracle. (Except maybe to the lawyers that bring class action suits against the company) It's one thing to use 50 year old men and women as test subjects, something altogether different when it's our little girls - and future mothers.

As they say in "Law and Order" - follow the money.

As for men having HPV, apparently the danger there is not just that they pass it on to women, but that it can lead to brain tumors and penile cancer.

-- Edited by palmon at 10:44, 2007-02-22

arbilad · Head Chef

Ok, my understanding of the word pandemic was wrong - I just looked it up, and it doesn't mean "quickly spreading", it just means "widespread". My point was that other kids at school are not likely to catch HPV from someone through casual contact. They have to have intercourse for that to occur. So, in my mind, there is no point to mandatory vaccinations. It's not like your good, seminary attending, values upholding young woman is going to catch it whether she wants to or not. There is a behavior she can avoid, and then she has no chance of catching it.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

Definition time, everyone.

American Heritage Dictionary
pan·dem·ic (pān-děm'ĭk)
adj.

Widespread; general.

Medicine Epidemic over a wide geographic area and affecting a large proportion of the population: pandemic influenza.

n. A pandemic disease.

Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary

Main Entry: 1pan·dem·ic
Pronunciation: pan-'dem-ik
Function: adjective
: occurring over a wide geographic area and affecting an exceptionally high proportion of the population <pandemic malaria>

American Heritage Dictionary ep·i·dem·ic (ěp'ĭ-děm'ĭk)
adj.

Spreading rapidly and extensively by infection and affecting many individuals in an area or a population at the same time: an epidemic outbreak of influenza.

Widely prevalent: epidemic discontent.

n.

An outbreak of a contagious disease that spreads rapidly and widely.

A rapid spread, growth, or development: an unemployment epidemic.

Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary -

Main Entry: 1ep·i·dem·ic
Pronunciation: "ep-&-'dem-ik
Variant: also ep·i·dem·i·cal /-i-k&l/
Function: adjective
1 : affecting or tending to affect an atypically large number of individuals within a population, community, or region at the same time <typhoid was epidemic> —compare ENDEMIC, SPORADIC
2 : of, relating to, or constituting an epidemic <coronary disease … has hit epidemic proportions —Herbert Ratner> —ep·i·dem·i·cal·ly /-i-k(&lE/ adverb

Arbilad, I do not think you misunderstood the context in which I used the word pandemic.

Look at the medical definitions of epidemic and pandemic. Pandemic is used to indicate an even larger problem than epidemic is. 20 million people (not sure where that number comes from) who carry one or more of the viruses is hardly a pandemic in a national population of over 301 million... it is not even 7%.

Easy way to avoid ever becoming a carrier or infected, as stated before, for both men and women. Complete abstinence before marriage, and complete fidelity in marriage. As with any disease that is transmitted via sexual contact, the epidemic of the disease is in direct correlation to the epidemic of promiscuous behavior indulged in by the given population, male or female.

In this case, the best way to stem and avoid the epidemic is to attack the cause (which is the method of transmission) and not to mistake the side effect (the infection) as the root cause. IMHO. Develop and provide treatments for those who have been infected, but don't force medical "prevention" on everyone under the assumption their behavior is going to put them at risk.

palmon · Senior Member

20 million people (not sure where that number comes from)

I made it up. Kidding. I got it from the paper - they made it up.

But, an article at

http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/division/generic.jsp?id=84544

says:

Twenty million Americans are currently infected with HPV and an additional 6 million Americans are infected every year. Half of those newly infected with HPV are between 15 and 24 years of age.

The number of cases of HPV in the United States appears to be increasing. In the mid 1960s, about 170,000 people visited their doctors with HPV infections; twenty years later, that number increased to 1.2 million.

I

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

I find interesting that in this hospital's FAQ, they do not indicate if the statistic they are using (which has no source cited to support it) is only brand spanking new infections (as in first time) or repeat infections (meaning same people getting infected over again). The reader is left to infer the previous of the two.

I question the veracity of the sheer bulk quantity of infections too. At 6 MM / year, and assuming that the number compounds or at least grows organically in step with the population growth rate, it would take less than 47 years for every person in the US to be a carrier or infected with it. It appears what they are putting out as the infection rate is double (as of 1999) the annual population growth rate in the U.S. Maybe rate is the wrong word, but the number is double the annual gross population increase.

http://www.census.gov/population/www/

http://www.cdc.gov/std/HPV/STDFact-HPV.htm

Anyway, here is what the CDC said...

How common is HPV?

Approximately 20 million people are currently infected with HPV. At least 50 percent of sexually active men and women acquire genital HPV infection at some point in their lives. By age 50, at least 80 percent of women will have acquired genital HPV infection. About 6.2 million Americans get a new genital HPV infection each year.

Sounds like the CDC is only stating statistical generalities, and note, they indicate it is a new infection, not new infectee...

Anyway, this is an interesting report, where it clearly states that the numbers are estimated, but by the time it gets to the FAQ at a hospitle, it is altered ever so slightly to make it sound like it is 100% factual.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5541a1.htm?s_cid=mm5541a1_e

TitusTodd · Senior Member

Easy way to avoid ever becoming a carrier or infected, as stated before, for both men and women. Complete abstinence before marriage, and complete fidelity in marriage. As with any disease that is transmitted via sexual contact, the epidemic of the disease is in direct correlation to the epidemic of promiscuous behavior indulged in by the given population, male or female.

In this case, the best way to stem and avoid the epidemic is to attack the cause (which is the method of transmission) and not to mistake the side effect (the infection) as the root cause. IMHO. Develop and provide treatments for those who have been infected, but don't force medical "prevention" on everyone under the assumption their behavior is going to put them at risk.
But a vaccine is so much easier!

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

TitusTodd wrote:

Easy way to avoid ever becoming a carrier or infected, as stated before, for both men and women. Complete abstinence before marriage, and complete fidelity in marriage. As with any disease that is transmitted via sexual contact, the epidemic of the disease is in direct correlation to the epidemic of promiscuous behavior indulged in by the given population, male or female.

In this case, the best way to stem and avoid the epidemic is to attack the cause (which is the method of transmission) and not to mistake the side effect (the infection) as the root cause. IMHO. Develop and provide treatments for those who have been infected, but don't force medical "prevention" on everyone under the assumption their behavior is going to put them at risk.
But a vaccine is so much easier!

Ah....so anything that makes my life easier is a winner. The whole thing with STDs including AIDS is that they are 100% preventable by behavior. Yet the world is spending billions to try and come up with a vaccine. I'm not saying that we should try and treat those who catch the disease but you had better believe that if they came out with a vaccine tomorrow for HIV, there would be politicians trying to force people to have the vaccine. We're not talking polio, measles, or tetanis here. I have no problem with the drug being available but requiring kids to get it smacks of big brother. There is no overwhelming public safety need here like for other vaccinations. More nanny state laws are not what we need, what we need is personal responsibility and suffering the consequences for our own actions.

Cat Herder · Understander of unimportant things

What I found interesting was that the CDC even states this is the easiest way to prevent infection. But, no one wants to take official responsibility for encouraging chaste behavior. No one really has the belief or trust that people can be more than the lowest common denominator of an animal as soon as they enter puberty.

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

Is it really the "easiest way" though? I mean, it takes a lot of effort as a parent to encourage moral chastity... not to mention most parents believe they have to have walked the walk before they can talk the talk... so instead they opt for a vaccine and condoms.

Can you really blame them, when they could be playing (conquering whole nations of virtual elves or space aliens) video games instead of having uncomofortable talks with their progeny?

--Ray

-- Edited by rayb at 19:59, 2007-02-22

TitusTodd · Senior Member

I hope no one thought I was being serious about the vaccine route being easier and thus the way to go. Too often in our society easy is the chosen way to go - the easy way out of difficult things, the easy pleasures, etc., etc. I was agreeing with Cat's quoted comment. Changing behavior or developing proper behavior is, of course, the way to go. It develops long-term habits that will serve a person right. This is a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel. Following the commandments will keep us out of a lot of trouble.

salesortonscom · Wise and Revered Master

TitusTodd wrote:

I hope no one thought I was being serious about the vaccine route being easier and thus the way to go. Too often in our society easy is the chosen way to go - the easy way out of difficult things, the easy pleasures, etc., etc. I was agreeing with Cat's quoted comment. Changing behavior or developing proper behavior is, of course, the way to go. It develops long-term habits that will serve a person right. This is a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel. Following the commandments will keep us out of a lot of trouble.

I knew what you meant. No worries.

arbilad · Head Chef

Virginia is now mandating the HPV vaccine.

fear of shiz · Profuse Pontificator

Mandatory or not does not matter to me. I would have my daughters vaccinated because 80% of the female population has HPV by age 50. While my daughters may live chaste lives, the chances of their husbands having also done so is not 100%. Add to that sexual assault, or even just a stupid mistake, and one shot is worth it. I would not want to gamble with their lives on principle.

arbilad · Head Chef

The point remains, though, Shiz, that requiring the vaccine is wrong. I would be against it being mandatory even if it was a vaccine against stupidity (something sorely needed in our country right now).
But as to the qualities of the vaccine itself, it's a $400 vaccine, it only protects against 40% of the HPV strains, and it's not guaranteed to provide immunity even against those strains. Plus, it's only good for 5 years. So assume that you vaccinate your daughter at 11. You have to vaccinate her again at 16. Then again just before she goes off to her mission at 21.

-- Edited by arbilad at 13:00, 2007-03-03

rayb · Hot Air Balloon

I think it'll be interesting when there's a vaccination for every kind of disease and casual sex is no longer risky. Every once in a while people start believing the above and diseases have a resurgence.

--Ray