posted June 28, 2006 09:13 PM         

ATLANTA - Should a new vaccination against a sexually transmitted disease be given to girls as young as 9 years old? That question will be taken up Thursday by a panel that helps set government recommendations on what shots U.S. citizens should get — and at what age.

ADVERTISEMENT

At issue is Gardasil, the first vaccine specifically designed to prevent cancer. The vaccine comes as a $360 series of three shots, and in tests has been highly effective against HPV, a virus that causes both cervical cancer and genital warts.

Proponents say it could whittle down the nearly 4,000 cervical cancer deaths that occur each year in the United States.

This month, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration licensed the shot for use in females ages 9 to 26. On Thursday, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices is expected to recommend to doctors what age group should get the shots.

The committee's advice is usually accepted by federal health officials, and influences insurance coverage for vaccinations.

The vote is potentially controversial, because the panel is expected to consider recommending that all girls 11 to 12 years old get a shot that guards against a sexually transmitted disease.

Health officials have been girding themselves for the argument that children who think they are immune to such threats might be more likely to have sex.

However, earlier this year, the Family Research Council, a conservative advocacy group that promotes family values, did not speak out against giving the HPV shot to young girls. The organization mainly opposes making it one of the required vaccines for school enrollment, said the group's policy analyst, Moira Gaul.

Even so, many doctors may be reluctant to discuss the shots with families of girls that young, and as many as a quarter of parents may oppose the vaccine for girls who are 15 or younger, some recent surveys suggest.

Scientists say the vaccine is most effective when given to girls before they become sexually active, and some girls become active before their teens.

About 7 percent of children have had sexual intercourse before age 13, and about a quarter of boys and girls have had sex by age 15, according to federal youth behavior surveys.

Youth survey data suggest that the shots will have little bearing on children's future sexual behavior, said Nicole Liddon of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

In a recent survey of virgins ages 15 to 19, only 10 percent of boys and 7 percent of girls cited fear of disease as a reason not to have sex, said Liddon, a CDC behavioral scientist.

The committee is not planning to recommend the vaccine be required by schools, but other groups advocate such a step.

"That would be what we would like to see at the state level," said Dr. Jeff Waldman, senior director of clinical services for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.

Policy makers in some states have begun to discuss the matter. Others, meanwhile, are focused on the cost of the vaccine and whether that will discourage its acceptance.

Most insurers are expected to cover the shot — a spokeswoman for Aetna Inc. said this week the insurer may even cover the shot for a broader age range than the committee recommends.

The panel is considering 11- to 12-year-olds in part because children that age already get two other shots, said Dr. Lance Rodewald of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.

The committee also is expected to discuss whether to make a "catch-up" recommendation for older, teenage girls as well, Rodewald said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060629/ap_on_he_me/hpv_vaccine

******

What the heck? I'm pretty dumbfounded.

posted June 30, 2006 01:14 PM         

Safe sex..use a condom. ...

..if your sexual active..get tested
before not using condoms, with a committed
partner..that you trust...I mean..both of you be tested..hehe

posted June 30, 2006 06:43 PM         

Luckily I did not catch anything.

Since HPV is linked to cervical cancers...

YES!

This is wise.

Exposure to sex with a person who has HPV may not always be voluntary.

Better safe than sorry.

Cervical Cancer can be deadly.

posted July 01, 2006 11:37 PM         

Condoms don't always prevent HPV because they don't cover the entire gential area. HPV virus and thus the warts caused by the virus can appear anywhere in the gential area.

posted July 01, 2006 11:44 PM         

do think it should be required..mandatory..
there are side affects from vaccines. ...

I was under the impression..that cervical cancer was easily cured?
is this a life or death issue?

posted July 03, 2006 07:32 PM         

quote:

---

Sprigg, who was in the meetings, came away impressed with Merck's handling of their questions. Its representatives, he said, "expressed sympathy with our concern that this not be distributed with an accompanying message that this makes it safe to have sex. They acknowledged the limits of the vaccine, that it does not target all strains of HPV, or any other sexually transmitted diseases."

---

Some people/groups are toting this shot as a preventative to a STD when it's NOT! Pap smears will STILL be required for HPV detection.

posted July 03, 2006 10:30 PM         

Yes, I do think it should be manditory like other childhood vaccines are. To be effective it has to be given before any sexually activity, hence the need to give it a young age.

Yes, there are risks with any vaccine, but I personally think the benefits outweigh the risks of having cancer and the risks and complications involved with cancer treatments. The disease and treatment could potentially enable a female unable to have children.

There are other side effcts related to having cancer: the emotional damage that cancer and cancer treatment can inflict upon a person, their family and their career.

Once you have had one form of cancer, you are at risk for developing other forms of cancer. The best thing to do with cancer is to try and prevent a person from having it in the first place.

10,000 women a year are diagnosed with cervical cancer in the USA. 4000 women die of it per year. source - Mayo Clinic

Some of the reluctance of parents with regards to this vaccine may be because they don't like to ever think that their children will be sexually active one day. And of course their are moral and ethical considerations for those who are religious.

Hopefully, the medical personal involved in administering the vacccines: doctors, clinics, or public health units, will stress the need for sexually active people to still use condoms to prevent other forms of HPV (there are over 100 different strains of it), STDs, pregnancy, and HIV and the need for continued pelvic and pap exams.

posted July 04, 2006 11:31 AM         

years and years ago..I agreed to the chicken Pox vaccine for my two girl's..
one got the chicken pox from the vaccine
the other didn't..

and then the one that got it slightly..also got the chicken pox from school a year later..

I wish I had not had the vaccine given to them

is there a chance the vaccine will give them veneral warts..and cancer???

still curious
and yes, I'm against this one..I would not want my girl's to be vaccinated for this..I think it should be a choice. ...

posted August 17, 2007 06:01 PM         

I feel they dont know enough about the long term effects to require that every girl between the ages of 9 and 26 get one. These girls at age 9 havent even hit puberty yet. Just one more thing for "them" to control. and more money for Merck - who is also, btw, the same company that made Vioxx which killed over 60,000 people.

Cervical cancer is not CAUSED by HPV ... it increases the risk. Doesn't the pill also increase the risk of cervical cancer?

I've also read that some ingredients in this vaccine are linked to infertility. Of couse i can't find the article that i had saved to back this up with "what" ingredient it is.

It's just sad the amount of people who are falling victim to this worthless vaccine, lining up at the doc's door with checkbook in hand ... making Mercks wallets fatter.

posted August 19, 2007 08:32 AM         

There should be no thing on earth that is mandatory for my body (and the body of any person), except that which I choose for it. Period.

Further, there is no vaccine that is without serious risks and repercussions. It should be a well-considered and fully researched decision whether or not to submit to any vaccine.

Stop listening to the Pharma industry and its faulty research performed with vested interests. Stop trusting the government to make your health decisions. Do the real research. Wake up from the matrix.

Begin with this book: "The Sanctity of Human
Blood: Vaccination is not Immunization" by Tim O'Shea

Or research his works here: http://www.lightparty.com/Health/HealingRegeneration/html/VaccinationIsNOTImmunizati. html

There is also lots of great information
available at: www.mercola.com. Just type in the name of any vaccine in his search engine.

posted August 19, 2007 12:16 PM         

but as for no vaccine should be mandatory..

what about-
smallpox
polio
measles

???

This article, which is part of a series you can find on Alternet, made me reconsider my previous support of the HPV vaccine..
http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/56679/

Anyone who has daughters should read this.

Would I get it, if I was in the correct age bracket? Probably. Should it be mandatory?

That's the rub.

posted August 20, 2007 10:58 PM         

Do not give this to your children without waiting to see what the true side effects are; don't let your children be the guinea pigs for the drug companies.

I could write a book here, but I'll spare you...