763 users online (101 members and 662 guests)  



Websleuths News


Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 115
  1. #1

    Thumbs down HPV vaccine mandatory for all texas girls

    http://www.yahoo.com/s/497897

    I hope there are no long term side effects from this like the first rotavirus and children had intestinal blockages. I was planning on giving it to my daughter when she is older when I have seen side effects for the next nine years but this is crap to me to require it. Someone should fight this, Its all due to kickbacks to merck. No one should be forced to take this. Although it seems states are doing this anyways with the deal with flu shots possibly being required in the future for NJ preschools and daycares. I understand they want to keep everybody well but there can be serious side effects to consider as a parent especially with thimersal being in these meds even though "its filtered out".

    Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Autumn2004
    http://www.yahoo.com/s/497897

    I hope there are no long term side effects from this like the first rotavirus and children had intestinal blockages. I was planning on giving it to my daughter when she is older when I have seen side effects for the next nine years but this is crap to me to require it. Someone should fight this, Its all due to kickbacks to merck. No one should be forced to take this. Although it seems states are doing this anyways with the deal with flu shots possibly being required in the future for NJ preschools and daycares. I understand they want to keep everybody well but there can be serious side effects to consider as a parent especially with thimersal being in these meds even though "its filtered out".

    Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
    While I am very conservative,I am big on immunizations as long as you have the ability to opt out. Seems you can in this case too:

    <<Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children<<

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    4,531
    Quote Originally Posted by JBean
    While I am very conservative,I am big on immunizations as long as you have the ability to opt out. Seems you can in this case too:

    <<Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children<<
    Yeah, but then you have to opt out of all vaccinatons. Having been seriously ill myself from both medicine and certain vaccinations this requirement annoys me very much. They just keep adding and adding required shots. In this day and age, I am wondering why - is it because it is better for one's health, or because it is better for the pharmaceutical company's wallets?

  4. #4
    With the way "big brother" is taking over though it wouldn't shock me if it will be were you wont be able to opt out soon. FDA is a government funded operation. Its the same reason why we still have rBGH in regular milk, Its one of the reasons I ONLY buy a certain kind of organic milk and cheeses. Its proven to cause breast cancer and colon cancer. Other countries outlawed it years ago but its big money

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by JBean
    While I am very conservative,I am big on immunizations as long as you have the ability to opt out. Seems you can in this case too:

    <<Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children<<
    Did you mean you are "not" very conservative?

    (I don't mean to imply that you used the term incorrectly! I just didn't know if you meant in terms of government intervention or personality)
    We walk, and our true character is shown in how we
    walk. Living in this world means choosing, and
    the way we choose to walk is infallibly and
    perfectly expressed in the walk itself.



    WWBD?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    On the bank of Lake Pontchartrain
    Posts
    1,777
    Glad I don't live in Texas. Scared it will make it's way across the country. Though I opt out of any for my kids any way I'm not too happy with the steps government is trying to parent our kids.

    Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.

    Now, isn't that telling? No waiting to see what the side effects 10 years down the road are, no worry about reactions some might have, just do it. Not really worried about our young girls I dont think. I think he's in their pocket and vis versa.

    Go to your ped and ask for a religious exemption form. Fill it out there and they can't do a blessed thing. Oh and as far as exempting out of all, not true. You can go get any you want but don't have to take the ones you don't want. Just be up front and honest and tell them you refuse certain ones but others are important.

    Like for instance, I'd never dream of my kids not getting a tetanus shot, but think the chicken pox vaccine is a joke. We get one but not the other. I have the right to choose what I put into their bodies.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,812
    Where I live, you can "opt out" for religious or personal reasons, however your "opting out" ALSO precludes your child from attending public school. It's like saying "Go ahead & decide for yourself, but your kid will be punished because of it."

    This HPV vaccine mandate is ridiculous, and I really question the motivations behind it.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,812
    And another thing, why aren't BOYS being forced to take this vaccine also? Men get HPV just as often as women do----it's incredibly prevalent. Yes, HPV CAN, in certain instances, result in cervical cancer to the female, but that doesn't justify forcing girls to get it.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by BhamMama
    Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
    sick sick sick sick SICK SICK

    How dare they force a shot upon our children to line their pockets. This kind of thing makes my brain bleed - yet we're infested with this kind of corruption.

    If it turns out it's a good vaccination and I become convinced of that - then I would allow my girls to get it - but how dare they make us when WE aren't even sure their clinical results are on the up and up.
    We walk, and our true character is shown in how we
    walk. Living in this world means choosing, and
    the way we choose to walk is infallibly and
    perfectly expressed in the walk itself.



    WWBD?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,759
    Quote Originally Posted by julianne
    Where I live, you can "opt out" for religious or personal reasons, however your "opting out" ALSO precludes your child from attending public school. It's like saying "Go ahead & decide for yourself, but your kid will be punished because of it."

    This HPV vaccine mandate is ridiculous, and I really question the motivations behind it.
    here you can opt out and you are not punished in any way. IOW, it does not prevent you from going to public schools, which is why one signs the affidvait.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,759
    Quote Originally Posted by Jessiebell
    Did you mean you are "not" very conservative?

    (I don't mean to imply that you used the term incorrectly! I just didn't know if you meant in terms of government intervention or personality)
    Oh I see what you mean. I am generally a moderate conservative. But,I was specifically responding to the part that said :
    >>however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children<<

    I am not with the conservative groups in this regard. I think immunizations are a good thing,I lik ethat they are required and I would have my daughter immunized. But with that said, I do respect that some do not want this interference and the fact that they can opt out makes it reasonable to me.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,812
    Interesting reading...It's from a blog (not a news article) but it contains some great information and points to ponder regarding this vaccine.

    10 Things You Might Not Know About Gardasil



    1. The vaccine only decreases your chances of getting cervical cancer, it doesn’t eliminate the risk.


    Straight from gardasil.com:


    “HPV Types 16 and 18 cause 70% of cervical cancer cases.

    GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone and does not prevent all types of cervical cancer, so it is important to continue regular cervical cancer screenings.”[1]
    Merck is upfront with this information; they don't try to hide it or spin it. But with all of the media coverage and information floating around about the "100% effective cancer vaccine", it's helpful to remember that Gardasil is only 100% effective at doing what it is supposed to do, which is preventing certain specific types of HPV, not preventing all cervical cancer.




    2. Even without the vaccine, the number of cervical cancer cases is trending downward and has been for years. (This is only true in the U.S.; worldwide it is one of the top cancer killers of women because women in many other countries have limited access to Pap tests and other health services.)

    The Gardasil commercials refer to "thousands of women" being diagnosed with cervical cancer in the U.S. each year, which is true, but they don't put that number into context.



    “Cervical cancer has gone from being one of the top killers of American women to not even being on the top 10 list. This year cervical cancer will represent just 1 percent of the 679,510 new cancer cases and 1 percent of the 273,560 anticipated cancer deaths among American women. By contrast, some 40,970 women will die of breast cancer and 72,130 will die of lung cancer.

    According to the American Cancer Society, "'Between 1955 and 1992, the number of cervical cancer deaths in the United States dropped by 74 percent.' Think about it: 74 percent.”[2]

    So Merck wants parents to have their pre-teen and teenage daughters vaccinated. But if current trends continue, by the time these girls are old enough to be at risk, how big will the risk really be? Check out the government's statistics on cervical cancer for yourself at the National Cancer Institute website.

    3. Gardasil is one of the most expensive vaccines ever, at about $360 for the series of three shots, plus the cost of doctor visits. Call me cynical, but I can’t help but think about how much money Merck stands to make from this if they can manage to convince all young women and all parents of young girls that this vaccine is a necessity.

    Gardasil is a cash cow. The revenue stream is big now, with the potential to get much bigger. This is especially important for Merck, which is still dealing with the scandal surrounding their pain medication Vioxx, which they had to withdraw from the market in 2004 after it was found to increase the long-term risk of heart attack and stroke in patients who took it regularly. Thousands of lawsuits have been filed by former Vioxx patients. Vaccines like Gardasil are needed to provide the constant stream of cash that will help Merck to recover from Vioxx.



    “Merck, struggling since the 2004 recall of its blockbuster pain pill Vioxx, has staked its turnaround in part on vaccines. They accounted for $1.1 billion of its $22 billion in revenue last year, or 5 percent, the highest share since at least 1995." [4]


    4. While we're on the subject of liability, lawsuits, and profits, there's another angle to consider. If Merck can get state governments to put Gardasil on their lists of vaccines that are required for schoolchildren, it can become a part of a federal vaccine liability program. Meaning that Merck will not be liable if Gardasil turns out to be harmful some time in the future. [5] [6] [7]

    5. There have been no long-term studies done on the effect of the vaccine after 5-10 or more years, and testing on young girls has been extremely limited.




    “Merck has tested the cervical cancer vaccine in clinical trials of more than 20,000 women (about half of them got the shot). The health of the subjects was followed for about three and a half years on average. But fewer than 1,200 girls under 16 got the shots, among them only about 100 9-year-olds, Merck officials said, and the younger girls have been followed for only 18 months." [8]
    If parents are expected to take their daughters to get a series of expensive immunizations, wouldn’t it be nice if they had any idea at all about what effects these girls might have to deal with 5 or 10 years down the line?

    If you're wondering what the rush was, part of the answer could be patents. When a company's patent on a particular drug expires, that's when generic versions of the drug can be developed and released into the market, which obviously drives the price and the profits of the original drug way down. Merck's patent on the extremely profitable cholesterol drug Zocor expired in June of this year, and Gardasil is one of the new drugs being counted on to bridge Merck's financial gap. According to the FDA, Merck filed an application for a patent extension for Gardasil on December 6th.

    6. It is unknown how long the immunity provided by Gardasil actually lasts.



    “Public health officials want to vaccinate girls early, before they become sexually active, even though it is not known how long the immunity will last.” [9]

    “Tests show that the vaccine lasts at least four years. Long-term results aren't known yet.” [10]


    And straight from the FDA:

    “The duration of immunity following a complete schedule of immunization with GARDASIL has not been established.”[11]


    So if I do decide that it’s worth the risks to my hypothetical nine year old and that I should go ahead and give her the vaccine, in the end I don’t even know if it will do her any good at all by the time she actually becomes sexually active.

    Merck isn’t telling women that their immunity may only last for a few years. The women and girls who get the vaccine may base some of their future sexual choices on the assumption that they are protected, but by the time many of them become sexually active this may not be true anymore.


    7. The studies done on Gardasil were not set up to investigate whether the vaccine itself has the potential to cause cancer.
    “GARDASIL has not been evaluated for the potential to cause carcinogenicity or genotoxicity.”[12]

    8. Gardasil is one of many vaccines containing aluminum, and there is increasing evidence suggesting that aluminum-based vaccines can have harmful effects. Aluminum is a neurotoxin and the aluminum in vaccines can potentially reach the brain. Since the list of required childhood vaccines is only getting longer over time, children are being exposed to doses of aluminum that may exceed what their bodies are capable of managing. Aluminum in vaccines has been linked to a variety of neurological disorders, including Alzheimer’s, although a lot more research is needed. [13] [14]

    It's also interesting to note that according to the FDA, Merck tested Gardasil along with the Hepatitis B vaccine (currently on the required list), to make sure that there were no negative effects to administering both vaccines during the same doctor's visit. The tests showed no apparent problems. [15] However, the hepatitis vaccine was the only one that was tested, so it is unknown whether any of the other required childhood vaccines could be potentially harmful when combined with Gardasil. There was also no information in any of the studies about what adding Gardasil to the required list would do to the cumulative aluminum levels in children's bodies.
    9. Gardasil is only for women.

    "Boys would not have to be vaccinated, although they can get HPV. There are no HPV tests for men. The vaccine has not yet been tried on men." [16]

    Men can get HPV. Men can give HPV to their partners. Men can get genital warts from HPV. Men can get cancer from HPV. (80% of HPV-related cancers affect women, but the other 20% include penile and anal cancers affecting men). [17]


    So why wasn’t Gardasil tested on men, and why isn’t Merck funding PR campaigns to educate men about their HPV risk? Is it because they feel that there’s more of a stigma surrounding men’s sexual health, and that it would be more difficult to convince men and parents of boys of the risks? And as a result they wouldn’t be able to make nearly as much money off of men as they will off of women.

    And women, because they are being asked to take full responsibility for HPV prevention. Women and girls are expected to take on all of the costs and the risks of this vaccine, and even if they do get vaccinated they could still be infected with HPV by a male partner who has been told that HPV isn't something that he needs to worry about.

    From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website:




    "There is no clear health benefit to knowing you have this virus—since HPV is unlikely to affect your health and cannot be treated. For most men, there would be no need to treat HPV, even if treatment were available— since it usually goes away on its own." [18]


    Isn't it a little irresponsible (and sexist) to say there is no benefit to a male HPV test? Regardless of the possible health issues such as penile or anal cancer, isn't not infecting your unsuspecting partner also considered a benefit? Men are reassured that tests and treatment are unnecessary because their HPV infections will likely go away on their own, while the fact is that most women's HPV infections will go away on their own as well. [19]

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,759
    Quote Originally Posted by JanetElaine
    Yeah, but then you have to opt out of all vaccinatons. Having been seriously ill myself from both medicine and certain vaccinations this requirement annoys me very much. They just keep adding and adding required shots. In this day and age, I am wondering why - is it because it is better for one's health, or because it is better for the pharmaceutical company's wallets?
    I don't know how they could keep you from opting out of all vaccinations. say you sign the form that says you cannot or will not have vaccines for whatever reason. how are they to know that you go and get whichever ones you choose? You are the reporting agency so how would they find out?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,812
    Quote Originally Posted by JBean
    here you can opt out and you are not punished in any way. IOW, it does not prevent you from going to public schools, which is why one signs the affidvait.
    That's the way it SHOULD be. It's not like that here---it's really a catch 22, because opting out for ANY reason here means no public education.

    I, myself, have never "opted out" of any vaccines for my kids--they have all had the required vaccinations at the required ages. However, I have a friend who DOES "opt out" and she goes through hell because of it. Her nephew is autistic and they believe it was caused from his vaccinations, because he went from a highly functioning, talking 2 year old to non-verbal, no eye contact, and "stuck" in his own world literally 24 hours after receiving his latest vaccine. That was a couple of years ago. She has since had her own child and had issues right at the get go in the hospital because she made her wishes known that she didn't want any vaccinations started (they had wanted to start one part of a 3 dose vaccine in the hospital) and she was pretty much treated like a common criminal.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Dana Point,CA
    Posts
    52,759
    this website probably has some good info in it.



    http://www.gardasilwatch.com/

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. FL - Fugitive In 1991 Collier rape of girls ages 5,8,10 is arrested In Texas
    By CN2Souls in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-11-2010, 03:12 PM
  2. Mandatory Flu & Meningitis Vaccines for KIDS
    By Linda7NJ in forum Up to the Minute
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 12-14-2007, 02:16 PM