Mandatory HPV vaccination in Texas

40% of the sexually active women do not have the disease.

By inoculating all the women . . . if indeed the innoculation works . . . and if indeed this disease is a threat. . . then you are much more likely to save lives and prevent the spread of the disease.

If we are not going to innoculate the 60% of women that are currently at risk, then why innoculate the children that will not be at risk of dying for 15 to 45 years.

 

In controlling an epidemic the target is those that will transmit the disease that DO NOT HAVE IT YET and would be at risk of TRANSMITTING the disease.

Vaccinating 1,000 girls versus 1,000 women will show drastic differences in disease control. Of the 1,000 girls less than 200 will be expected to be sexually active in the next 5 years.

Of the 1,000 women, more than 600 can be expected to be sexually active in the next 5 years.

Of the 200 girls . . . 120 would be at heightened risk of catching the disease . . .

Of the 600 . . . 240 can be expected to not have the disease yet. 60% of those will catch the disease . . . at least 144 would catch the disease . . .

Someone is less concerned with controlling the disease then they are with vaccinating girls with a vaccination that may put them at long term risk when they are not even sexually active yet.

 

If it were about controlling the virus, boys would also get the vaccine. This is about controlling the effects of the virus - cervical cancer.

 

Daisy

They are just now testing the vaccine for boys.

So far the reason for the push is that they ARE ONLY testing young women.

http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/STDFact-HPV-vaccine.htm#hpvvac1

also

 

So, again why the smoke screens?

The target is GIRLS. The target has not been women.

Why?

Women are dying from this disease. Children at the age of 9?

This is scary.

And as for the numbers - 70% of cervical cancers are caused by the HPV strainS.

 

As someone who had a hysterectomy due to this problem, I just have to give my two cents. Both my husband and I were virgins when we married and have only been with each other, yet the doctor diagnosed me with HPV and eventually had to perform surgery. We were devastated, trying to figure out how this had happened since the medical community insists you can only get HPV sexually.

I began talking with other women and found out that some had unmarried, still-virgin relatives with cervical cancer. More questions revealed that my mother was also diagnosed years ago, but she refused to believe it as she and my father were both virgins at marriage who have been faithful to each other.

My point is, there has to be another way HPV is transmitted. Maybe the doctors aren't cleaning their instruments well, maybe it is passed at birth, but I really believe that one day we will find out. That being said, my girls WILL NOT get the vaccine. If I can't believe my doctor about HPV being only transmitted sexually, I can't believe in this vaccine, either.

 

HPV is not the only cause of cervical cancer, just the most common one.

It sounds like there is a genetic predispositon in your family.

 

You might want to check out this site.
http://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/legally_avoid_shots.htm

 

Additionally, I just came across this article this morning.:type:

http://www.mercola.com/2007/feb/15/...e-you-to-stay-away-from-vaccines-for-good.htm

 

I think that your doctor was just repeating the 'misinformation' that is so prevalent with this disease. And I can agree with your feelings.

 

So often, we hearing about diseases that 'so little is known about. I wonder if they really are that sloppy, or if they have an ulterior motive.

God knows . . .

How's church?

 

Like herpes. Genital warts are in a rather specific area of skin that isn't - usually - casually contacted.

Actually not - bodily fluids such as blood and semen through an opening in the skin - has been the "story" since the early 90s.

 

Lacy

They still scare me. The stories keep changing and they usually work on diseases for ulterior motives.

And they aren't really being honest on this one at all.

 

Texas lawmakers vote on cancer vaccine

Texas lawmakers vote on cancer vaccine

 

I am glad we at least have conservative lawmakers here, even if our Governor isn't.

HPV is not some wildly out of control epidemic, such as small pox, polio, measles, yellow fever, etc., etc. were.

There is no reason in the world this should be a mandatory injection, other than to reward the "health care" interests who gifted Governor Perry with campaign contributions before the '06 elections, which he won with barely 40% of the total vote.

Perry is about as popular here as President Bush is nationwide. In fact, I think Bush is more popular here now than Perry is.

Edited to say: I was right. In Texas as of this February, Bush has 47% approval, 50% disapproval, and 3% undecided, while Perry has 45% approval, 50% disapproval, and 5% undecided. Just barely different, but still different.

http://www.surveyusa.com/50StateTracking.html

 

http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd256.htm

 

Score one for the good guys...

Perry Won't Veto Virus Vaccinations Bill

AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - Gov. Rick Perry on Tuesday said he won't veto a bill that would block state officials from following his order that all sixth-grade girls be vaccinated against a virus that causes cervical cancer.

The Republican governor accused the state legislators of politicizing the debate over his February executive order that required vaccinations against the human papillomavirus vaccine for girls starting in September 2008.

However, he acknowledged the Legislature's overwhelming disdain for his program and said he will allow the bill to become law without his signature.

"It is time to move this issue from the political arena to the court of public opinion where real lives are at stake," Perry said.

A veto almost certainly would have been overridden by Texas legislators, who have questioned the vaccine's safety, efficacy and cost and complained that the governor's mandate would intrude on families' lives. Lawmakers also were outraged that he didn't consult with them before issuing the order.

The bill they sent to the governor last month bars state officials from requiring the shots for four years. Lawmakers could then extend the ban or allow health officials to add the shots to the list of vaccinations required for school attendance.

The vaccine protects girls and women against strains of the sexually transmitted virus that cause most cases of cervical cancer and genital warts. Merck & Co.'s Gardasil is the only HPV vaccine on the market.

Republican Rep. Dennis Bonnen bristled at the governor's criticism of his bill.

"We should not and are now not going to offer the 165,000 11-year-olds in Texas up to be the study group for Merck to find out what the implications of this vaccine would be for these girls," he said.

About half of all men and women are infected with HPV at some point in their lives, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agency recommends that girls get the vaccine when they are 11 or 12 so they will have immunity before they become sexually active.

Bills have been introduced in about 20 states to require the vaccine. ​