Mandatory HPV vaccination in Texas

I'm not sure if this explains the HPV in your family. It may be rare but your parents may have gotten it from their parents and then passed it onto you.

 

I'm not sure where you are getting your numbers from but ...

Vaccines only work if given before an individual is exposed to the invading organism.

 

Vaccines come in three major forms

1) toxoid: virus/bacteria toxin that has been made harmless
2) inactivated or "killed" virus/bacteria
3) live attenuated virus/bacteria

The reason for these types of vaccines has to do with the way immune system works. There are two key immune cells in the body, B-cells that pump antibodies into the blood and T-cells that seek out and destroy infected cells.

Toxoid and Inactivated vaccines cannot infect the host cells, but they induce the B-cell antibody response which leads to a limited level of immunity and often requires booster shots, like the DPT or Diptheria, Pertussis, Tetanus vaccine.

Live attenuated virus/bacteria can still infect the host, but cannot cause the disease. B-cells and T-cells are both activated and a high level of immunity is maintained for longer in life and often no boosters are needed. An example of live attenuated vaccine is the MMR or Measles, Mumps, Rubella vaccine.

The HPV is live attenuated virus that can no longer cause cancer.

 

While I agree that Merck is behind the push to have mandatory vaccinations for profit reasons, I do believe that HPV vaccination should be part of a regular vaccination schedule. As I understand, vaccination can always be opted out of in all states for religious or conscience reasons. And Amish populations in Minnesota who do just that experience a polio outbreak when polio is virtually eliminated in the rest of the developed world.

Australia is making it available to women under 25 right now but will reduce that to only 12 and 13 year olds in the next few years. The issue is more about the cost of keeping up with demand for the vaccine. However when you factor in the number of lives saved and hysterectomies avoided, the cost of widespread vaccination is miniscule.

 

Humm.. I have been vacinated for Hepatitis. I have never ever felt the urge to poke myself with dirty needles. I dont buy it.

Since this desease can not be transmited through casual contact (I think) I would not make it manditory. But like somebody said no vacination is really manditory. If they could wipe out aids with a vaciene, I would be all for it.

I do not know how my daughter will turn out when she is older. I can do my best to teach her right from wrong, but that does not always work. I hope and pray she will be a good moral girl who makes the right choices. And I hope she marries a man who made all the right choices all the time, but that is not always the case. But if a vaciene can prevent her from dieing from cancer, because of her mistake or her husbands past mistakes, I am for it.

Like I say I dont buy the argument that this shot will make her choose to sleep around. That choice is made way before the event based on moral convictions. In the heat of the moment, consiquences are not thought about. There are more serious consiquences that are more immediate and more well known. Those consiquences do not stop promiscuity. The decision to or not to is based on moral convictions not consiquences.

 

It absolutely can be obtained though casual contact.

 

Forgive me, but since when is contact in that "region" casual? Even if some women may have been possibly infected, like ABC, in her doctors office through unsterile equipment, it is still not casual contact. Even if it was passed during birth it is still not casual contact. Anyone who has ever experienced that type of doctors visit or given birth will tell you the same thing. There is no such thing as casual contact in that area of the body.

For the most part women with HPV have received the virus through sexual contact. A few stories here and there of moral women with moral husbands who were both virgins and faithful to one another will not change that fact.

 

My reference to casual is a reference to the attitude about sex.

 

I am in perfect agreement. I find it very hard to believe that receiving this vaccine will somehow make one more promiscuous.

 

Why yes, we all know that the vaccine will change someone's moral bearing.

You need to get a life.

 

The word "make" is a bit of a stretch. It appears some see the vaccine as taking away a restraint of some that may have a casual attitude about sex. I do not see that this should be viewed as a restraint on society therefore we should do nothing about it even with young girls.

However to impose it as mandatory is even more extreme and it is not worth taking away the personal judgement of individuals.

 

If that is the case then I am in favor of manditory vacinations. Why would anybody be opposed?

 

Wait, I did not read this one before I replied. When I say casual contact I mean every day shaking of hands and sneezing on each other.

So to be clear. It has to be contact in "that area"?