This poll needs serious DU help!! Thanks!

[AZBlue]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16948399/

As of this post:

Should a state require that schoolgirls get the shot against human papillomavirus?
(29038 responses)

63% No, parents should decide whether or not their daughters are vaccinated.
34% Yes, the vaccine is best for girls' health.
3.1% I don't know.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Related article:

Some conservatives and parents’ rights groups worry that requiring girls to get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way they raise their children.

By using an executive order that bypassed the Legislature, Republican Gov. Rick Perry — himself a conservative — on Friday avoided such opposition, making Texas the first state to mandate that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the virus.

Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.’s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.

Perry also directed state health authorities to make the vaccine available free to girls 9 to 18 who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover vaccines. In addition, he ordered that Medicaid offer Gardasil to women ages 19 to 21.

Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base. But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16975112/

[Hosnon]

1. They should get the shot. nt.

[Richard D]

2. I know . . .

. . . it's probably not a popular viewpoint, but I'm against state mandated anything that has to do with vaccinations or medical procedures.

[crim son]

3. I agree wholeheartedly. I'm also against using any medicine or procedure

that's only been on the market for a short time. Too often there are unforeseeable or worse, foreseeable side effects that don't become apparent in the treated population for several years. I'm under no illusions about my daughter and her prospective sex life and in time I may suggest that she gets the vaccination but I sure don't want my Governer mandating it. It bothers the hell out of me that my son had to get the chickenpox vaccine, but he did.

[shaniqua6392]

4. Me too.

I already voted NO in that poll. I will wait until that vaccine is out for several more years to see the side effects that they try to hide from us. They stand to make BILLIONS of dollars on that vaccine and that is why they are lobbying every state to try to mandate it for our children. I do not trust the pharmaceutical companies one bit. This is not your typical contagious disease like polio, measles, etc. This is a personal choice and I can not believe people so readily accept the government telling us to vaccinate our 9 year olds with something so new. It is not guaranteed to prevent HPV either and it does have some side effects that they are admitting to also. I saw a doctor on MSNBC this morning that said he would not give it to his daughters quite yet. This is all about the money. They need to stay out of my daughter's body. If someone wants the shot, then go right ahead and get it. But not me...not yet.

[movonne]

9. Yes, you are absolutely right...you know who is making the money

with requiring mandatory vaccinations...

[movonne]

10. Yes, you are absolutely right...you know who is making the money

with requiring mandatory vaccinations...

[fla nocount]

15. It's popular with me.

State mandated ANYTHING sucks big time; except perhaps state mandated impeachment of the hapless fellow sleeping in Al Gore's bed.

[AZBlue]

19. Including measles, hepatitis B, DTP, polio, mumps, rubella, etc?

eom

[RBS]

5. Silly poll.

This issue isn't so black and white. By lumping together those that feel states shouldn't mandate medical treatments and those that feel a vaccination vs. HPV is tantamount to permission to have sex, they've created a poll that will serve no purpose whatsoever.

Better to gauge whether or not the HPV vaccine should be made available to all students, free of charge, along with education about it's use in preventing cervical cancer.

[ScreamingMeemie]

22. Thank you. And the use of the word "idiots" by some on this thread

is irking this mother of a daughter.

[shirlden]

6. Here is a better idea

How about ole GoodHair mandate that all guys above 12 years of age have to wear a condom when having sex. This would protect from pregnancy, STD of all types, help with Aids, protect from the HPV, etc while having no known side effects.
How come it is always the females that have to bear the bullshit when it comes to sex. Can't the guys, just once, be held accountable??

Free condoms for all and jail for those who don't have a supply in their pocket at all times.

[Breeze54]

8. Males don't have cervixes. Just sayin'...

"How come it is always the females that have to bear the bullshit when it comes to sex?"

Can't the guys, just once, be held accountable?? :rofl: :rofl:

Explain exactly how the state would check to make sure males are wearing condoms? :shrug:

Just sayin'....

[AZBlue]

12. Actually, condoms don't protect against HPV or Herpes or any virus born STD.

That includes AIDS. And, they are only about 85% successful due to improper usage and breakage.

I'm definitely not against advocating condom use - it does help some. However, it can't be the only means of protection for STDs (or even pregnancy for that matter).

[leftofthedial]

7. still 63-34 in favor of the idiots.

[babylonsister]

11. What idiots?

Being against greasing the palm of Merck is not idiotic imo. It shouldn't be mandatory but available for those who want it for their kids.

[AZBlue]

16. Again, why is it worth not giving a few bucks to Merck if it protects your children?

I don't get that at all.

[leftofthedial]

20. yeah. you're right.

better to let a few hundred girls suffer or die than to let any money find its way to the evil pharmo.

vaccinations are a scam and we shouldn't let the gummint get away with it.

[mhatrw]

13. The 34 are the idiots.

The Facts About GARDASIL

1) GARDASIL is a vaccine for 4 strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), two strains that are strongly associated (and probably cause) genital warts and two strains that are typically associated (and may cause) cervical cancer. About 90% of people with genital warts show exposure to one of the two HPV strains strongly suspected to cause genital warts. About 70% of women with cervical cancer show exposure to one of the other two HPV strains that the vaccine is designed to confer resistance to.

2) HPV is a sexually communicable (not an infectious) virus. When you consider all strains of HPV, over 70% of sexually active males and females have been exposed. A condom helps a lot (70% less likely to get it), but has not been shown to stop transmission in all cases (only one study of 82 college girls who self-reported about condom use has been done). For the vast majority of women, exposure to HPV strains (even the four “bad ones” protected for in GARDASIL) results in no known health complications of any kind.

3) Cervical cancer is not a deadly nor prevalent cancer in the US or any other first world nation. Cervical cancer rates have declined sharply over the last 30 years and are still declining. Cervical cancer accounts for less than 1% of of all female cancer cases and deaths in the US. Cervical cancer is typically very treatable and the prognosis for a healthy outcome is good. The typical exceptions to this case are old women, women who are already unhealthy and women who don’t get pap smears until after the cancer has existed for many years.

4) Merck’s clinical studies for GARDASIL were problematic in several ways. Only 20,541 women were used (half got the “placebo”) and their health was followed up for only four years at maximum and typically 1-3 years only. More critically, only 1,121 of these subjects were less than 16. The younger subjects were only followed up for a maximum of 18 months. Furthermore, less than 10% of these subjects received true placebo injections. The others were given injections containing an aluminum salt adjuvant (vaccine enhancer) that is also a component of GARDASIL. This is scientifically preposterous, especially when you consider that similar alum adjuvants are suspected to be responsible for Gulf War disease and other possible vaccination related complications.

5) Both the “placebo” groups and the vaccination groups reported a myriad of short term and medium term health problems over the course of their evaluations. The majority of both groups reported minor health complications near the injection site or near the time of the injection. Among the vaccination group, reports of such complications were slightly higher. The small sample that was given a real placebo reported far fewer complications — as in less than half. Furthermore, most if not all longer term complications were written off as not being potentially vaccine caused for all subjects.

6) Because the pool of test subjects was so small and the rates of cervical cancer are so low, NOT A SINGLE CONTROL SUBJECT ACTUALLY CONTRACTED CERVICAL CANCER IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM — MUCH LESS DIED OF IT. Instead, this vaccine’s supposed efficacy is based on the fact that the vaccinated group ended up with far fewer cases (5 vs. about 200) of genital warts and “precancerous lesions” (dysplasias) than the alum injected “control” subjects.

7) Because the tests included just four years of follow up at most, the long term effects and efficacy of this vaccine are completely unknown for anyone. All but the shortest term effects are completely unknown for little girls. Considering the tiny size of youngster study, the data about the shortest terms side effects for girls are also dubious.

8) GARDASIL is the most expensive vaccine ever marketed. It requires three vaccinations at $120 a pop for a total price tag of $360. It is expected to be Merck’s biggest cash cow of this and the next decade.

These are simply the facts of the situation as presented by Merck and the FDA.

[lonestarnot]

14. Since I don't trust the Merkettes, and no one has mentioned side

affects, I think if I had a female child, I would like to wait and see what happens to the guinea pigs first.

[AZBlue]

17. It's been tested on 11,000 females with nothing more than soreness at injection site

as a side effect. Seems pretty safe.

As for long-term effects, that's a valid question - but we already know what the long-term effects of cancer are...

[lonestarnot]

18. Yes we do know the long-term affects of cancer and they are not

good. And yes long-term affects are what I was referencing in the post. Seems pretty safe is not good enough for me and mine.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

24. I agree with you and I am also very wary how they are trying to steamroll this in. eom

[Vidar]

21. done

[donheld]

23. I voted twice, once each way

Id have voted NO twice if I'd have known the first time that this was a Merck was behind this