HPV Vaccine: Mandatory?

[Drolefille]

I'm honestly surprised "dizziness" was ever even reported. And GB would be MORE likely to be reported than not. Also the major reporters to VAERS are the drug companies and doctors... they don't seem like they're hiding much or they wouldn't be reporting the majority of the issues.

Basically, your interpretation of the information as "this is being played down and it'll be worse" shows a bias. You're going to keep interpreting through that bias unless you learn to shake it off. Statistics don't innately have bias.

And unless you think you can get people to make medicines for free, yeah, lobbying is gonna happen. (Actually there's a cool NFP that researches treatments/cures for syndromes that aren't common enough to receive enough attention from the drug companies. When they find a drug that gets sidelined for whatever its original purpose was, but shows promise in an area where there are maybe 100 people affected world wide... they develop it. Cool idea and really the only effective way to do it. Clearly this would not work otherwise.)

[blueangel]

I wouldn't call it a "bias".. but healthy suspicion. I've done too many stories on corruption in big industry and too many stories on drugs gone wrong (ala Phen Phen and Vioxx) not to question this vaccine. It came out with too much fan-fare and too much political backing. The red flags in my mind went up right away.

Maybe the vaccine will end up being safe.. but maybe not. It's way too early to know for sure. If I had a daughter, I certainly would not rush out to have her vaccinated. I would take a more conservative approach... and wait a few years until we know more.

If it turns out to be this wonder drug.. fabulous! But remember, Merck knew about the cardiovascular problems with Vioxx long before it disclosed anything. There's too much money riding on this vaccine to make me feel comfortable.

The political wheeling and dealing is just starting to come to light. That alone makes me uneasy.

[kddani]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

ZOMG 500 girls out of how many? Reported dizziness, mild fever, and nausea?

Those are incredibly minor "side effects" and not even necessarily related to the vaccine- one of my favorite phrases - "correlation does not imply causation".

Again, as I think the only person in this thread who has actually HAD the vaccine, I had absolutely no side effects from it besides a slightly sore arm in the injection spot- but that would happen no matter what was injected.

And I had on the same day as other treatment for something, so we don't even know if these "side effects" could have been related to other treatment.

[Lady Pi Phi]

Originally Posted by kddani

Those are incredibly minor "side effects" and not even necessarily related to the vaccine- one of my favorite phrases - "correlation does not imply causation".

Again, as I think the only person in this thread who has actually HAD the vaccine, I had absolutely no side effects from it besides a slightly sore arm in the injection spot- but that would happen no matter what was injected.

And I had on the same day as other treatment for something, so we don't even know if these "side effects" could have been related to other treatment.

Blueangel, I agree with kddani. Those are side effects of almost any drug. I'm a diabetic and sometimes I experience side effects from my insulin. Does that mean we should ban insulin?

I'm experiencing nausea, dizziness, and a mild fever right now, and I haven't had the vaccine.

[blueangel]

I think you're missing my point. My point is that this vaccine has only been out a short time. It's too soon to know what the side effects will be. I find the 3 cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome quite disturbing... even one would cause me to be concerned.

The cardiac side effects of Vioxx didn't become known to the public until people had died. I think we need to take a "wait and see" with this vaccine.

[UGAalum94]

Or at least a wait and see attitude before we mandate it?

Lobbying and advertising isn't a problem for me. Successful lobbying to remove individual choice before an item has even been introduced for public consideration? That's scary.

(Again, if it's something folks can pretty easily opt out of, it's not the end of the world. But it's the kind of nanny state crap I hate. If we have a vaccine that prevents cancer, we ought to get people to get the vaccine because they want to avoid cancer, not because they want to go to 7th grade.)

[DolphinChicaDDD]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

As crazy as the stories coming out about middle school are these days, I don't think HPV is likely to be transmitted at school.

Maybe the transmission itself might not occur at school, but it will occur as the result of being in school. In my short time teaching, I've had 2 pregnant 7th graders and 1 pregnant 8th grader. That was in one school alone (with a population of about 75 students per grade.) I won't even touch high school...or the "my friend has weird bumps...what should she do" type STDs that I got asked about (love being the bio teacher.) No, not all middler schoolers are off having sex, but some are and most are off performing sexual acts. In my opnion (read: opnion based on my experiences) middle schoolers who are engaged in behavior not suitable for their age are more likely to not use protection because they have less access to it and believe nothing will happen to them.

I'm still torn on the issue of manditory vaccination. I'm debating it with myself right now. I certianly believe it should be on the reccommended list.

kddani- I've had the first dose of the vaccine, so far I'm still alive with no side effects either. No sore arm either...the only complaints my doc had were sore arms, so now she does a shot in the butt, a la babies. More fat= less likely to be sore, according to her.

[Drolefille]

According to this: The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

Guillain-Barré syndrome can affect anybody. It can strike at any age and both sexes are equally prone to the disorder. The syndrome is rare, however, afflicting only about one person in 100,000. Usually Guillain-Barré occurs a few days or weeks after the patient has had symptoms of a respiratory or gastrointestinal viral infection. Occasionally surgery or vaccinations will trigger the syndrome.

If literally hundreds of thousands of women have received the vaccine. That is at a minimum 200,000. If the vaccine caused a particular problem, you'd see a higher rate than 3 out of 200,000. (It's more likely the numbers are even closer to 1:100,000) Particularly since it is usually caused by other infections, not medical procedures.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

Maybe the transmission itself might not occur at school, but it will occur as the result of being in school. In my short time teaching, I've had 2 pregnant 7th graders and 1 pregnant 8th grader. That was in one school alone (with a population of about 75 students per grade.) I won't even touch high school...or the "my friend has weird bumps...what should she do" type STDs that I got asked about (love being the bio teacher.) No, not all middler schoolers are off having sex, but some are and most are off performing sexual acts. In my opnion (read: opnion based on my experiences) middle schoolers who are engaged in behavior not suitable for their age are more likely to not use protection because they have less access to it and believe nothing will happen to them.

Yeah, I know what you mean. But I still wouldn't tie it school attendance. The vaccines that we require for school are usually for diseases fairly easily communicable through casual contact that you could expect at school. HPV, not so much.

It bugs me that schools become the medium through which various non-academic ideas for the social good are foisted on the kids. Your attendance at middle school shouldn't be in question because you refuse a vaccine for a disease that someone couldn't really get from you, even if you had, it without pretty intimate contact. Even if we allow parents to refuse it, it's still a goofy situation to put people in.

[DolphinChicaDDD]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

It bugs me that schools become the medium through which various non-academic ideas for the social good are foisted on the kids. Your attendance at middle school shouldn't be in question because you refuse a vaccine for a disease that someone couldn't really get from you, even if you had, it without pretty intimate contact. Even if we allow parents to refuse it, it's still a goofy situation to put people in.

Oh, I completely understand- and trust me, most teachers HATE IT. I think its BS that I need to devote entire lessons to character education, bullying, alcohol/drug education, to a lesser degree- sex education (yay for being moved to high school and actually have a health class!), accpetance, etc etc etc. Ideally, we shouldn't be having the debate over if the HPV vaccine should be required because the parents should be the ones who decide and who should educate their children on all of the subjects listed above.

However, parents educating thier children (as a whole, I don't mean individual because I know there are still some great parents who are acting as parents) doesn't occur anymore, and therefore it falls to the public education system and the teachers. And that is a whole 'nother debate for another thread.

I think the HPV vaccine should be at least bought up in literature for parents of girls entering into the middle school age- and not in a flyer that goes home, 90% of that information doesn't make it home. Either a mailing or depending upon the district, it should be handed out when the child enrolls. I would like to see it be one of the "reccommended" vaccines at least- like the Hepatitus vaccine and how meningitus used to be reccommended (I believe many districts now requires that vaccine.)

[adpi93]

I think that by making it mandatory for school attendance then it becomes covered by insurance. I know that my daughter will receive the vaccine as soon as she is old enough, with or without insurance coverage. Should parents be allowed to opt out of having their child vaccinated, yes. Parents can now based on religious beliefs. Is it advisable to opt out of vaccines, no. How much would i regret not taking steps to prevent the possibility of cancer for my daughter. Yes, HPV is transmitted through sexual contact so no they shouldn't be exposed at school. But requiring the vaccine for school attendance will make sure that those at risk are protected. And lets face it, any girl who is dating is at risk. Getting the vaccine is not granting permission to engage in sexual activity, it is smart parenting. We raise our children to the best of our ability and hope that they make the right decisions. But, should they make a wrong decision or not have a voice in the decision (rape, date-rape) I as a parent have taken steps to insure that my daughter will have one less worry.

[33girl]

Originally Posted by DolphinChicaDDD

However, parents educating thier children (as a whole, I don't mean individual because I know there are still some great parents who are acting as parents) doesn't occur anymore, and therefore it falls to the public education system and the teachers. And that is a whole 'nother debate for another thread.

Back in the olden days (i.e. when I was a kidlet) we were shown the "Yay! Here Comes Puberty!" films (separated by boys & girls) just because there were parents who, even though they were notified the films were being shown and could elect to have their child not see them, WOULD NOT tell their kids the facts of life. Even that didn't help everyone - I still remember one of my 6th grade classmates who wore a tank top to school & hadn't shaved her pits, although she REALLY needed to. Of course, her mom was too stupid and clueless to tell her.

I'd like to think there aren't any parents like that around any more today, but I know there are.

I know a movie doesn't compare to getting a vaccine - but the simple fact of the matter is if the schools don't take care of some things they won't get taken care of - causing consequences that effect the OTHER children in the school - and that has been going on for a LONG time.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

Yeah, I know what you mean. But I still wouldn't tie it school attendance. The vaccines that we require for school are usually for diseases fairly easily communicable through casual contact that you could expect at school. HPV, not so much.

Oh yeah, like tetanus?

Originally Posted by Alphagamuga

It bugs me that schools become the medium through which various non-academic ideas for the social good are foisted on the kids. Your attendance at middle school shouldn't be in question because you refuse a vaccine for a disease that someone couldn't really get from you, even if you had, it without pretty intimate contact. Even if we allow parents to refuse it, it's still a goofy situation to put people in.

Can you think of a more convenient way to require (or even promote) vaccination?

What about the point raised earlier - that this guarantees insurance coverage for the vaccination?

Your fears of a "nanny state" really have to keep in mind pragmatism and effectiveness, don't you think?

[AlexMack]

Originally Posted by blueangel

I think you're missing my point. My point is that this vaccine has only been out a short time. It's too soon to know what the side effects will be. I find the 3 cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome quite disturbing... even one would cause me to be concerned.

The cardiac side effects of Vioxx didn't become known to the public until people had died. I think we need to take a "wait and see" with this vaccine.

See, here's the thing...to wait and see, people still need to have the vaccination done. So it makes no difference either way. I just don't think it should be mandated. The last mandated vaccine I got (MMR) made me really sick and had me off school for two weeks. Yeah, I was the 1 in 100,000.
Also this isn't like the swine flu, the epidemic that never happened-people have HPV and cervical cancer now so it's a bit different. You're right to be cautious but also remember, with respect, that you're out of the recommended age range to receive it anyway.

[blueangel]

Originally Posted by centaur532

See, here's the thing...to wait and see, people still need to have the vaccination done. So it makes no difference either way. I just don't think it should be mandated. The last mandated vaccine I got (MMR) made me really sick and had me off school for two weeks. Yeah, I was the 1 in 100,000.
Also this isn't like the swine flu, the epidemic that never happened-people have HPV and cervical cancer now so it's a bit different. You're right to be cautious but also remember, with respect, that you're out of the recommended age range to receive it anyway.

We're on the same page.. sort of. I'm happy this vaccine is available to those who want it. The key words being "want it." At this point, it's been out too short of a time for me to feel comfortable with it. If I had a daughter, I would not have her vaccinated, but take a "wait and see" attitude.

For those who are over age 18 and are within the age group-- you certainly can choose to have the vaccine if you feel comfortable. But FORCING parents to vaccinate their kids with something that has only been on the market for a few months, has been aggressively marketed to politicians.. just sends up too many red flags for me.