Texas requires HPV vaccine.
By on Feb 5th, 2007 at 9:41 am
Texas requires HPV vaccine.
Gov. Rick Perry (R) “signed an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer.” He bypassed “opposition in the Legislature from conservatives and parents’ rights groups who fear such a requirement would condone premarital sex and interfere with the way parents raise their children.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
As a father of 2 daughters I am 100% for this decision.
Good on ya’, Gov. Perry.
February 5th, 2007 at 9:49 amPerry is wrong. This is something that the parents should have a say in. I would not trust any thing this government does. If I lived in Texas I would move to a different state.
February 5th, 2007 at 9:49 amShould parents have a say whether or not the kid gets a polio vaccine? Smallpox?
Bullshit.
Good job, Perry! A dose of cervical cancer might just teach those naughty little girls that sex is BAD, but let’s leave THAT kind of thinking to the religiofascists, shall we?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:00 amThe government has ABSOLUTELY NO BUSINESS telling people they must get a vaccine without a clear mandate from the people. NONE. As citizens we can decide what role the governemt, OUR GOVERNMENT…WHICH IS REALLY WE THE PEOPLE, should play in health. I do not believe that most Americans want the government to decide what they put into their bodies.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:01 amMy reasons for opposing this have nothing to do with my fear kids will have sex. They are about autonomy and personal privacy rights.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:03 amThis was a kick back to the pharmaceuticals, nothing more, nothing less. Perry is still an ass.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:06 amI have a feeling money is involved. Perry is a first rate turd.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:07 amTXU wants to destroy your children’s futures and Perry is helping them.
Knowing Rick Perry, THIS, is the important paragraph:
February 5th, 2007 at 10:08 am
S, i understand your position, but do you think people who drive motorcycles should have to wear helmets?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:09 amIt’s great that Texas is requiring this vaccine (think smallpox, but worse), even if it’s being done for the wrong reasons (money).
Now let’s talk about that highway bill that’s going to put Texas in paralyzing debt – that’s something to worry about!
February 5th, 2007 at 10:12 amThe theocons are about to lose their minds over this.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:12 am#4 & 5 – So, I can only assume that you also refuse to have your children vaccinated against other preventable diseases, such as polio, tetanus, and diptheria.
Why would you be against protecting your children from preventable diseases?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:16 amIt’s a terrrible, terrible decision on Parry’s part— mandating a vaccine because it might prevent a future illness. What’s next? What other drugs does Rick Parry want to mandate? If they discover a drug that might prevent prostate cancer, should that be mandatory for young boys? What about future side effects? It’s also chauvanistic. Did Big PHARMA contribute to his gubernatorial campaign? I wonder what Molly Ivins would have to say about it.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:17 amOn the surface, it looks like a good idea. Beyond that, Big Brother is watching. Why is it that Republicans seem to think that it is OK to circumvent the constitution? Oh yeah, I forgot -We HAVE NO constitution. Bush shit all over it and flushed it down the toilet.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:19 ams
Here is an idea for you. Don’t give your children the polio vaccine, or MMR, or any other vaccine that you personally object to. But then, when your children gat one of the above mentioned illnesses, do not look for any assistance of organizations to help you either.
This is an important step in helping save womens lives, plain and simple. As everyone likes to say, kids will be kids. Teenagers will have sex. Why not protect their lives?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:19 amI’m usually not in favor of a leader deviating from the established legislative procedure in order to get his way — something Bush has been doing with his signing statements — but in this case, I think that Governor Perry did the right thing for the most part. Conservatives do not have the right to prevent other people in the state who do not share their religious views from having access to this vaccine. After all, even if they believe that this vaccine will encourage teenage girls to have premarital sex (a belief for which there is no real evidence), what about when these girls eventually get married? What if their husbands cheat on them, are infected with HPV, and in turn infect their wives? That’s by no means unknown to happen — and vaccinating these girls will help protect them as adults. The rights of conservatives end where the rights of others begin — and especially in relation to health issues where the potential consequences of the conservative perspective is the development of a life-threatening disease.
That being said, in all honesty, I think Governor Perry did too far by requiring vaccinations — especially for a condition which is generally not transmittable through non-intimate contact — since some people clearly object to this virus for religious reasons. Regardless of whether their objections are based on fact or not, they should at least have the option of whether or not to vaccinate their daughters. Once the girls have turned 18 and reached the age of their majority, they can decide for themselves whether or not they want to be vaccinated since the vaccine can be administered up to age 26. That being said, the vaccine apparently doesn’t protect against all forms of the HPV virus which are known to cause cervical cancer (although it does combat the ones which are believed responsible for most cases). I’m also disturbed by what I’ve heard from other sources, that Governor Perry has ties to the company which makes the vaccine.
By the way…I’m not 100% certain that it’s entirely accurate to say that the HPV virus causes cervical cancer. It is known that women who have contracted the HPV (or Human Papilloma Virus, which causes genital warts) have a significantly greater chance of developing cervical cancer — but this does not automatically mean that the virus causes the cancer, since most women who contract the virus never develop the cancer. In statistical research, just because one medical condition is positively correlated with another does not automatically mean that the former causes the latter — as my statistics professors always reminded me, “correlation does not imply causation”. I realize that this is what a lot of the journalists are reporting, but this doesn’t necessarily mean this is accurate if they don’t have an understanding of how research statistics work.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:22 am#13 – I agree!
They “say” that wearing a seatbelt will help protect against death in a vehicle accident, but the money is going to the manufacturer of seatbelts!
They “say” that educating your children leand them to better jobs in the future, but the money is going to book publishers.
They “say” that the flu vaccine might protect you against the flu for this year but they come out with a new flu vaccine every year!
Why do anything that “might” help protect your children! Not every vaccine is like the one that has almost eradicated small-pox. Just because it worked one time doesn’t mean it will work again!
Save the money you would spend on a “might” cure and use it to buy another DVD or soda can for that fat-assed child of yours! They may end up with cervical cancer no matter which vaccine you buy for them!
(Sarcasm off)
February 5th, 2007 at 10:23 am#15 – I agree with you!
You don’t tell you children to wear a seatbelt becuase it’s going ot encourage them to speed or drive recklessly.
You tell them to wear a seatbelt because it just might save their lives.
I wonder if these same prople would complain about an AIDS vaccine should one ever become available.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:26 amLet the shitstorm begin….
February 5th, 2007 at 10:27 amIt is not the government’s place to demand someone be vaccinated. Period.
I, upon personal research into the side effects of each, would most likely choose to receive the vaccine, but that does not give them the right to demand I receive it.
Similarly, I always wear a seatbelt and always would. I’m also opposed to the government demanding that I wear one.
And I’m opposed to the use of drugs and would never use them. But, I’m also opposed to the government saying that no one can use them.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:30 am#15 Then why not offer the drug for free, give out pamphlets and info on it and let the people decide. I DO NOT want the gov’t (esp. because it is soooo trustworthy right now) mandating what I can or cannot give to my children. With the way the FDA is run right now with big pharma controlling them, I certainly don’t trust them to make sure new drugs are safe.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:31 amAlso, we are responsible people. Let us be responsible. What do you get when you nuture a society to not be trusted to be responsible? An irrespnsible society. Or maybe an irresponsible government…..
Take a look at Bush’s “Teen Screen” program where your children are given Psychiatric tests and can then be prescribed powerful mind altering drugs.
That program has no input from experts in child psychology or child welfare.
Teen Screen has literally been created by the pharmaceutical corporations to gain access to your children as consumers of their drugs.
Under that plan there is no parental consent required and refusal may be argued to be child endangerment.
George Bush works for Corporations and has no problem handing your kids them over to them.
In this particular case known deadly cancers can easily be prevented, but once you give away your rights they don’t easily return. Bush first tried to initiate Teen Screen in Texas. It was rejected when it was discovered to have been created for corporate profits instead of Child welfare.
This may just set the precedent for that kind of control.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:32 ami’ve never understood the argument that “such a requirement would condone premarital sex” … why tell your 12 year old anything other than it’s a required vaccine? … even older girls – just, “it prevents cancer” would be enough information for them… everyone has been touched by cancer… everyone doesn’t want cancer… it’s that simple…
February 5th, 2007 at 10:40 am.
Comment by Bluedahlia
A large reason for the need of this vaccine is because of an irresponsible society. How do you think STDs are spread? By being irresponsable. A responsable person does not have sex when they have an STD. A responsable person that does not know they have an STD uses a condom. A responsable person does not have unprotected sex outside of a committed relationship.
I am all for the government paying for the shots. Has anyone bothered to see it the Tx. Dept of Health is doing that? If it is a mandated shot, I would assume they are.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:42 amIf it saves ONE young girl from getting cervical cancer — it’s worth it.
Do a little research on the product. It works. If the main bitch is that a company is making money off it, too bad! It’s called capitalism.
http://www.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/results/cervical-cancer-vaccine1102
February 5th, 2007 at 10:43 amwhy tell your 12 year old anything other than it’s a required vaccine? … even older girls – just, “it prevents cancer†would be enough information for them…
Comment by katy
Exactally the thing we are going to tell my daughters when they get vaccinated! That is all they need to know.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:45 amBlah blah blah, “whaaaa, we are encouraging young people to have sex”.
“But it prevents cancer”
Hmmmm, what to do?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:50 amSome of the most rabid “for” comments are from men. They don’t have a clue. This executive order is wrong. Perry is wrong. If the Texas Constitution does allow this type of order, perhaps we should go for an amendment. There is no real proff this vaccine works. Perry is the most obvious of the politicos who without worry, does favors for this friends who gave him money. People, when will the lightbulb come on in your heads?
February 5th, 2007 at 10:51 amtwo words: thimerosal preservative.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:57 amI am all for the government paying for the shots. Has anyone bothered to see it the Tx. Dept of Health is doing that? If it is a mandated shot, I would assume they are.
Comment by hacker bob
In the article, all it says is that the $360 cost of the series of shots is covered by most insurance companies. To me, that says TX ain’t paying. Oh, and Gov Perry has close ties to Merck — surprised?
I have no problem with this vaccine. I just think the “requirement” part is over the top. If I had a daughter, I’d do just like you and katy and say it’s just another shot she needs. I’d do it whether I was told to do it or not — but I don’t like to be told what to do, especially by government. You’ll see that the biggest outcry about this will be from the fundies, and not because government is telling them what to do, but because of the icky sex angle.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:57 am#20 – “It is not the government’s place to demand someone be vaccinated. Period.” Comment by LoganCale — February 5, 2007 @ 10:30 am
I disagree. The Federal Government has a right to mandate vaccinations that will protect people from preventable diseases.
We had mandated vaccinations for small-pox and nobody was complaining like it was the end of the world. Go figure.
I wonder if they came out with a vaccine that would prevent cancer if there would be the same objections raised.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:58 amGovernment getting between parents and their kids is almost as bad as religion getting between me and my beliefs… My daughter is getting that HPV vaccine, but just like I dont wear my seatbelt even though it is the law and I have already been ticketed for it … it is my business not theirs. Just like these asses I saw on the news the other day trying to make it illegal for a parent to smoke in a car when their kid is in the car… going too far left or right is WRONG.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:01 amComment by bs
Gee, #28 is really funny. I was actually not to crazy about the idea of the Gov. of TX mandating the shot until my wife and I talked about it. She had HPV long before it was a “buzzword” illness. She had precancerous cells removed. One of the side effects of the cell removal procedure was that it weakened her cervix, which, in turn, contributed to us almost losing our unborn son. He survived and is healthy, but she has been advised not to have any more children because of the risks.
If there is anything that can prevent my daughter or anyone else’s daughter from having to go through that, I am all for it.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:04 am#26
February 5th, 2007 at 11:05 amGreat parenting! Our children need to be kept ignorant. THAT is what is wrong and irrespnsible. Grow up, teach your kids what lies ahead for them, including what bad things can happen to them, and offer them knowledge so that they can make helathy choices themselves.
God knows you are n ot going to be there when the decision to have sex, have protected sex, not have, not have protected sex, etc is going to happen. And this is not about kids having irresponsible sex, this is about the gov’t mandating our choices and our ability to to make choices for ourselves.
“Good decisions come from experience; experience comes from bad decisions.” Don’t know who to quote. lol
Take a look at Bush’s “Teen Screen†program where your children are given Psychiatric tests and can then be prescribed powerful mind altering drugs.
That program has no input from experts in child psychology or child welfare.
Teen Screen has literally been created by the pharmaceutical corporations to gain access to your children as consumers of their drugs.
Under that plan there is no parental consent required and refusal may be argued to be child endangerment.
George Bush works for Corporations and has no problem handing your kids them over to them.
In this particular case known deadly cancers can easily be prevented, but once you give away your rights they don’t easily return. Bush first tried to initiate Teen Screen in Texas. It was rejected when it was discovered to have been created for corporate profits instead of Child welfare.
This may just set the precedent for that kind of control.
Comment by mparker
My daughters school tried that crap with me when she was in 1st grade… I told them kids are not zombies they act up and that is normal deal with it… I am not drugging my kid up so that you can have complete silence. They didnt theaten me with anything… I sure thought it was sick of them to even suggest it though.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:05 amGov. Perry is getting paid big money to allow this drug for girls who aren’t developed yet. When it shows that it is harmful parents wont be able to sue or have medical help for they daughters. It’s all about money. By the time the results show how bad this drug is Perry will be out of office and the State of Texas will have woman who will die, don’t be able to have kids or other medical problems. Now educated parents wont let their kids take this drug but with some many minorities in Texas it will be like test tube children. This is so much like Russia use to be and Hitler as children are used to test medically. Let’s see what other State Governor get paid to do the same. Bush has let Satan run the United States God save our children.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:05 amOh, and maybe you need someone to keep you on the straight and narrow path to righousness, I don’t. You can let the gov’t tell you what is best for you. I will investigate, study and aquire knowledge and then make my own decision.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:11 amMaybe we can have a law passed where anyone who signs up can have to gov’t plan their lives for them and tell them what to do. Only a small increase in taxes for those lucky people. The rest of us can struggle at making our own choices. Win/win
Comment by Jackie
Do you have any reason to suspect that their is anything wrong with the HPV vaccine? I assume scientists made it not a bunch of monkeys so there must be some basis to the validity of their claim that it works. Have they done no testing on it or something?
February 5th, 2007 at 11:12 amIt should be an option.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:20 amLibs should not be fooled by this wolf in sheep’s clothing. It was done to add to the bottom line of Big Pharm. That’s it. If you have daughters and decide this is good, then that’s wonderful! Get them vaccinated. But why require something that a lot of people can’t afford and ISN’T GENERIC! If it was generic, I might sing a different tune… But it’s not.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:21 amOne word: Vioxx
February 5th, 2007 at 11:22 amThis makes Merick how much money? The long term side affects of this are? Anyone remember the ole lobster claw babies from that perfectly safe drug? Perry can stick this in the closest Merick rep in his office. be sure to study the rise in autism of english children related to their forced vacination program. It will make you cry.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:27 am#40 – Drugs don’t go “generic” over night. Once a drug is approved for general use, they have a seven year “lock” on the rights to produce the drug so they can recoup the cost of research and development.
I take it you’re against capitalism.
Personally, with a possibly life-saving drug, there should be some way to reduce the cost quicker. But then we’d hear about how much the drug companies are losing and they’ll stop researching new drugs.
There’s no easy answer to this, but if you have a child that ends up dying because you didn’t invest in a vaccine, who’s fault is that?
February 5th, 2007 at 11:31 amRequired vaccines should be for diseases that are easily transmitted through the air and can cause a deadly outbreak or pandemic.
A vaccine for HPV is WONDERFUL news but transmission requires sexual contact and a pandemic is never going to happen.
Doctors can’t even agree on recommending the Chicken Pox vaccine and we are already legislating HPV vaccines?
All that said, I do believe this vaccine should be available to anybody who wants it, regardless of income.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:31 am#42 – Autism isn’t linked to vaccinations. It’s linked to the so-called “safe chemicals” that our foods are drenched in so they’ll remain fresh longer.
When you scarf down twinkies and honey-buns because they’re faster than scrambling eggs, you’re responsible for higher autism rates.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:33 amAutism isn’t linked to vaccinations. It’s linked to the so-called “safe chemicals†that our foods are drenched in so they’ll remain fresh longer.
Tell that to the parent of a child with autism. Gotta link for that study, because I’ve already read the one about the vaccinations.
When you scarf down twinkies and honey-buns because they’re faster than scrambling eggs, you’re responsible for higher autism rates.
Comment by Democrat Soldier
My autistic son never ate that crap.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:40 am#33 is not funny.
We can not freak out and let the government make laws to protect us from everything that could possibly happen.
This is not the same as small-pox. Even the polio vaccine killed and maimed hundreds (thousands) of children. It took 50 years to develop a vaccine that wasn’t quite as dangerous. Ask those parents whose children suffered and died if it was worth it? Parents and the affected persons should have a choice and decide for themselves about this vaccine. This vaccine needs to be tested and proved alot more. This is not a communicable disease that is easily caught thru the air. And even then, anyone can get cervical cancer, regardless of their sex life.
February 5th, 2007 at 11:42 amQuit poisoning our children, quit taking away our parentel right.
I do not believe that most Americans want the government to decide what they put into their bodies.
Comment by s
S, I am assuming that you have never had to enroll a child in school. The government ALREADY tells us what we HAVE to put in our bodies!
February 5th, 2007 at 12:02 pmSo isn’t this in a way promoting more sex, without protection (condoms) among teens?
February 5th, 2007 at 12:08 pm“The New Jersey-based drug company could generate billions in sales if Gardasil at $360 for the three-shot regimen were made mandatory across the country. Most insurance companies now cover the vaccine, which has been shown to have no serious side effects. ”
What about those school girls that don’t have health insurance? Is the State of Texas going to cover the expense for those uninsured girls? Will school sponsored health insurance cover it?
Theresa
February 5th, 2007 at 12:11 pmI really don’t get it when conservatives oppose this vaccine. Their opposition makes them “pro-cancer”. Or maybe their belief is that cancer has the “right to life” also. Totally bizarro.
February 5th, 2007 at 12:30 pmParents have cause for concern. I understand there must be vaccinations. But this particular vaccination is supposed to prevent a girl from contracting cervical cancer, how is that when HPV 31 allows the opportunity to still receive it.
February 5th, 2007 at 12:50 pmThis particular mandated vaccination supposedly alllows protection from HPV 2,4, 6,11,16, and 18. It does not address the issue of eliminatiing the chance of getting cervical cancer from HPV 31. On the top of the fact that Merck’s own clinical files states the length of immunity is unknown. Therefore, how can it prevent a disease which will still be amidst us? Not to mention, young men will contract and pass it along. It seems a parent’s responsiblility to weigh all the issues and concerns when thinking of injecting a STD into a young child for preventable measures or any other reason?
The shots are paid for by the state if the parents can’t afford them. If the state did not require these shots only people who could afford $180 would have children who will not get cancer. Now the poor will also be able to protect their children. Parents can opt out the way they can for any vaccination, by filling out a simple form.
(You won’t have to move to another state to assure your children will be able to get cancer. Your Constitutional right to neglect and abuse your child is completely protected. And when your daughter comes to you at 35 with cervical cancer and wants to know why you didn’t get her the simple shot you can proudly say,” No government law was going to deny me my right to punish you for having sex with the death penalty. You are my child. I own your body and your future.)
Fortunately, most people will not find it in their hearts to deny their daughters a shot that will keep them from getting cancer just to prove they can stand up to the government. That is great news for their daughters and the other young girls too. HPV is a virus that is passed through sex. If you don’t vaccinate your child, she may not only get cancer, she may pass the virus on.
I am sure Perry benefits in some financial way from this. But at least it will prevent 80% of all cervical cancer. Usually when a politician is taking kickbacks the people get screwed. This time little girls will live long and healthy lives.
February 5th, 2007 at 12:53 pmI don’t think this fits the label of conservative or liberal. Not sure where the prolife willy is. Nor is it capitalism. Dirty politics and Greed made this an executive order.
February 5th, 2007 at 12:53 pmDorothy please understand there are over 100 variations of HPV. This vaccination will not stop anyone from receiving this disease. It may reduce their chances a bit. Also, the transmission of this disease is not dependent upon condoms. Since condoms will not stop transmission of this disease, it is still circulated among the general population. Check out the clinical study file at Johns Hopkins. The footnote politely informs you that MERCK does NOT know the length of immunity. How can this type of promise guarantee any protection, nevertheless protection as a adult for a shot as a preteen?
February 5th, 2007 at 1:01 pmEven Gov. “Goodhair” Perry Can Do Something Right…
Friday, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed the first in the nation bill to require HPV vaccinations for school aged girls:…
February 5th, 2007 at 1:02 pmThis issue concerns trust. Do you trust a government entity to mandate injections of any kind? Can you be sure what is in the material being injected? I can’t, judging by the actions of our current governing bodies. At the very least, this should be on a voluntary basis and no other.
February 5th, 2007 at 1:10 pmThe word “cancer” triggers emotions ranging from fear to empathy to panic. But we cannot let our emotions cause us to spend money or create mandates without careful research. We need to evaluate claims of drugmakers, lobbyists and lawmakers when they seek money for cancer prevention efforts.
Here are 10 reasons why we are skeptical about efforts to mandate for school girls the HPV vaccine against the sexually transmitted cervical-cancer virus.
10. Merck and Co. (the manufacturer of the vaccine) has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.
9. Sen. Connie Lawson, the General Assembly’s No. 1 advocate for the vaccine, is a member of Women in Government.
8. A top official from Merck’s vaccine division sits on Women in Government’s business council.
7. Women in Government President Susan Crosby, a former Indiana state legislator, said the vaccine could “eliminate a cancer.” Yet Gardasil, is NOT a cancer vaccine. It is a vaccine for a virus; specifically for four of the more than 100 types of HPV, two of which cause 70 percent of cervical cancer in women, and two that cause 90 percent of genital warts.
6. Merck could generate billions in sales if Gardasil – at $360 for the three-shot regimen – were made mandatory across the country. Depending on how many girls are Medicaid-eligible in each state, much of that money could come from Medicaid dollars – even if the vaccine is recommended, not mandated.
5. The top 10 leading killers of women in the U.S. are heart disease, stroke, lung cancer (more than 70,000 deaths of women per year), respiratory diseases, Alzheimer’s, breast cancer, diabetes, accidents, flu/pneumonia and colon cancer. About 3,700 U.S. women die of cervical cancer each year; that is about 1/8th of the number of women who die from colon cancer, the No. 10 killer of U.S. women.
4. Because the vaccine was only studied for 3 1/2 years, the long-term effectiveness and safety of this vaccine has yet to be determined. It took years for thalidomide and Vioxx (also a Merck product) to demonstrate their most negative side effects.
3. Pap smears have dramatically reduced cervical cancer deaths in the U.S. But Gardasil does not protect against all cancers of the cervix. If the number of Pap smears go down because of women’s false sense of security, the number of cervical cancer deaths could go UP!
2. Scarce health care dollars should be spent in the most effective way possible. We believe an investment of billions could be better spent in efforts to battle the top 10 killers of women. (See No. 6 and No. 5.)
1. With an issue as “murky” as this, our little girls should not be guinea pigs.
February 5th, 2007 at 1:31 pmSome of the comments are rather hysterical.
The government of Texas is doing what governments are supposed to do: Take care of the health of its ciizens.
This is not some right-wing conspiracy to “poison” anyone. This is a matter of public health. Let’s not forget the federal government already mandates compulsory vaccines: Polio, hepatitis, varicela, etc. It was thanks to these programs that lethal, disfiguring, and imparing diseases were stopped and have become all but unknown in the US.
The fact that sexual intercourse is not necessary for a girl/woman to contract cervical cancer is the best argument in favor of the vaccine. The fears that it will somehow “condone” pre-marital sex are pruddish and unfounded.
I think this is one of the few occasions when I fully support government-mandated, compulsory programs. It is about public health. Too bad the governor had to bypass the legislature…
February 5th, 2007 at 1:31 pmThe virus targeted for this vaccination is not airborne, therefore there is no need for it to be MANDATORY.
Any parent that wants their daughter to have it, should be free to do so, while any parent that does not, should be free not to do so.
As usual this is about making pharmaceutical companies richer!
As usual this is about the HYPOCRITES who want to FORCE everyone to obey their choices!
February 5th, 2007 at 1:51 pm#46 – Dr. Wakefield, the researcher that produced the study linking the MMR Vaccine and autism was discredited. Interestingly enough, Dr. Wakefield was also working for the Legal Aid Board which was representing parents that thought the MMR vaccines had harmed their children, and were planning on filing a suit as soon as proof of the link could be found.
Basically, Dr. Wakefield was looking for results that supported his predetermined result. When you already have an end result in mind, you’re very unlikely to diverge from that predetermined position.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=6083
In my reference to preservatives, have you ever looked into the rise of man-made chemicals in our everyday foods? Why hasn’t looked into a link from that source of chemicals? Why concentrate on the once-in-a-lifetime vaccine and exclude all other possible factors?
February 5th, 2007 at 1:56 pmI think Gov. Rick Perry just gave the Texas Republican Party a “wedgie.”
He drove a wedge into their base, helping to split the religious right from the corporate-suburban Republicans.
February 5th, 2007 at 2:03 pmThey tell us we can’t teach kids about safe sex. They tell us that we can’t pass out condoms, then they tell us that kids will have sex whether we want them to or not, and then they tell us that immunizing girls against cervicle cancer should be mandatory.
I’ll agree to that. I’ll agree to that at the Federal level….. right after they agree that condoms can be distributed to the students.. right after they make annual HIV tests mandatory… right after they put definitive safe sex education into schools including Abstinence and ALL contraceptive options and explanations of their effectiveness, plus pregnancy counselling including legal abortion options for the state. THEN, I’ll get behind Perry and try to get that law passed.
Until then, he’s just another hypocritical Republican with obvious friends in the pharmaceutical companies and is either trying to make a buck for himself or his pharm friends or both.
February 5th, 2007 at 2:15 pmBravo for Perry!
February 5th, 2007 at 2:28 pmThis one will confuse good, liberal people because it looks like protecting women – but look again. As a wise friend pointed out to me, women get the disease from, umm, men, and yet the women (as ever) are bearing the burden of the medical treatment. Funny how Merck didn’t ask how to treat the men who carry the virus, isn’t it?
February 5th, 2007 at 2:37 pmAlso, this vaccine was just approved last summer. Vaccines have a mixed history (remember Lily got special exemption against liability for its thimerosol in the Homeland Security budget?). And, for new pharmaceuticals, Public Citizen recommends consumers wait 7 years – 7! – before taking it because that’s how long it takes medical and public health pro’s to establish what its side effects are.
The article American Progress linked to layed out the clear money ties as other posters here have noted.
I don’t see how this Texas mandate is “good news”. It’s money and it’s politics (a gubernatorial executive order? c’mon!) and the consequences will be borne by women decades from now.
Finally, wouldn’t it be weird if this issue had the unintended consequence of uniting the anti-sex religious fringe with progressive advocates for women’s rights?
Great post annie.
February 5th, 2007 at 2:53 pm“Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons.”
If you object to it, or believe that the vaccine hasn’t had time to be properly tested for harmful side effects you will not have to have it given to your child.
HOWEVER- as a Texas parent of two girls myself, there are serious ramifications to refusing vaccines for your child. My children have been fully vaccinated, but I personally know a couple who (hardcore baptists) refused vaccines for their child. And more than one doctor and clinics have “taken them to task” on several occassions when their child has gotten sick, for whatever reasons. Refusing an vaccine can possibly lead to CPS getting involved and charging you with parental neglect.
This is by no means a simple issue. My knee jerk reaction was to be shocked that Perry agreed to this, knowing the christian base was against it. But after seeing his Merck ties, it all became clear. In Texas, among politicians AND preachers, a dollar trumps the religious groups every time.
February 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pmIn my reference to preservatives, have you ever looked into the rise of man-made chemicals in our everyday foods? Why hasn’t looked into a link from that source of chemicals? Why concentrate on the once-in-a-lifetime vaccine and exclude all other possible factors?
Comment by Democrat Soldier
Thanks for the link, Dem Soldier. I hadn’t realized Dr. Wakefield had been discredited. Too bad.
Actually, I don’t think my son’s autism was caused by vaccinations or food allergies or chemicals. He was simply born that way. People tend to think that if something goes “wrong” with a pregnancy, something from outside must have caused it. Sometimes that’s true, and it should be investigated.
February 5th, 2007 at 3:50 pmMost times — stuff happens.
#63 – “People tend to think that if something goes “wrong†with a pregnancy, something from outside must have caused it. Sometimes that’s true, and it should be investigated.
Most times — stuff happens.” Comment by Zooey — February 5, 2007 @ 3:50 pm
Zooey, I agree whole-heartedly! We, as a nation, have become the “blame it all on someone/something else” crowd.
Pres. Bush didn’t lie, it was because of bad intelligence!
The war in Iraq isn’t a lost cause, it’s because everyone is not listening to the propaganda!
I’m not fat because I can’t stop eating, it’s because I have “big bones”!
We aren’t in Iraq because of the oil, it’s the oil that attracts terrorists so we HAVE to be there!
When people can warp their own minds to believe any line (no matter how twisted) they’ll believe anything. I guess that’s why Pres. Bush still has some people who support him no matter what! ;-)
I seriously hope that vaccines are not mutating our genes and progency. It would be sad (put poetic justice) if we did cause our own death as a species.
February 5th, 2007 at 4:39 pmI seriously hope that vaccines are not mutating our genes and progency. It would be sad (put poetic justice) if we did cause our own death as a species.
Comment by Democrat Soldier
Somehow, I think if we manage to wipe ourselves out, it won’t be anything as subtle as gene mutation.
February 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pmThis is the smartest action that I have ever heard of Perry doing.
Don’t care about the promiscuity….those are values for the parents to teach.
February 5th, 2007 at 9:27 pmRick Perry just got re-elected by a minority vote by the great unwashed, git-r-done, rednecks in the state of Texas, and now that Napoleonic dipsh*t wants to tell us how to live our lives!
I’m all for preventing cancer in any incarnation, but I don’t agree with ordering anyone to get a shot and/or vaccination.
Of course, this is the man who wants to shove toll road down Texans throats (despite widespread opposition), and wants to use eminent domain to displace farmers off their lands to build the Trans-Texas Cooridor, a boondoggle of epic proportions. I hope the he gets shot down on that proposal!
February 5th, 2007 at 10:07 pmI’ve lived in Texas going on 40 years, and I have not seen a more unpopular governor than Rick Perry. Never.
February 5th, 2007 at 10:09 pmThe vaccine should be widely available and parents should be strongly advised to give it to their daughters but forcing them too means that this is not a free country.
February 6th, 2007 at 8:45 am#74 – “but forcing them too means that this is not a free country.” Comment by Ron Paul for Pres — February 6, 2007 @ 8:45 am
So, becuase you’re forced to drive on the right side of the road to protect other drivers and yourself, America is not a free country.
February 6th, 2007 at 10:17 amAnd just remember, 30% of the people in Texas voter for this guy.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:46 amRe #59
“wrong, the male sexual organ must touch the cervix for the virus to be transmitted”
impeachment?
February 6th, 2007 at 12:40 pmRe: #1
Please read the facts before you are so gung ho to have your children injected with a vaccine that has not been tested the recommended 7 years (only 3), and the American Pediatricians Association does not endorse. Many of us have daughters, and some of us have had the precancerous cells, but this vaccine is NOT proven sufficiently.
And, why don’t they target males since they are the carriers?
And this vaccine is for 4 out of 30 viruses that cause cancer, not the cancer itself. The virus is nowhere in the same class as polio, smallpox, etc. This is not a superflu type of bugs folks. Not in the top 10 killers.
February 6th, 2007 at 12:50 pmRe: #65 – Good Post!
February 6th, 2007 at 12:58 pmHPV is not the only cause of cervical cancer; therefore the vaccine will not eradicate cervical cancer. If girls think they are protected, will they stop getting annual pap smears? If detected early, cervical cancer is almost 100% curable.
This vaccine costs about $350 for the 3-shot series. Why not pay for an annual pap smear instead?
February 6th, 2007 at 3:49 pmI’m not entirely sure that this vaccine should be mandatory at this time. This idea sounds great on the surface, but what are the long term effects? How long has this been tested? How safe is it for girls going through puberty? How safe is it for any woman? When I had the Polio and smallpox vaccinations when I was a child, they had been tested for years, so it seemed safe.
Is this “protection” a secret plan to eliminate the population by preventing these girls to grow up and have children in the future??? Is this part of the New World Order? Is it Classical Conditioning? What’s next – 666? Is this just a money making scheme between Perry and the Pharmaceutical company? Or is just a great plan? What’s REALLY going on?
February 6th, 2007 at 7:53 pmBy age 80, 90% of women will have HPV. Gardasil, the HPV vaccine prevents four of the 30 types of sexually transmitted HPV. The four types of HPV this vaccine prevents are responsible for 70% of cervical cancer cases.
I’ll be getting the first of my vaccines in March.
February 6th, 2007 at 9:31 pmFirst of all sex is the furthest thing from my 11 year olds mind. She is still playing with Barbies. I am not against disease protection but what worries me is how far down the line are we going to find out that this MANDATORY vaccine has other side effects. It should be a choice. Funny also that the drug company is in such close relation to Perry. I bet this would be a different story if there was a vaccine to give to men Perry’s age that was mandatory. My daughter will NOT be getting this vaccine because NOBODY will tell me what my daughter has to do to her body. That is her choice and mine. Who knows what they are pulling on us???
February 6th, 2007 at 10:00 pmPS. And I sure as heck did not vote for this idiot. Larry the Cable Guy would do a better job!
February 6th, 2007 at 10:06 pmThis is yet something else to put in an otherwise healthy body for which nobody can really know the long term effects. One of the researchers that developed this vaccine acknowledges that most cases of HPV resolve themselves within one year and much less than one percent of cases result in cancer or any lasting effect. I don’t think these odds are bad enough for someone to mandate that my perfectly healthy daughter be vaccinated with something that will be far more financially beneficial to the marketers than it will ever be to the population to which it is directed. Why do you think there is a never ending list of attorneys who make their living from suing the medical community for things that were not immediately apparent.
February 6th, 2007 at 11:23 pmGreat point #85. I agree that the marketers are out to benefit a whole lot more than my child or yours in the long run.
February 7th, 2007 at 12:36 amWe could all be effected by chemical weapons some day. Some of our military have been given anti-chemical weapons vaccines. So, using the logic here, the entire public should be vaccinated. Think of the grave consequences of not being vaccinated. Nevermind the fact that some of those in the military are now experiencing ‘unrelated’ side effects.
I’m encouraged to see that Texans posting here are not that thrilled w/ Perry. I never expected TX to do something like this.
February 7th, 2007 at 2:35 amI find it interesting that the same people who demand the right to do whatever they choose with their bodies(ABORTION) are the same people that are telling parents that their children don’t have a right to their own bodies. The HPV virus is not an airborn virus, so to compare it to polio or the measles is just plain ignorance and not a valid argument. This virus is not a public health threat so the parents should have the right to decide. There is no clear research on the long term side effects of this vaccination and personally, after a great deal of research, I no longer trust the FDA(most of the high level DECIDERS have ties to big pharma).
February 7th, 2007 at 8:29 amFor those of you who oppose this on supposedly moral grounds, let me tell you about my good friend “Annie,” a sweet, Bible-reading, church-going girl. She remained a virgin until age 30, when she became engaged and subsequently had sex with her fiancée. And contracted HPV. It will be with her for a long time — though her former fiancée will not. I’m completely befuddled and exasperated by your willingness to play roulette with the health of your daughters. HPV and cervical cancer aren’t limited to the girls gone wild. It’s immoral not to protect your girls while you can. Perry may have ulterior motives, but who cares — he made a good decision.
February 8th, 2007 at 12:23 pmRe: #82
February 8th, 2007 at 1:41 pmThe pharm company thinks it may be effective for 5 years, but don’t know for sure.
Has anyone thought about the fact that this is a STD? The female has to contract in during sex!! If the female is not sexually active why would you give the vaccine? I think this could be a choice made by the female when she turns 18. This is just another way for the government to dictate to the people what the HAVE to do. You cannot smoke, drink, or do anything that is bad for you because the government has made it ILLEGAL. I am not a smoker or drinker!! Next we will have to get approval from the government which medications we can take or not take that have been given by the doctor!!!!! I wonder how much money Gov Perry receive to push this through????
February 12th, 2007 at 11:09 amMake sure you read the “terms” of this blog. They censor!!!
February 12th, 2007 at 7:54 pmI AM FOR THE VACCINE ,WHEN I WAS 15 I WAS IN THE THIRD STAGE
February 14th, 2007 at 7:53 pmOF GETTING CERVICAL CANCER . MOTHERS THINK ABOUT YOUR DAUGHTERS , WHETHER THEY ARE SEXUALLY ACTIVE OR NOT CONSIDER PROTECTING THEM. THATS WHAT PARENTS ARE FOR…
Hardcore Sex Gay Hardcore Sex Hardcore Blowjob
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 2:31 pmFree Legal Aid Texas
Hi – just wanted to say good design and blog -
March 14th, 2008 at 8:59 pmSex Girls Having Sex Rough Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 14th, 2008 at 10:16 pmparenting teenagers
Do you think many people may consider it?
March 15th, 2008 at 7:51 pmPreteen Preteen Pussy Model Pre Teen Underwear
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 15th, 2008 at 10:52 pmYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 4:26 pmTeen Girls Teen Titans Raven Tiffany Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 16th, 2008 at 5:22 pmTeen Girls Black Teens Kiss Lesbian Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 12:32 amSchoolgirl Sexy Schoolgirl Uniforms Nude Schoolgirl
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 2:19 amSex Free Sex Pictures Office Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 6:26 amSchoolgirl Asian Schoolgirl Porn Japanese Schoolgirl Masturbation
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 12:11 amChubby Grannies Chubby Blonde Mature Chubby Mature Thumbs
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 18th, 2008 at 1:53 amlebanese girl
Man i just love your blog, keep the cool posts comin..
March 18th, 2008 at 7:35 amPreteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 6:20 pmPreteen Preteen Model Galleries Pre-Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 8:10 pmGay Sex Gay Ass Gay Ass
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 19th, 2008 at 9:22 pmrelationship counselling
Well spoken. I have to research more on this as it is really vital info.
March 20th, 2008 at 3:04 amTeen Girls Teen Mpeg Ass Teen
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 10:27 amGay Incest Gay Male Sex Gay Brothers
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 12:27 pmMatty
Attitude is the way you mentally look at the world around you. It is how you view your environment and your future. It is the focus you develop toward life itself.
March 20th, 2008 at 2:21 pmYoung Girls Young Teens Angus Young
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 20th, 2008 at 10:54 pmTeen Teens For Cash Nudist Teens
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 12:15 amKds Bbs Pics Underage Porn Kid Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 12:18 amTeen Girls Teen Chat Teen Panties
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 10:58 amInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 4:42 pmHealth Insurance California Health Insurance Michigan Health Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 9:52 pmSchoolgirl Spanking Schoolgirls Schoolgirl Pussy
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 amFree Granny Porn Milf Camps Friend’s Hot Mom
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 6:24 amSex Gay Sex Anime Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 7:50 amHealth Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 9:04 amGay Sex Gay Twinks Gay Hunks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 4:51 pmpenalty not filing taxes
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok.
March 27th, 2008 at 1:11 amHardcore Sex Sex Hardcore Hardcore Porn Videos
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 4:42 pmTeen Girls Teen Titans Hentai Teen Girls That Are Hot
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 27th, 2008 at 4:52 pmTexas Bankruptcy Laws – Time Line
Please keep these excellent posts coming.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:50 amYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 28th, 2008 at 2:26 pmAll about Digimon Adventure Online Game. Digimon Adventure Fans Blog….
…Digimon is a small virtual pet. You can download and play an online RPG in the Digimon universe. It looks and feels like 2D graphic RPG adventure. You can train and level up your Digimon, make hundreds of quests, and travel through a huge universe a…
March 6th, 2009 at 7:21 pmShag Hairstyles and Haircuts…
shag hairstyle basically gotits name from the word “shaggy” since …once the hair is cutand layered it gives off a shaggy look. The shag hairstyle has always been apopular hairstyle, and there are plenty ofshag hairstyles to choose from…
April 7th, 2009 at 10:52 am