hey fathers - how do you feel about this? if i had a daughter i would be pretty damn angry right now. i guess its conservative now to have the government tell you what is best for your kids. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070202/ap_on_he_me/cervical_cancer AUSTIN, Texas - Bypassing the Legislature, Republican Gov. Rick Perry signed an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer. By issuing an executive order, Perry apparently sidesteps 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. Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade — meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 — will have to get Gardasil, Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV. 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. "The HPV vaccine provides us with an incredible opportunity to effectively target and prevent cervical cancer," Perry said in announcing the order. "If there are diseases in our society that are going to cost us large amounts of money, it just makes good economic sense, not to mention the health and well-being of these individuals to have those vaccines available," he said. Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the country mandating Gardasil for girls as young as 11 or 12. It doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country. Perry has several ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government. Perry also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign. Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit objecting to the vaccine on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children. The federal government approved Gardasil in June, and a government advisory panel has recommended that all girls get the shots at 11 and 12, before they are likely to be sexually active. 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. Merck spokeswoman Janet Skidmore would not say how much the company is spending on lobbyists or how much it has donated to Women in Government. Susan Crosby, the group's president, also declined to specify how much the drug company gave. A top official from Merck's vaccine division sits on Women in Government's business council, and many of the bills around the country have been introduced by members of Women in Government.
why would this make you angry if you had a daughter? would you be happy if your daughter got HPV? are you just angry because the govt is saying that you need to do it? are you angry that kids are forced to have MMR vaccines?
I can't even articulate how much this pisses me off. This is worse than telling someone to stop smoking.
well for starters, i wouldnt need or want the government telling me how to take care of my children, as they have proven to be pretty incompetent at the task. if one feels that the vaccines are dangerous and especially to children as they contain high levels of mercury among other things, than it is ones right as a parent to decide they dont want their kids taking them. the implication with getting these shots is to prevent cervical cancer, which can be caused by sexual activity at a young age. i would deeply resent the government implying that my 11 year old daughter is going to be sexually active and them deciding that she needs a shot to protect her from getting cancer due to it. i feel that i could decide what is best for my own children rather than the government. and you dont have a problem with merck, which makes the shots, spending all this money lobbying our elected leaders to make us take these shots? you dont see a conflict of interest w/ perry and his ties to merck? i thought conservatives were against government interference? doesnt this go totally against everything they should be standing for.
I completely agree the relationship with merck and perry is very questionable and I certainly don't like it. but to say there is an implication of daddy's little girl being a big slut is just idiotic. women can get HPV at anytime not just when they are 11. they can get it from their one and only sexual partner if he is a w****. this is a vaccine that could eliminate a virus that can lead to cancer. I am all for that.
I got to say, for as much as I dislike the republican party in general, I think this is overall a great idea. HPV is a disease that inflicts a very large percentage of women iirc. I wonder if people would be so upset if there was a vaccine for AIDS, if parents would still be upset over such a law. This in no way takes control away from the parents, because everyone who is a parent should know that you have NO control over your childs sex life. It is up to her or him to make a good decision. Having being vaccinated before hand is just a safety net to prevent something terrible from happening. I applaud this decision.
one of the causes of cervical cancer is having lots of sex, isnt it? thats fine. i just dont think the government has any right to tell people how to raise their children. lots of people dont take any shots (me being one of them) and wouldnt want their kids injected w/ all that stuff either. you may not agree with them, but its their right to raise their kids the way they see fit.
I like this ruling - just a shame that Merck is the only company that will profit from it for awhile, which makes it look shady. And it probably is - but the health issue is more important, I think.
You don't have to have 'lot's of sex', it is quite prevalent. As for 'right to raise your kids as you see fit', you're essentially required to get them immunizations, you must place young ones in a car seat, you cannot neglect, abuse, or in some States even 'discipline' them, they must get schooling ... I'm sure the list is much longer of 'how the State tells you how to raise your kids'. Why someone takes issue with a shot that may save your daughter's or grandchild's life (that's right, it's been linked to miscarriage and infertility also) is friggin' beyond me. What if your daughter was abstinent (like you dream), then got raped and contracted cervical cancer and DIED some years later. How the h*ll would you ever rationalize that? Your daughter's life belongs to her, not you. It's your responsibility to take every action to safeguard it regardless of what mistakes she ultimately make or what events may occur that are out of her control.
No, as I mentioned, there are other laws that save lives and therefore are ideologically neutral (yet illogically berated by a few).
An 11 or 12 yr old girl could relate the vaccine as another measels shot. The only correlation with sexual promiscuity is in the minds of the parents. That's a great head-in-the-sand mentality to raise children.
That's so &^%*ing sexist. Why won't they offer the vaccine to boys??? but seriously, these people would protest an AIDS vaccine because it means that some gay people would live, or that it would promote premarital sex. It should still have parental consent though, and if those conservative parents who are likely going to have slut daughters who get cervical cancer, they can live with their own choices then. .
Then tell her its a polo vaccination, a flu shot whatever. If it helps her general health whats the big deal. Here is some key bits of Info for you so reluctant: Anyone who has any kind of sexual activity involving genital contact with an infected person can get HPV—-intercourse isn't necessary. Of the approximately 6 million new cases of genital HPV in the United states every year, it is estimated that 74% of them occur in 15-24 year olds. HPV is the only known cause of cervical dysplasia, genital warts, and plantar warts. In fact, a recent study completed at Washington State University showed that 32% of the female college students had HPV. Being vaccinated with GARDASIL before coming into contact with a person who has HPV may help protect you against HPV Types 6, 11, 16, and 18. HPV Types 16 and 18 cause 70% of cervical cancer cases, and HPV Types 6 and 11 cause 90% of genital warts cases. GARDASIL may not fully protect everyone and does not prevent all types of cervical cancer, so it is important to continue regular cervical cancer screenings Maybe some of you should realize the danger your children are in. Especially young women when it comes to HPV. Like I said...you CAN NOT stop them from having sex, only they can themselves. If your child makes a mistake do you want them to be a number like one of those? You act like they are trying to really promote sex or something. Like they boost your child and say..."There you go sweety, now you can have sex and not worry about HPV, Warts, or most importantly CANCER!!!"
so the great percentage of kids in texas who aren't insured...their parents will have to fork out almost 400 bucks for this?
Lesson to Internet sarcasm. IF you going to be sarcastic in a hot or debateable thread where there will be firery responses, allow me to show you these......
