MT: Gardasil vaccination to be legally mandated

[Knowledge Bot]

Gardasil vaccination to be legally mandated By shesulsa - Wed, 31 Jan 2007 00:30:35 GMT

=========

Quote:
AUSTIN, Texas - Merck & Co. is helping bankroll efforts to pass state laws requiring girls as young as 11 or 12 to receive the drugmaker’s new vaccine against the sexually transmitted cervical-cancer virus.

Some conservatives and parents’-rights groups say such a requirement would encourage premarital sex and interfere with the way they raise their children, and they say Merck’s push for such laws is underhanded. But the company said its lobbying efforts have been above-board.


With at least 18 states debating whether to require Merck’s Gardasil vaccine for schoolgirls, Merck has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.
FULL ARTICLE

I'm sorry, but every time Merck thinks it's got a good idea, it tries to get law passed to force people to get the drug or vaccine they came up with.

I'm not opposed to the vaccine itself, I'm opposed to the idea that the government gets to tell me that my daughter has to have this vaccine.


Read More ... or click reply below.
------------------------------
MartialTalk.com Post Bot - Women's Self-Defense Feed

[Tom Yum]

I read about that in the papers this morning.

Crazy stuff...lots of issues to be addressed...lots.

[Garland]

This is a tricky one...how long has this vaccine been available, and what are the long-term longitudinal studies on its use? I mean, it guards against HPV, which is an STD...if there is a herpes vaccine that comes out in the next 10 years, should people be forced onto it?

Are flu vaccinations mandatory? How are they going to enforce this mandate? I think it's fucked. Big boo to big brother.

Let's put everyone on prozac and stratterra...and then bitch about our kids sniffing oxy contin and smoking weed. We are a drug culture, and the pharmacuetical companies have enough lobbying power to do whatever the **** they want.

You know what else Merk came up with??? Take a guess...it's starting to come back as an option to treat mental illnesses like PTSD and depression in therapuetic settings....first came on the scene in 1912 and popped up again in a big way in the 70's? Seriously...take a whack at it.

[GranFire]

Guarding against the virus is one thing, but it is supposed to preven cervical cancer! I am all for it.

However, the Modus Operandus is beyond creepy!

I do believe Texas has circumvented the legislature to make it mandatory - for girls as young as 11...

[Garland]

Guarding against the virus is one thing, but it is supposed to preven cervical cancer! I am all for it.
However, the Modus Operandus is beyond creepy!
I do believe Texas has circumvented the legislature to make it mandatory - for girls as young as 11...

I am for the vaccine, but very opposed to the mandate. What's next, legislation forcing people to wear condoms? (actually...that's not a bad idea...)

[GranFire]

Remove a few people from the gen pool... (Nah, I take that back, sound innocent enough, but isn't)

But is it any different that all the other mandatory vaccines we give our kids so they can go to school?!

[Garland]

But is it any different that all the other mandatory vaccines we give our kids so they can go to school?!

yeah...it hasn't been tested longitudinally long enough...and...giving it to 11 year old girls or making it mandatory has some serious implications...making any STD vaccine mandatory is pretty damned intrusive.

[GranFire]

LOL, one should not see it as STD vaccine, but cancer prevention. Heck, Viagra is passed out like candy...no implications there?

(Dang, don't make me defend this ridiculous process of politics!! )

[Garland]

one should not see it as STD vaccine, but cancer prevention. Heck, Viagra is passed out like candy...no implications there?

Viagra isn't mandatory. And Gardasil IS an STD vaccine first and foremost. HPV does not immediatly imply cervical cancer.

[GranFire]

Well, grouping it with 'STD' makes the act of human copulation a dirty deed. Keeping the species alive has always been dangerous, especially to the females.

The point is, the disease is not curable, so if you can prevent it, why not?
Statistics paint a grim picture of our youth, too many are active at a tender age when they should still be playing with dolls, and not 'Doctor' that's a fact, sad but true.

The administration of medical attention is sexist, to say the least: This vaccine could be a mile stone in women's health (and don't make me repeat that!!!) heck, there is a cancer with known cause, an ounce of prevention ....ring a bell?

On the same token the introduction of male inhencement drugs causes race cars to change colors to reflect sponsor ship, invokes a dumb joke or two...health insurance covers the cost, no problem! Please consider, birth control on the other hand has to be pre-approved! And weighing cause and effect and follow up cost - a pack of pills for a woman seems much more economical than for a man: A woman has to eat that crap by the hand full to get close to the 12K it cost for prenatal care, provided all goes well!

Unfortunately there are too many known cases of convicted sex offenders receiving Viagra, payed for by either health insurance or government and in turn use it for evil. And considering they are drawn from the same pool of the usual suspects, one can consider that half of these individuals also carry the virus and spread them, maybe even to the little girls that would now be protected from the virus.

Getting STDs has never kept one from screwing around, nor getting pregnant. Why would a vaccine do it for the kids (usually the more informed kids are at less risk than the pampered ones, sheltered from real life. Teen pregnancies rates are much lower in countries with a more open minded sex ed approach.



But that the drug company had to steep that low, and that it has been snug by the legislature....that is creepy!

[Garland]

Well, grouping it with 'STD' makes the act of human copulation a dirty deed. Keeping the species alive has always been dangerous, especially to the females.

But that the drug company had to steep that low, and that it has been snug by the legislature....that is creepy!

Oh...I am far from being a prude...my problem, as I've said before...is the mandate. Men can carry HPV as well...nobody is giving them the shot.

By saying I am AGAINST the legal mandate forcing people to get this vaccine, it does not therefore imply that I am FOR the virus, or AGAINST the vaccine...and not because I think sex is "dirty and dangerous" as your last post misrepresented, but because it takes away FREEDOM and CHOICE, and forces a chemical down the throats of young women that hasn't been properly field tested yet. How many lifetime longitudinal studies have there been on this drug? See my point?

And it is an STD vaccine, just because you don't contract HPV doesn't mean you won't develop cervical cancer...it cuts the chances down significantly, for sure...but it ISN'T a cancer vaccine. There are people who have HPV that never go on to develop cervical cancer. Keep that in mind.

[GranFire]

I see that we don't really disagree...(BTW men can get cancer from the virus as well... who'da thunk it...)


What is the motivation behind the push for it?

[Garland]

What is the motivation behind the push for it?

Lobbying from the pharmacuetical companies. As the Wu Tang Clan puts it; "cash rules everything around me, c.r.e.a.m. get the money, dolla dolla bills, y'all."