CurlTalk

What do you think: HPV vaccination requirement

katethegreatkatethegreat Posts: 801Registered Users
The Indiana Legislature is debating whether or not the HPV vaccine should be required for 11 and 12 year old girls in the state. Since HPV is passed only through sexual activity, it seems strange to me to require girls to undergo a medical procedure that their families have not deemed necessary. Any thoughts? I'll see if I can find a story to post or something with more information....
"Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate, but that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness, that frightens us."
-Marianne Williamson
«1

Comments

  • riotkittyriotkitty Posts: 1,307Registered Users
    Since I know someone who got cervical cancer at 16 from HPV, and one time having an HPV scare of my own, I'm going to have to go with yes.

    Supposedly 85% of the population carries HPV, why not do what we can to reduce that number.

    I've also heard that the vaccine only works on young girls who are not yet sexually active. Honestly I just see it like any other vaccine.
    Have several allergies and sensitivities.
    Current products
    Low Poo/Cowash: Rio Grande Herb Co Negrita and Amole Deep Treatment Concentrate, Magick Botanicals (MB) Shampoo (diluted)
    Rinse out/Leave in: MB with apricot kernel and jojoba oils added
    Protein Treatment: MB Conditioner for Thinning Hair, IAgirl's protien treatment
    Style: MB Gel mixed with LOTD Aloe Vera Gelly


    2b-c, need lots of moisture, likes protein in moderation.
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    I say yes. Parents can always choose to opt out of vaccinating their kids, or out of certain vaccinations, so that won't change. But if it means that the majority of girls will have a significantly lower risk of cervical cancer in the future, I'm all for it.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • wonderdiana - shopaholic takes a napwonderdiana - shopaholic takes a nap Posts: 1,728Registered Users
    Yes. You never know what can happen. And I don't think something like that would give girls *carte blanche* to have sex. When I was younger I wasn't even thinking about HPV. What worried me about sex was 1) the emotional reprocussions and 2) pregnancy.
    2C/3A -- wurly!
  • geekygeeky Posts: 4,995Registered Users
    Hepatitis B is mainly transmitted sexually, and yet we require that infants be vaccinated against it.
    There should be no debate. If parents want to opt out, they can. But it should be available and recommended. This vaccine does not mean that the 11 year old girls will be having sex now. But they are likely to be having sex at some point in the future and the vaccine will protect them.

    IMO the only reason there is any debate about this is that the anti-birth-control forces have seized on HPV and the fact that condoms do not protect from it 100% as a way to discredit birth control, sex education and anyting except their abstinence only agenda. If the vaccine greatly reduces the risk of HPV then they lose their little propaganda point.
    To Trenell, MizKerri and geeky:
    I pray none of you ever has to live in a communist state.

    Geeky is my hero. She's the true badass. The badass who doesn't even need to be a badass. There aren't enough O's in cool to describe her.
  • CurlyMireyaCurlyMireya Banned Posts: 956Banned Users
    riotkitty wrote:
    Since I know someone who got cervical cancer at 16 from HPV, and one time having an HPV scare of my own, I'm going to have to go with yes.

    Supposedly 85% of the population carries HPV, why not do what we can to reduce that number.

    I've also heard that the vaccine only works on young girls who are not yet sexually active. Honestly I just see it like any other vaccine.

    I don't think that's true since they gave me some information about Guardisil at my Pap smear appt. - they say that they're targeting women in their 20's especially. I'm 25 and not a virgin. I'm not sure about it though since I don't know how much it costs or if my health insurance would cover it, but I'm thinking about it.
    "I'm half Hispanic, half white, and look like an Indian." - Bill Richardson
  • PoodleheadPoodlehead Posts: 6,959Registered Users
    ITA with everything Geeky said.
    Minneapolis, MN
  • internetchickinternetchick Posts: 6,191Registered Users
    Girls are sexually active at 11 or 12(though not as common). It would be nice if the vaccine was offered at an earlier age.
  • CurlyMireyaCurlyMireya Banned Posts: 956Banned Users
    Also, it's not really a medical procedure. It's only a series of shots, right? I hate needles, though, and it does have risk of side effects like nausea. Is anyone here of the age to get it. From the commercials, it seems to be geared toward 11 and 12 year olds like the OP said. I don't see a problem in young girls getting it - it's one less thing to worry about in the future. But it only prevents one type of cancer, and HPV is not responsible for all cases of cervical cancer. You can get it and not even be sexually active.

    Since I've already had sex, wouldn't I likely been exposed to HPV (though I've only had one partner and he hadn't slept w/anyone else in a long time (over 2 years) when we got together). I wonder if it's something that stays in your body forever and can be transmitted even after several years of contracting it. Hmm, I don't know now if it's worth it or not to get this. I would get it if I were 11 or 12, though. I've heard that getting it young will prevent you from having to go to PAP smears every year, but I don't get that since PAPs screen for other things too right?
    "I'm half Hispanic, half white, and look like an Indian." - Bill Richardson
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    Also, it's not really a medical procedure. It's only a series of shots, right? I hate needles, though, and it does have risk of side effects like nausea. Is anyone here of the age to get it. From the commercials, it seems to be geared toward 11 and 12 year olds like the OP said. I don't see a problem in young girls getting it - it's one less thing to worry about in the future. But it only prevents one type of cancer, and HPV is not responsible for all cases of cervical cancer. You can get it and not even be sexually active.

    Since I've already had sex, wouldn't I likely been exposed to HPV (though I've only had one partner and he hadn't slept w/anyone else in a long time (over 2 years) when we got together). I wonder if it's something that stays in your body forever and can be transmitted even after several years of contracting it. Hmm, I don't know now if it's worth it or not to get this. I would get it if I were 11 or 12, though. I've heard that getting it young will prevent you from having to go to PAP smears every year, but I don't get that since PAPs screen for other things too right?

    The vaccine protects against 4 different types of HPV which together account for 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital wart cases, according to the vaccine's maker. So while yes, you could still get a form of HPV and even cervical cancer, it reduces the risk from exposure to the most common forms.

    They also say you should still get your annual pap. I believe the pap itself is only to test for cervical cancer, although some docs will check for other things while they're in there (like chlamydia), and an annual exam is important even if you aren't getting a pap.

    I'm 22 and the commercials definitely seem to be targeting women my age too.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • CurlyMireyaCurlyMireya Banned Posts: 956Banned Users
    I'm 22 and the commercials definitely seem to be targeting women my age too.

    Really, because those jump rope commercials with mostly young girls and teens in them don't really seem geared toward 20 somethings. I don't think I've seen a woman that looks over 20 in those ads. Those are the only types commercials I've seen for it. That's why I assumed it's for younger people, though on one I looked closely and they did show something that said "ages 8-26."
    "I'm half Hispanic, half white, and look like an Indian." - Bill Richardson
  • PartyHairPartyHair Posts: 7,713Registered Users
    I completely agree with what Geeky wrote, particularly that second paragraph.

    And it IS just a vaccine. Parents can opt out of this vaccine just like some parents opt out of other vaccines.
    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

    Rock on with your bad self.

    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

    Be excellent to each other. ~ Abraham Lincoln

    *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
  • M2LRM2LR Posts: 8,630Registered Users
    Also, it's not really a medical procedure. It's only a series of shots, right? I hate needles, though, and it does have risk of side effects like nausea. Is anyone here of the age to get it. From the commercials, it seems to be geared toward 11 and 12 year olds like the OP said. I don't see a problem in young girls getting it - it's one less thing to worry about in the future. But it only prevents one type of cancer, and HPV is not responsible for all cases of cervical cancer. You can get it and not even be sexually active.

    Since I've already had sex, wouldn't I likely been exposed to HPV (though I've only had one partner and he hadn't slept w/anyone else in a long time (over 2 years) when we got together). I wonder if it's something that stays in your body forever and can be transmitted even after several years of contracting it. Hmm, I don't know now if it's worth it or not to get this. I would get it if I were 11 or 12, though. I've heard that getting it young will prevent you from having to go to PAP smears every year, but I don't get that since PAPs screen for other things too right?

    To the bolded, yes, HPV stays in your body much like herpes does. Once you have it, you always have it.
    :rambo:
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    I'm 22 and the commercials definitely seem to be targeting women my age too.

    Really, because those jump rope commercials with mostly young girls and teens in them don't really seem geared toward 20 somethings. I don't think I've seen a woman that looks over 20 in those ads. Those are the only types commercials I've seen for it. That's why I assumed it's for younger people, though on one I looked closely and they did show something that said "ages 8-26."

    There are other commercials with young women. I see them a lot. There's one that has a bunch of women saying things like "A cancer caused by a virus? I didn't know that....tell someone you love" and "Gardasil--be one less woman with cervical cancer"

    I've read that most women's immune systems will eventually clear out HPV. The problem is that unless you have wart outbreaks, you might never know you have it, and you transmit it to others, and if your body doesn't clear it out, it can lead to cancer.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • marielle448marielle448 Posts: 1,823Registered Users
    I think it's ridiculously hypocritical how we tout "mandatory vaccines" for the good of our children but how many adults not in the medical health industry (and due to their jobs) get boosters for Hep B, chicken box, MMR, etc. regularly?

    I'm a non vaxer because I believe that there are a lot of additives in vaccines (BESIDES mercury) which do a lot more harm than the vaccine does good. I won't put those additives in my healthy child's body whether female or male. Specifically with the HPV vaccine the efficacy of this vaccine has yet to be thoroughly proven, at the moment though it only protects against SOME strains of HPV. There are still women that would get HPV despite having the vaccine. Also a small percentage of women would still get non-HPV related cervical cancer.

    I find it interesting that when the ACOG is recommending reducing the frequency of pap smears to 2 years instead of yearly they want to then alarm women with a new "cancer vaccine". Also what would be the booster schedule after that initial dose, how long into adulthood would it protet the woman and I also see a slippery slope as some will want to vaccinate boys.

    I also find it ridiculous to vaccinate infants against HepB.
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users

    I find it interesting that when the ACOG is recommending reducing the frequency of pap smears to 2 years instead of yearly they want to then alarm women with a new "cancer vaccine".

    yes, ACOG does a lot of interesting things... :?

    But I don't think there's anything wrong with recommending a vaccine that can prevent cancer. No, it won't prevent all cervical cancer or protect against all strains of HPV. But it will against some, and if a woman wants the vaccine, it's good that it's out there. If someone chooses not to get it, or not to have her children get it, that's fine too.
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • marielle448marielle448 Posts: 1,823Registered Users
    also if HPV is such a concern why is there no regular screening for it in the targeted age group? Apparently it's only a concern when someone stands to make a profit (until there was a vaccine there was no hubub over this).

    From another board so I won't take credit for this but interesting:
    hpv isn't tested for yet eight of ten women get it AND NEVER KNOW IT. No dire consequences , these women go about their lives as normal and the HPV goes away. Most hpv goes away on it's own. The woman never even knew she had it. and she has no ill effects. No medication necessary , no diagnosis , no knowledge of even having it.

    Just three weeks after it's approval by the FDA , the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (acip) said it should be routinely given to 11-12yr old girls. (because that's when they go in for their other vax boosters...no other specific reason behind the age).

    Merck also says “Vaccinating men could be the best way to prevent the spread of the cancer-causing virus among women”. By "men" they mean boys as well. As young as 11 or 12...there was some talk on a few websites about giving the vax to boys at a younger age because boys engage in sex sooner than girls do. But they couldn't figure out how to get the boys in , so 11-12 stuck.



    Less than 10% of those in the placebo group got a true placebo.The trial conclusions are mis-stated: The effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing cervical cancer is said to be 100%. However, there were ZERO cases of cervical cancer in both the vaccinated and the unvaccinated groups. That is ZERO PERCENT effectiveness.

    I found this tidbit interesting: FDA staff also asked that the committee examine five cases where children with birth defects were born to women who had received the vaccine around the time of conception.

    The cost will be $500 for three injections over a six month period.


    Quote
    Cervical cancer rates have been dropping for several years.The cervical cancer death rate declined 45 percent between the periods 1972-74 and 1992-94 and the overall incidence of the disease has decreased steadily from 14.2 per 100,000 in 1973 to 7.4 per 100,000 in 1995. Source: /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hhs.gov%2Fasl%2Ftestify%2Ft990316b.html" class="Popup

    Quote
    Claims for effectiveness in preventing cancer are based on indirect efficacy measurements. The number of subjects, the age of the subjects (9-26) and the duration of the trials was such that no cases of cancer were recorded in either the Placebo or Gardasil groups. In other words, there is no proof that even one case of cervical cancer has been prevented to date by this vaccine.(source: vax insert)

    from the insert also..the ingredients:

    Quote
    The purified VLPs are adsorbed on preformed aluminum-containing adjuvant (amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate). The quadrivalent HPV VLP vaccine is a sterile liquid suspension that is prepared by combining the adsorbed VLPs of each HPV type and additional amounts of the aluminum- containing adjuvant and the final purification buffer."

    "Virus-like particles of HPV Types 6, 11, 16 and 18. Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine contains approximately 225 mcg of aluminum (as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate adjuvant),
    9.56 mg of sodium chloride,
    0.78 mg of L-histidine,
    50 mcg of polysorbate 80,
    35 mcg of sodium borate,
    and water for injection.
    The product does not contain a preservative or antibiotics."

    concerns the FDA has (reported by the AP news)
    Quote
    The first concern is that Gardasil may result in an increased number of cases of a cancer precursor among patients who are already infected by one of the four targeted HPV types when they're given the vaccine; and whose immune systems haven't eliminated the virus from their bodies
    and no...as of now there is to be NO hpv screening before recieving the vaccine.
  • marielle448marielle448 Posts: 1,823Registered Users
    iris427 wrote:

    I find it interesting that when the ACOG is recommending reducing the frequency of pap smears to 2 years instead of yearly they want to then alarm women with a new "cancer vaccine".

    yes, ACOG does a lot of interesting things... :?

    But I don't think there's anything wrong with recommending a vaccine that can prevent cancer. No, it won't prevent all cervical cancer or protect against all strains of HPV. But it will against some, and if a woman wants the vaccine, it's good that it's out there. If someone chooses not to get it, or not to have her children get it, that's fine too.

    Since we have many intelligent posters on this board let get's the terminology right (and that's not meant in a snarky way). This vaccine is intended to prevent SOME strains of HPV. It is not a cancer preventer. A regular yearly pap smear will also prevent cervical cancer or catch it early enough to get effective treatment. Also will pap smears be gone after the vaccine? No, so why add what will serve as a false sense of security when education and true preventative measures are currently available?
  • iris427iris427 Posts: 6,002Registered Users
    also if HPV is such a concern why is there no regular screening for it in the targeted age group? Apparently it's only a concern when someone stands to make a profit (until there was a vaccine there was no hubub over this).

    Actually, this is in the works:

    New York Times

    If the vast majority of cervical cancer cases are caused by two strains of HPV against which this vaccine can protect women, then yes, it can prevent cancer. If HPV didn't cause so many cases of cervical cancer, then this vaccine wouldn't have been developed in the first place and we wouldn't be letting our doctors stick cold metal speculums and Q-tips up our "hoo-has" :lol:
    3027585431_55b6195e50_s.jpg3028374752_0df4d81a1b_s.jpg3028422696_8dcef38baa_s.jpg
    TickerTicker.aspx?&TT=bdy&TT1=bdy&CL=29&CT=&CG=F&O=m_nestbirds&T=t_b14&D=20080913&M1=&D1=2009&T2=&T1=Baby+Iris&CC=0&CO=&step=5&radio=A
  • marielle448marielle448 Posts: 1,823Registered Users
    iris it's in the works but only with a vaccine in the horizon. Why not include it in the workup for a yearly gyno checkup before the vaccine? I'm calling $$$$$.
  • CGECGE Posts: 1,911Registered Users
    I think it's a great idea.
    It's something I will get for my hypothetical daughter one day.
    I used to have a signature but it disappeared and I just couldn't be bothered writing another so please feel free to ingore this.
  • marielle448marielle448 Posts: 1,823Registered Users
    another concern is this. HPV causes about 70% of cervical cancer so when you tout a "cancer vaccine" and the ACOG slips the frequency of PAP smears down to 2 years instead of 1 how much do you want to bet that women will think gyno exams are optional? Already there are women that don't get checked by a gyno/midwife regularly, how many more do you think will scrub the idea because they've been "vaccinated against cervical cancer"?
  • AmnerisAmneris Posts: 15,117Registered Users
    My concern is similar to marielle's - that a) this vaccine may encourage people to neglect medical checkups or ASSUME they can't get cancer from other sources or ASSUME they can't get other STD's and
    b) it may encourage promiscuity because people feel they are protected... and then they get other STD's, and don't get checked for them because they think they are OK and
    c) it may decrease peoples' usage of condoms in casual sex encounters
    Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali


    .png


    534Pm5.png





  • hayseedladyhayseedlady Posts: 646Registered Users
    Katie will be getting this in the very near future.

    She has had all her vaccinations, the chicken pox vac about a year after she got sick. No biggie now she doesn't have to worry about boosters later in life.

    With something like this I'm surprised people want to debate it.
  • JosephineJosephine Posts: 14,175Registered Users
    CGE wrote:
    I think it's a great idea.
    It's something I will get for my hypothetical daughter one day.

    Same here, even though I'd like to believe she wouldn't need it:). I was kind of worried about this myself because I was not as careful as I should have been a couple of times and I found out about this vaccine and how it's new (i think last summer) but only for younger women/girls. I think it's too late when your 28 and active.
  • roseannadanaroseannadana Posts: 5,632Registered Users
    I think it's a great idea. This vaccine would have caused me a lot less anxiety and medical procedures if they'd had it 20 years ago.

    The more people who get this vaccine the better as far as I am concerned. As more and more people become immune, the virus will have a difficult time finding someone to infect, and that will help protect everyone.

    I was born to be a pessimist. My blood type is B Negative.
  • KCLKCL Posts: 1,663Registered Users
    I think Marielle makes some good points. There is a lot of controversy regarding vaccinations. This one probably isn't as cut and dry as it might seem at first. I guess it's just another thing we have to educate ourselves about before signing onto it.
    If there were more people on earth who desired their own happiness more than the unhappiness of others we would have a paradise ~ Bertrand Russell
  • EilonwyEilonwy Posts: 12,389Registered Users
    I totally support it, because too few parents will let their girls get the shot unless it's required.
  • Sweetie83Sweetie83 Posts: 110Registered Users
    M2LR & Co. wrote:
    Also, it's not really a medical procedure. It's only a series of shots, right? I hate needles, though, and it does have risk of side effects like nausea. Is anyone here of the age to get it. From the commercials, it seems to be geared toward 11 and 12 year olds like the OP said. I don't see a problem in young girls getting it - it's one less thing to worry about in the future. But it only prevents one type of cancer, and HPV is not responsible for all cases of cervical cancer. You can get it and not even be sexually active.

    Since I've already had sex, wouldn't I likely been exposed to HPV (though I've only had one partner and he hadn't slept w/anyone else in a long time (over 2 years) when we got together). I wonder if it's something that stays in your body forever and can be transmitted even after several years of contracting it. Hmm, I don't know now if it's worth it or not to get this. I would get it if I were 11 or 12, though. I've heard that getting it young will prevent you from having to go to PAP smears every year, but I don't get that since PAPs screen for other things too right?

    To the bolded, yes, HPV stays in your body much like herpes does. Once you have it, you always have it.

    Actually, this is not true. HPV is quite easily cleared (completely) by the immune sytem in MOST cases. In people with compromised or weakened immune systems, the virus can lay dormant for years, but this is pretty rare. Most people are able to clear the virus entirely with none of it "lingering". I find this stuff fascinating-- it's one of the things that led me into the public health field.

    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thebody.com%2FForums%2FAIDS%2FCancer%2FArchive%2Fscreening%2FQ147861.html" class="Popup
    Hair Type: 3c/4a

    "I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life's a b****. You've got to go out and kick a$$." Maya Angelou
  • sariroosariroo Posts: 1,958Registered Users
    I think it is a great idea. However, ALL young girls and women still need to be educated about HPV as the vaccine does not protect against all strains. That said we still have AIDs and other sexually transmitted diseases to worry about so education about safer sex and ways to protect oneself need to mandatory everywhere in America NOW!
    316vq4y.jpg
  • CGECGE Posts: 1,911Registered Users
    Josephine wrote:
    CGE wrote:
    I think it's a great idea.
    It's something I will get for my hypothetical daughter one day.

    Same here, even though I'd like to believe she wouldn't need it:). I was kind of worried about this myself because I was not as careful as I should have been a couple of times and I found out about this vaccine and how it's new (i think last summer) but only for younger women/girls. I think it's too late when your 28 and active.

    Yea, you always want to think they won't need it, but the fact of the matter is most teenage girls (or younger) do not talk to their parents about this stuff. But it is still our job to keep them as informed and protected as possible.

    Vaccine or not, it's still the parents job to inform their kids of the dangers of sex and to get their daughters to the gyno at either the first sign of sexual activity or 18, whichever comes first.
    I used to have a signature but it disappeared and I just couldn't be bothered writing another so please feel free to ingore this.
«1