Latest HPV vaccine info (little girl forced vaccine)

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I dont know if this was a mistake or if you meant to be talking about something else, but HPV>>>>>>herpes.

[/ QUOTE ]

The interesting thing is that you make the point here. Herpes would be way worse than HPV, except for the fact that HPV can cause cancer in women.

Now, here is the point! The vaccine will not prevent cancer causing HPV, because it only works (supposedly) on about 4% of the strains of HPV!

Also the 4 strains are about 70% of the HPV right now according to the article, but if everyone was vaccinated then it's realistic to think that the other strains would just gain the niche.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't get it. Herpes would be worse except for the horrible fatal cancer that HPV causes? Yeah, of course. Dandruff would be worse than ebola except for the violent hemorrhaging and dying that ebola causes.

Your point about the other strains gaining the niche is well taken, but of course, if its only currently possible to develop a vaccine that prevents 70% of HPV cases, why would we be against that? Hopefully when another 4 strains expand into the niche and make up 70% (of the now reduced number of cases) we can develop a vaccine for that.

I don't get why you say this will not prevent cancer-causing HPV. You said earlier that that is exactly what it does, it prevents the common strains that cause all the cancer. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't get why you say this will not prevent cancer-causing HPV. You said earlier that that is exactly what it does, it prevents the common strains that cause all the cancer.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they all cause cancer. My point is the vaccine will not prevent women from getting HPV. It will prevent them from getting 4 strains of HPV, assuming it works 100%. So women can get the shots and still get HPV.

Also the 70% may not be accurate, and is not claimed for say Mexico, where the vaccine may be only 10% effective.

Interestingly the manufacturer makes no claims as to cancer prevention of the vaccine.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't get why you say this will not prevent cancer-causing HPV. You said earlier that that is exactly what it does, it prevents the common strains that cause all the cancer.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they all cause cancer. My point is the vaccine will not prevent women from getting HPV. It will prevent them from getting 4 strains of HPV, assuming it works 100%. So women can get the shots and still get HPV.

Also the 70% may not be accurate, and is not claimed for say Mexico, where the vaccine may be only 10% effective.

Interestingly the manufacturer makes no claims as to cancer prevention of the vaccine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, boo flu shots? I am confused as to the issue here. Of course it won't prevent all strains, at least not currently. So?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, boo flu shots? I am confused as to the issue here. Of course it won't prevent all strains, at least not currently. So?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the big draw of the HPV vaccine is that it will prevent cervical cancer so we better give it to young girls so they don't get cancer,

doesn't it bother you that it doesn't prevent HPV and doesn't prevent cervical cancer?

I mean if you wanna go pay an indian raindancer to do a rain dance so you have good weather, go right ahead, but don't try to coerce or force me into doing the same.

[PLOlover]

Also this 3 part HPV vaccine is the most expensive vaccine to date. Not sure if you have to pay for it or whether school/feds do or what.

[PLOlover]

Now a lawyer is on talking about how the same company as brought us vioxx is bringing this HPV, trust issues.

[PLOlover]

Lawyer's conclusion -

"when you start talking about fears, people should have fears."

lol I really hate lawyers although he's probably right.

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also, boo flu shots? I am confused as to the issue here. Of course it won't prevent all strains, at least not currently. So?

[/ QUOTE ]

If the big draw of the HPV vaccine is that it will prevent cervical cancer so we better give it to young girls so they don't get cancer,

doesn't it bother you that it doesn't prevent HPV and doesn't prevent cervical cancer?

I mean if you wanna go pay an indian raindancer to do a rain dance so you have good weather, go right ahead, but don't try to coerce or force me into doing the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except it DOES prevent the majority of cases of HPV. Let me ask you this question:

If we were able to knock out 90% of all cases of any sexually transmitted disease, today, randomly chosen from people who were infected, do you think that those people would EVER be replaced? What percentage of the population must be infected in order for an epidemic to spread?

If they were replaced, how long would it take? Decades? Longer?

[PLOlover]

[ QUOTE ]
Except it DOES prevent the majority of cases of HPV. Let me ask you this question:

If we were able to knock out 90% of all cases of any sexually transmitted disease, today, randomly chosen from people who were infected, do you think that those people would EVER be replaced? What percentage of the population must be infected in order for an epidemic to spread?

If they were replaced, how long would it take? Decades? Longer?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't have hard facts, but from listening to loveline 10 years ago with that dr. guy I think maybe 1/3 of sexually active people (maybe age ranged 20-30) have HPV. It's very common.

So using their own figures, .3 * .33 = 10% of sexually active population have vaccine resistant HPV.

And that is on a closed population. People are coming in in droves from mexico / latin america where the vaccine may be no good at all.

My point though is that the propaganda is that girls must be forcibly vaccinated before puberty so that they will enjoy lifelong protection from cervical cancer. The truth is that this argument is simply false. It's just false.

How much vaccine you think they would sell if they said , hey , spend 1000 dollars and cut your daughters risk of genital warts by 2/3? I mean, I totally see why they lobbied the texas governor to make it quasi-mandatory. How else would they be able to sell it?

[ezratei]

I think some of you guys are a little confused as to the etiology of cervical cancer;

Certain strains of HPV lead to DNA damage which causes cervical cancer; this temporal causality has been extensively proven in large scale clinical studies.

Of the many strains of HPV, relatively few cause cervical cancer. HPV 16 and 18, are the cause of 50% and 20% of cancers respectively. I think this is where people are getting the "70%" figure. HPV 35 and 41 both cause ~5% of cancers.

As a result of this, a quadrivalent vaccine which protects women against these 4 strains would effectively reduce the incidence of cervical cancer by 80%.

As to "forcing" girls to get this vaccine, I think the fact that HPV is sexually transmitted is besides the point. The fact that preventing a large portion of such a horrible disease is within our grasp is reason enough. If you are cruel enough to blame a 25 year old girl who is dying of cancer for having unprotected sex when she was 15, you need to reexamine your own values.