|
|
#1
06-09-2006, 07:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
By the year 2050, scientists fear that “deaths from cervical cancer could jump fourfold to a million a year … mainly in developing countries.” The good news is that this outbreak and thousands of preventable deaths “could be prevented by soon-to-be-approved vaccines against the human papilloma virus which causes most cases of cervical cancer.” The problem is that HPV is sexually transmitted and “opposition to the vaccines might lead to many preventable deaths.”
<font color="white"> . </font> In the United States, religious groups are gearing up to oppose vaccination, despite a survey showing 80 percent of parents favor vaccinating their daughters. Staunchly conservative religious groups like the Family Research Council tacitly oppose the vaccine on the claim that “Giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful because they may see it as a license to engage in premarital sex.” Thankfully, the FDA seems willing to brush aside such idiotic arguments and decided proceed with the approval of Gardasil, a vaccine that prevents infection by some strains of a virus which can cause cervical cancer. [ QUOTE ] "This marks a very important step forward in women's health," said Dr. John O. Agwunobi, the assistant secretary for health at the Department of Health and Human Services. <font color="white">. </font> "It will be the first vaccine licensed by the FDA that can prevent a cancer that kills a large number of women each year," said Dr. Michael Keefer, an associate professor in the infectious disease division at the University of Rochester School of Medicine in New York. "If that's not a breakthrough, I don't know what is." [/ QUOTE ] 
|
|
#2
06-09-2006, 08:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
Is this supposed to be an argument in favor of the FDA?
How about this: Joe Schmoe of the Anytown, USA police department could have shot John Q Citizen in the head yesterday, but he didn't. Ergo, police are a good thing to have coercively funded.
|
|
#3
06-09-2006, 08:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
I hate the FDA, but the religious argument against this vaccination might be one of the dumbest things I've heard in a while.
|
|
#4
06-09-2006, 08:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
The positions sometimes taken by religious fundamentalist groups and moral crusaders disturb me greatly. This is one of those occasions. I wonder how many people actually support their position in a case like this?
A few years ago I was in the uncomfortable position of being the deciding vote on the board of a community center when the social workers wanted permission to distribute free condoms to teens. This was in a Bronx neighborhood, high risk for HIV. The board had a number of observant religious members who were very committed to helping the area and it's residents and I was close to them personally. They voted against allowing the social workers request because it might encourage teens to engage in sex. They were willing to risk lives for doctrine. I sorely disappointed them by voting in favor of the condom distribution but it was an easy choice for me no matter what it did to my future relationship with them.
|
|
#7
06-09-2006, 11:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
[ QUOTE ]
The FDA is a pretty worthless organization, but the approval of the vaccine does not force everyone to use it, right? [/ QUOTE ] I beg to differ. I think the FDA, at times, can be slow and unwieldy. But I am thrilled to have an organization giving oversight on medical drugs. One doesn't have to think too hard about drug companies trying to sell either worthless or outright dangerous drugs on the market. I want a check and balance. (Besides, that is, having 1000's being defrauded or injured first and then deciding not to buy a product.) Same goes for food.
|
|
#8
06-09-2006, 11:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
Theoretically, the FDA is a good thing, but it turns out that by delaying, delaying, delaying the approval of drugs actually costs more lives than it saves.
http://www.fdareview.org/
|
|
#9
06-09-2006, 11:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The FDA is a pretty worthless organization, but the approval of the vaccine does not force everyone to use it, right? [/ QUOTE ] I beg to differ. I think the FDA, at times, can be slow and unwieldy. But I am thrilled to have an organization giving oversight on medical drugs. One doesn't have to think too hard about drug companies trying to sell either worthless or outright dangerous drugs on the market. I want a check and balance. (Besides, that is, having 1000's being defrauded or injured first and then deciding not to buy a product.) Same goes for food. [/ QUOTE ] Yea without the FDA there'd be no way for anyone to ever have any indication about the safety of the food they buy or the medicines they use. Good thing the FDA is there to put us in jail for using drugs they don't like. natedogg
|
|
#10
06-09-2006, 11:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FDA Ignores Religious Fundamentalists\' Objections
That doesn't mean the FDA is bad. It means it needs some fixing. I have no objections with having a shake-up to improve its efficiency. Also: I think the FDA should shorten its testing when thorough testing has already taken place in other countries.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
