| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Texas orders mandatory vaccinations for killer std on school girls. Discuss. |
| 2007-02-03 |
| Posted by:Thoth |
| #7 Aren't vaccine manufactures immune from private lawsuits? As I recall you have to go through some program to get compensation after many years and proving (beyond a shadow of a doubt) that the vaccine caused it. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2007-02-03 20:36 |
| #6 This strikes me as a mass marketing push. You can always recognize the drug company ads. They start out with a first set of ads that says, "ask your doctor about the purple pill" or "I didn't know". Then after they have peaked your concern and curiosity, they tell you what drug they are selling that can fix that problem. The cervical cancer ads followed the same pattern. The first ad was mothers and daughters inciting concern about cervical cancer with the motto, "tell someone you know about cervical cancer" (or words to that effect). The next set of ads instructed you to tell your girlfriends and your daughters to get the vaccine and IIRC, they reused the "I didn't know" motto with regard to this vaccine. Now it appears that they have managed to convince the state of Texas to buy mass supplies. Not a bad marketing plan. For those of you who think that they care about side effects for those small percentage$... ahh that's sweet. |
| Posted by: Slineger Whomort9098 2007-02-03 15:47 |
| #5 Shipman: If the vaccine works as advertised, great. Cervical cancer is nasty and murderous. But Merck and the State of Texas are setting themselves up for a real, or at least a PR disaster, by not analyzing the heck out of this before making it a statewide mandate. As it is, they are, and are appearing to be using the State's children in a massive experiment to see if this vaccination is a good idea. Most parents are not going to be thrilled with that idea. If you remember during the hearing for the MMR vaccine and autism, medical authority after medical authority testified in essence that vaccination is a numbers game. They know that a certain number of children will get bad side effects, and may even die; but that number is dwarfed by the number who would be crippled and die without vaccinations. What good will it do children if three of four die from this, and the State and Merck are sued to prevent any other children from being vaccinated? You can always legally claim that "not enough testing was done", no matter how much testing was done. And though Texas limits liability, there is little they could do if the court filed an injunction to prevent further vaccinations. One of those situations where good intentions is not enough. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-02-03 13:33 |
| #4 Bottom Line: Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing an affidavit stating that he or she objected to the vaccine for religious or philosophical reasons. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2007-02-03 13:32 |
| #3 What if it works? Would it be worth it? Can't we find some reason to be against it? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-02-03 12:53 |
| #2 Is the vaccine grown in chicken eggs? (lots of folks are allergic to chicken eggs.) |
| Posted by: 3dc 2007-02-03 10:49 |
| #1 Before any decision like this can be made, several very important bits of information need to be established: 1) What is the current incidence of HPV in girls in Texas? 2) What are the potential side effects of the vaccine, including allergy? What is their incidence rate among those who are vaccinated? 3) Will the vaccine still be effective if a girl has already contracted the disease? Will there be a follow-up screening program to determine effectiveness and side effects? 4) What are the distribution and storage requirements of the vaccine, as in refrigeration and perishability? 5) What are the known drug interactions? 6) Can the drug be administered to a child who has a compromised immune system, drug resistant tuberculosis, cancers and leukemias, dengue fever, West Nile virus, strep throat, inflamed tonsils or blocked eustation tubes, conjunctivitis, other childhood diseases, or is under treatment for any of the above? 7) What are the exact contents of the vaccination? Does the vaccine contain any mercury or other metals? 8) Can the vaccination be given in combination with other common school and travel vaccinations? With anti-malarial drugs? 9) Does the vaccination contain any product that is typically found to be objectionable on religious grounds, such as pork, beef or shellfish? 10) What is the extent of animal testing that has been done with this vaccine? (Think Thalidomide, not PETA.) |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-02-03 10:15 |