Teens can do whatever they want, as long as they don't harm anyone. The best thing we can do is make sure they're protected. If they understand the importance of safe sex, we'd be having way fewer problems.

Flatiron...because this particular virus causes cancer in women...for that reason alone it is important because when mommy gets sick or dies form the disease, the taxpayer pays higher fees than the vaccine. She won't be ale to work or may be dieted insurance because of a prexisting condition. Both situation will haunt the taxpayer. Trust me, prevention and education is much cheaper.

What paranoid political hack and relegious group decided we needed a study like this?

Fear is the primary tool used by the religious right. In this case, they believe the risk cancer is a reasonable price to pay in order to maintain some control over their teenage daughters. Of course, it is a sign of insanity.

Commento508--we tried that "abstinence" only route during the early part of the 2000s. Guess what? The rates of teen pregnancy and sexual activity among teens actually when up. I mean, we can keep on trying what's been proven NOT to work, if you want, or we can go back to the sort of sex education that caused dramatic drops in teen pregnancy and sexual activity back in the 90s. But that's not the GOP's way, is it?

And the mere FEAR of your daughter having sex doesn't really seem like a rational reason not to provide her with a vaccine which could, one day, save her life. Or am I just crazy?

One can teach abstinence and still teach kids to protect themselves, if they do have sex. The two are not mutually exclusive. There is a difference between "abstinence" education and "abstinence ONLY" education. Abstinence only education as public policy is an abject failure, but facts are irrelevant to religious zealots.

commento508 What if we focused on teaching young women to abstain from sex until after they are committed and married to a man ... oh that's right, that's not the Democrat's way

Teens have sex because nature is demanding it through hormone activity and it feels good. Teach all you want and even use the rhythm method if you want but the other name for those people is parents.

The Democrats didn't create hormones and sexual activity in teens. That has been going on for thousands of years! The two biggest drives in humans, animals too, are eating and sex. My money is on you can't teach teens to eat properly either.

I agree that abstinence should be stressed, but it important to teach about being safe/preventing disease and/or pregnancy. Even if a person decides to wait until marriage, perhaps he or she and their spouse aren't ready to have kids right away (for example, they want to be more financially stable first, or want to enjoy a few years of being married without kids), a more comprehensive sex ed would help them be able to do that (which the current abstinence only would be of no help).

It's curious that with the exception of Britain, teenagers in Western Europe lose their virginity later than American teenagers. This happens despite the fact that they have comprehensive sex education, have access to condoms in high school restrooms, have access to the pill and the "day after pill" and also despite the fact that the majority of them are not religious and are not being hit with a Bible over the head by their parents.

The reason I think is very simple: The forbidden fruit is always the most attractive. The fruit you can pluck whenever you want is not as appealing.

Don't you people realize that things like pregnancy and STD's are supposed to be punishment for having sex? The only reason for anyone to ever have sex is for the express purpose of procreation.

Just ask Rick Santorum. /s

Oh my God, my, my baby is going to have se se seeeeeeeeeeeeex!

:D Some people

OK, now try to picture your parents having sex. ;-)

Mind Games, that's completely true from grecko roman society to the gauls and saxons from which white america descended. I'm no expert on africa, but at least two or three tribes force marry their children at age 14. So yes, teenage sex has existed and been in full swing for thousands of years.

Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha. Thousands ?

I'm a Republican and I think that's hilarious.

I'm not quite sure I understand you're comment Mind Games. Are you implying that people, including teenagers, HAVEN'T been having sex for thousands of years?

teenagers in Western Europe lose their virginity later than American teenagers. This happens despite the fact that they have comprehensive sex education

I'm not making a case for teaching abstinence, but this is not a good comparison to the US and not necessarily a reason why they have low pregnancy rates. Across most European countries multiple generations of a family live in the same household and they share bedrooms with their siblings until they get married and move out...sometimes not even then. Few people want to have sex with their sister in the room and their grandmother watching to see who leaves the house at 2 am.

@SeveredHead, are you Catholic or something? That's insanity right there. Yeah, God forbid people have sex for pleasure, that would be HORRIBLE right? *sarcasm*

People are so backwards in this country about sex. So repressed. So ignorant. So ashamed. AND IT'S THE 21st CENTURY!! Makes me sick!! Damn it, people, when the hell are you going to GET OVER your STUPID hangups? If you don't, your just going to end up emotionally scarring and messing up ANOTHER generation about sex, who will have a bunch of unhealthy sex lives because of YOUR stupidity. They're just going to end up thinking their urges and having sex is gross, and it will be YOUR FAULT for passing on that shame! KNOCK IT OFF!

Also, abstinence is BS. If you TRULY love somebody, and YES teenagers ARE capable of love, no matter what you ageists may say, then they won't let a piece of paper and a gold band stand in their way. "no sex before marriage" is unrealistic...hell, I even heard of a GYNO who yelled at a patient when she went in for birth control because she wasn't married. Unbelievable.

The whole "stressing abstinence" thing is just another pathetic attempt to try and control young people, to keep them under a thumb. Newsflash: you CANNOT control sexual urges and desire, it will NOT work, so why not EDUCATE them instead of acting like you can stop it!

What if we focused on teaching young women to abstain from sex until after they are committed and married to a man ... oh that's right, that's not the Democrat's way

You mean, that's not the 'based in the real-world' way... I assume. Otherwise, your comment would basically just be an admission that you think nonsensical religiously-motivated policies that have proven to be completely ineffective are a good idea for this country.

The Catholic Church does not teach that sex is only for procreation. It is for both procreation and to bind the married couple closer. Also, a marriage is not complete UNTIL the married couple has sex.

What you do not like about the Catholic Church is what you THINK that you know. It is amazing what you might learn on any subject once you check things out and dispel your bigotry.

Some of the older religious institutions (Catholics and Jews for instance) are actually a bit more lax on the sexual hangups than what you will see in Evangelical and born-again types.

This is because of after thousands of years of reality slapping them in the face, they eventually realize that they need to give up 'some' ground on their restrictive sexual dogmas to remain a cohesive institution.

Unfortunately, religions are very slow to do this - and backlashes are guaranteed. Catholics are also a widely varied group - so you will see a wide array of opinions not just among the average churchgoers; but among the clergy as well.

commento508

What if we focused on teaching young women to abstain from sex until after they are committed and married to a man ... oh that's right, that's not the Democrat's way.

You're right commento508, that's not our way. We tend to learn from what works and what doesn't work. Abstinence only birth control has been preached for thousands of years with a recent resurgence during the Bush Administration...it didn't work, do you get it? It doesn't work and it never did. So climb back into your bible and pretend God will prevent your daughter from having sex. The rest of us will try reason.

Shuklack,

Incorrect. What I posted has been the Catholic Church teaching for many, many years. It is also the official Church teaching and not my own interpretation.

It doesn't work and it never did...The rest of us will try reason.

If you are going to try reason, do so. It requires you not be so blindly supportive of one side. Here is a link from the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/TeenPregnancy/AboutTeenPreg.htm

I don't see where you are getting that abstinence ed "didn't work". I'm not saying it DID work, but the trend is very clear in this graph. It flatlines from 2005-2007 but every other year, before and after, sees marked declines. This is similar to the overall trend since since the late 50's:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-04-09/CDC-teen-birth/54140178/1

The most logical, knee-jerk conclusion from this graph is that abstinence education does work because, I guarantee you, that was the way during most of the past 70 years. However, scientifically, I think what's going on here has nothing to do with the type of sex education. It has more to do with economics and more awareness of what teen pregnancy does to your life, regardless of the type of sex ed.

WHAT? It’s not the Slut-In-A-Shot we were promised? I want my money back from the FDA and CDC and …

This a shot to PREVENT a disease you could get whether you waited until you were married or not to have sex. Next you won't want to give your kids vaccinations for measles and ... oh wait, some of you idiots are already doing that. Won't be happy until the Black Plague is back, years of research and development to save lives just doesn't fit your world view.

First off it's a series of three shots. Second, make sure to get your sons inoculated, over 50% of US boys/men have the HPV virus and pass it onto girls/women. The HPV virus causes 90% of the cases of cervical cancer. This isn't rocket science.

It's the Evangelical Churches and the Republican party that is making our kids fornicate and take drugs. Those GOP devils are the ones profiting from all of the illegal contraband. They have been in charge for over 50 years and haven't done anything to stop it.

They are worried about a shot spurring sex?! What about television?! All advertising, movies, tv shows, some video games, and everything else anymore is about sex, they should be more concerned with that than a shot!

Nothing else needs to be said.

Gardasil does not halt the spread of the disease. It has never been shown to halt HPV spread, and the limited time it has been available is entirely insufficient to say that it will keep a woman from getting cervical cancer, which is typically caused by lesions on the cervix, not a virus. Most reported cases of cervical cancer are from women between the ages of 37 and 49, so following a group of teenage girls for 4 years is no scientific way to determine avoidance of an adult disease.

Bill, I don't know where you get that lesion on your cervix but most women get cervical lesions/warts from Human PapillomaVIRUS from their sexual partners.

Erm... The study was to determine if the vaccine caused young girls to have the urge, and/or, rush to have sex. It was not conducted to see if it was providing a cure. Read the article again????

Lonesome, while there is an association with cervical lesions (or dysplasia), there  has been no direct causal link with HPV. The University of Maryland Medical Center's article on the subject clearly says "The precise cause of cervical dysplasia is unknown".



The following may increase a person's risk for developing cervical dysplasia

Human papillomavirus (HPV) infection
Genital warts
Smoking
Being sexually active at a younger age (younger than 18 years old)
Giving birth before age 16
Having multiple sexual partners
Having a partner whose former partner had cervical cancer
History of one or more sexually transmitted diseases, such as genital herpes or HIV
Having suppressed immune system, such as from HIV or chemotherapy to treat cancer
Using birth control pills for longer than 5 years
Being born to a mother who took diethylstilbestrol (DES) to become pregnant or to sustain pregnancy. This drug was used many years ago to promote pregnancy but it is no longer used for these purposes.
Low levels of folate (vitamin B9) in red blood cells
Dietary deficiencies in vitamin A, beta-carotene, selenium, vitamin E, and vitamin C (scientific data is not entirely conclusive at this time; see section on Nutrition and Dietary Supplements)

Read more: http://www.umm.edu/altmed/articles/cervical-dysplasia-000034.htm#ixzz29NRGZNeN

Exactly! If you've watched a woman you love (mother, aunt, sister, daughter, friend) die from any form of cancer, you would never hesitate to vaccinate your daughters to help protect them from this horrible way to die. Society has been struggling to find a cure for cancer for as long as I can remember. When we find a medicine that helps prevent cancer, people refuse to use it. Why? Seems counter-productive to me. For those who wish to take advantage of medical advancements in disease prevention, great. For those who don't, great. Freedom to chose is there for all of us.

Bill the Cat said:

Lonesome, while there is an association with cervical lesions (or dysplasia), there has been no direct causal link with HPV.

According to the National Cancer Institute, you're wrong.

High-risk HPVs cause virtually all cervical cancers. They also cause most anal cancers and some vaginal, vulvar, penile, and oropharyngeal cancers.

http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/HPV

Exactly! It is our freedom and right to chose what medicines go into our and our childrens bodies! And health does not come from a pill or vaccine!!!

THIS IS MARKETING 101...VACCINES DONT PREVENT CANCER...GIVE ME A BREAK...

But the vaccine prevents the spread of the virus which causes cancer, so indirectly the vaccine prevents cancer.

This is science/medicine 101, give me a break!!!1!

jessica1979 said:

Exactly! It is our freedom and right to chose what medicines go into our and our childrens bodies! And health does not come from a pill or vaccine!!!

Tell that to Polio!

Tell that to Polio!

owned

jessica1979

Exactly! It is our freedom and right to chose what medicines go into our and our childrens bodies! And health does not come from a pill or vaccine!!!

How many Christian Scientists said that just before the death of their child. Yes, God and health food stores will answer all health problems.

I have nothing against vaccines, however I am curious about the long term affects of such chemicals & the facts pharmaceutical companies are more profit orientated the humanity thus will say & do anything to back their products until people start dying or have deformed babies.

As for the Sex issue, until recent history one was considered an old maid if not married by 18 & have a couple of children. The average age of marriage 14-16. This was the way to prevent unwed mothers. Of course now we are a free nation of unwed mothers mostly surviving of public assistance.

I find it interesting how the article mention a decline in preganacy amoung 15-17 years old yet didn't mention the pregnacy amoung the 12-15 year olds, which at least in my area has increased over the last 5 year.

This study was necessary because the Christian Taliban were preaching that protecting our daughters against cancer would encourage them to have sex. In reality this bigoted idiots would prefer cancer be an actual risk of having sex, rather than it being a preventable risk. The misogyny of the religious right is palpable. Such as in their desire to force women to bear their rapists babies; which is one of the planks of the Republican Party BTW!

Bill is kind of playing fast and loose with words. He says that HPV has not been shown to cause cervical dysplasia. Which may be true, I don't know. But that's not precisely the issue. The issue is whether it causes cervical cancer. Which it does.

jessica1979

Exactly! It is our freedom and right to chose what medicines go into our and our childrens bodies! And health does not come from a pill or vaccine!!!

actually it is not your right. where would we be with polio if it wasn't mandated that all children receive the vaccine? there would still be thousands of death's a year because people act against their own self-interest and the interests of society far too often. and yes, very often health does come from a pill or needle. maybe you've heard of antibiotics?

please lets not for get that vaccines protect us from measeles mumps ruebella small pox chicken pox meningitis hepatitus typhoid yellow fever tetanus, shall i go on.... and you think they dont provide health?????. Ever see someone with hepatitus or meningitis. Thank god we dont have to see typhoid or small pox. And there are people who are actully afraid of the vaccines. Im old so i remember getting the measels and the mumps and chicken pox. you betcha i got my kids vaccinated i DID NOT want them to suffer this. Let me tell you cancer is about the worse you can imagine. If it were really true that getting this vaccine would make my daughter run out and have sex.... fine... it sure beats getting cancer. Cancer treatments are almost as horrible as the disease itself. And some people are worried about sex. I am willing to bet your kids went out and had it and you did not even know it

Turf13

actually it is not your right. where would we be with polio if it wasn't mandated that all children receive the vaccine? there would still be thousands of death's a year because people act against their own self-interest and the interests of society far too often. and yes, very often health does come from a pill or needle. maybe you've heard of antibiotics?

DO some research, polio was in RAPID RAPID decline by the time the vaccine was even introduced. It's a virus that lives in the intestinal track and is spread by poor hygiene.

AND YES it IS MY RIGHT to decice what I do to my and my childrens bodies! I can chose to drink myself to death if I want to, correct? I can chose to engage in risky sexual behavior, correct? Why should I not be able to chose what I put into my body?

And the type of "health" I am referring to is long term health, not take a pill to fight an infection. I am not against science or medicine, I just know that they are flawed. Science proves something "correct" one day and "incorrect" the next. The world of science it is ever evolving. You can not tell me something is "safe' when drugs are pulled off the market daily. They were all "safe" at some point. I mean long term health, that what we put into our bodies has an effect on our health.

If you are vaccinated against polio and I am not why would you care?? By your beliefs I will get it and YOU should not get it correct? IF vaccines work you should have no concerns about what other people chose to do. You are protected remember, or are you?? That is the million dollar question..............

Ol_Doc

How many Christian Scientists said that just before the death of their child. Yes, God and health food stores will answer all health problems.

Religios freedem (and freedom in general) is alive and well in the United States, as it should be. Are you saying you are agianst a healthy diet?

Jessica, you are so wrong it is sad. You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts. In the few years before the polio vaccine was introduced there was a (recurring every summer) HUGE epidemic. A family member of ours spent the rest of his life in an iron lung as a result. I was not allowed to visit the public pool or leave the house because of the rampant infections. This was in the midwest. A friend in L.A. went to the mountains with her family on vacation, only to return to discover that many friends were infected, some of whom were physically challenged for life. The Salk vaccine was just in time to prevent the next summer's epidemic. People who had actually SEEN the results of the epidemic could not get the vaccine soon enough! Your stupidity (if you want to talk about "religious freedom" at least learn to spell it is evident. Your judgement is non-existent. Healthy diet is good, but it doesn't prevent infectious diseases.

I don't know what they could be thinking, but it is all "insert president name" fault.

Oh but Romney is not president yet or ever. Can't blame Obama, he believes in women's rights

No Rex. It's the republicans obsessed with women vaginas . Perverts!

Obama believes in controlling women's lives, thereby determining their rights.

false.

thfan said:

No Rex. It's the republicans obsessed with women vaginas . Perverts!

Not only obsessed with women, but obsessed with gays. Perverts!

Rex-1306908

Obama believes in controlling women's lives, thereby determining their rights.

Funny, I could have sworn it was Romney/Ryan that want to give control of American women's bodies to old white men. A little too reminiscent of the Ayatollahs if you ask me.

I am sure Obama will evolve to say & agree with every special interest groups to remain in his kingly position. However, this article isn't about your glorious leader.

I'm sure Romney will "evolve" to say anything to please the Christian Taliban. He went from a moderate, at least not opposing women's rights to a raving lunatic against women's rights, just to please this "base." The Taliban and religious Islamic nuts oppose vaccines for children on political grounds, even if it will harm the children. The Christian right oppose vaccines for children on political grounds, even if it will harm the children. They are cut from the same cloth.

Wants to know...
Romney has evolved to suddenly support all of the same policies as obama. Interspersing that whenhe realized he was losing the election for good, his campaign decided to let him go "rogue". Like another repub we knew 4 yrs ago the party wants nothing to do with.....Lol. :)

Dr. Jack-sorry, but I BELIEVE that Gardasil was developed and introduced during the BUSH (2 ) admin.

Does it matter? The fact is people who thought that immunizing kids against one of the dozen-plus STDS out there would encourage them to have sex were wrong. As if that was difficult to figure out.

Mo, what's your point? Jack is saying the wing nuts/fear mongers will always accuse Obama for skewing the facts. Even when the facts are as plain as their noses, they'll cut off their noses just to spite Obama.

Is there anything parents WONT get hysterical about these days?

Right Wingers left wingers,wingnut wingers,makes no difference both sides are insane,in one sense or another.

Anyone buying into taking these vaccines is a Gullible Guinea Pig,ande what ever you're told by big pharma, and the medical establishment,you people fall for this big pharma vaccine CRAP,like a Flock a of Pigeons being fed bread crumbs in the Village Square! Not knowing what those bread crumbs are laced with.You people will believe ANYTHING!Anything the medical and pharma establishments shove down your throats.

Have any of you stool pigeons read the inserts to these vaccines? No you haven't! Because when you go in to be vaccinated,with this CRAP,the inserts are usually still left in the boxes containing this Crap,or in some back room or some circular file/garbage pail. These stupid doctors don't even read them.Nobody reads them,and if they do, they don't care!

Has anyone seen the side effects of this CRAP,they call vaccines? Have you seen what's put in them?No you haven't,because like all the good little stool pigeons you are,you'll believe anything you're told,by Big Pharma and run to get you and your kids Shot Up,with god knows what!

Somebody mentioned the Polio vaccines.Does anyone know how many kids contracted polio in India,when the polio vaccine was being given out,on behalf of their Benevolent Benefactor Bill Gates?No you don't! 67,000 kids,contracted polio.These are not the same polio vaccines that were given out in the 50's folks!

It's all out there,the Real Side Effects and ingredients,that no one tells you about.They give you only surface answers if you happen to ask.I'll repeat it's all out there.Type in the Real side effects and ingredients,in vaccines such as you're all joyfully discussing now and see what this CRAP,really is for the long term.Oh and some says it doesn't prevent Cancer,and I'll just bet it doesn't prevent any Viruses either.

All this VaccinerCrap,like this one does, is fill big Pharma and the Medical establishments pockets with the Green Stuff,and is given at the yours, and your kid's expense!

However please continue to be those Pigeons in the Village Square and see what it Costs You!
E

Somewhere: Your paranoia is severe. While big pharma is definitely interested in big profits, vaccines are not such a profitable product, manly because they are expensive to develop and only need to be purchased once in a life time. The big money is in drugs that are purchased over and over by the patients throughout their lives.

LOL tell that to smallpox, crazy person.

Yeah right Bob not such an expensive product! BULL!Vaccines are also distributed to patients through their lives over and over again.Oh let's see the Flu Vaccine,this vaccine, that vaccine, and on and on and on.Who the Hell do you think is making money off those vaccines the Easter Bunny?No why it's Big pharma, and the medical establishment.

Everytime you turn around now,it's a vaccine,and a vaccine for that.Drugs by tons being put out there.Vaccines and drugs to make people well? No to make money off of them.Profits Profits and more Profits,and the willing participant gets the shaft!

quidproquote,everytime somebody speaks out they're crazy? Is that your best line of defense?Also small vaccine is an entirely different animal.

conspiracy theorists abound. actually, india reported one case of polio in 2011, and none so far in 2012. the only place polio still exists in large numbers is in pakistan's tribal area, and northern nigeria where more religious zealots prevent vaccination. the usa hasn't had a case for over 30 years, the western hemisphere in over 20. vaccines work, and they work very well.

Conspiracy theorist abound!India reported one case of polio in 2011.Gee it might of been from that polio shot!

67,000 genius look it up!Vaccines work and they work very well.Of course they do!

somewhere

H.flu causes meningitis. It is commonly caused from an earache. When children get it it can cause anything from mild brain damage to death. mostly the effects are not seen in children they have a remarkable ability to recover. not so in adults. when adult get menigitis it can leave devastating residual that may take years of physical therapy to overcome. H flue if preventable through a vaccine. My daughter had it. it was the worst 10 days of my life because i was afraid she would die. The vaccine came out one month after she got out of the hospital. Pharm companies dont make much money off vaccines because they are often given out free. pharm companies make thier money off cancer meds, heart meds and cholesterol meds and lets not forget antidepressents and antibiotics. If they sold no other meds but these meds... they would still be amoung the richest companies in the world

Awesome...sign me up! And my girlfriend too. We need more sex!

Here, here!

Great idea. Hell I'll get the shots today if that's the case. I'll even host a menopause-gardasil party at my clinic and throw in a free PAP test too. Make love, not war.

Kfdiei817--sorry, but the fact is that the failure is on the part of the parents who have not honestly talked to their children about sex. The doctor, by all means should re-inforce those teachings, but you cannot absolve those who seem to think that if your kids know about sex, they will do it.

Believe me--they KNOW about sex.

The stupid theory that teaching kids about sex encourages them to go out and do it is at the heart of increased teen pregnancy, kids having kids, etc., etc., etc. Hello out there....human nature is that as one approaches and enters puberty, the natural drive IS to have sex...whether you've been taught about it or not. Talking to kids (hopefully at home, by parents who love and care about them) about sex and RESPONSIBLE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR will help prevent all kinds of problems and heartache. And, any medication that will ensure protection against STDs and this kind of cancer is the responsible way to protect kids.

Hey guys, have you heard? Mountain Dew prevents pregnancies!

catgoddess I think it is so funny that there really are parents out there who think that if they don't teach their kids about sex, they will never want to have sex. It is exactly the opposite! Kids who don't know what it is or what they are doing are far more likely to think that it is OK to just proceed unprotected. They don't know any better.

Sally Lu, it isn't funny that so many parents are failing their kids. My parents and schools failed me. I learned everything I knew from the internet which we all know isn't a very good source but there was no planned parenthood near by (the one PP in my city was constantly harrassed by fundies). Alot of pregnant girls in my high school in 2005. I got lucky because I was super super busy and just didn't have time for sex and was too afraid of getting pregnant. Magically didn't get any STDs.

OK, well to clarify for MOmaid- The article quoted the doctor as saying he was concerned that girls who got the vaccine might mistakenly believe it protected against pregnancy and other STDs. Ergo a doctor administered the vaccine to these hypothetical girls. Ergo, that doctor did not explain what that vaccine prevents if his or her patients still believed that the HPV vaccine also prevents pregnancy. Logic!

Obviously parents should be talking to their kids about safe sex. But doctors, as actual medical professionals, shouldn't allow their patient to so completely misunderstand exactly what they are being vaccinated against.

However, the point is moot anyways since the doctor was just saying he thought this might be happening, and I gotta say he must think kids are pretty stupid if he thinks they might believe that-- I have a hard time believing that anyone would think that.

The reason teens get pregnant is not because of sex education. Face it. people have been doing this for a couple of milinea. No one taught the first people how to have sex they just did it as did those that followed. You dont have to be taught how to have sex. Its nice if you were. but most of it comes naturally. Teens get pregnant because no one taught them what causes it and how to prevent it. I wish i had a dime for everytime i have heard i did not know that doing that made you pregnant. or i thought i was too young.. we have never been able to prevent teen sex and we never will. teaching kids about sex will lower the teen birth rate and maybe help some of them make better choices. I am for giving this vaccine. anything to lower the cancer rate. people can die from cancer. Consentual sex rarely causes death. unless your doing something wierd

True that. The US is the only developed country in the world to have a significant creationist or anti-science population. And that's percentage wise.

Right on. We need to tax churches and church-related charities NOW!

Thackery...so you are saying during the 60's and 70's were more progressive times and since we have fallen into some sort of religious decay? The years of "free love" , "Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll", "If it feels good, do it" and many other cliches of the time made us more enlightened without consideration for drug overdoses, sexually, transmitted diseases and early pregnancy? It seems that your argument is so much more personal agenda driven than "intellectual or enlightened".

Spartain...I would love to see the reference you use for that tid bit.

Captain Jack Wigal.... Where exactly does taxing churches and church related charities feed into this discussion of vaccinating young people from contracting HPV?

Cap'n, taxing charities means less goes to helping those in need... and your religious bigotry is showing...

@txmom, vatican website, u.s. is the only country remaining today with more than 35% of its population practicing ANY form of christianity.

@bill the cat, while I agree with your sentiment, it is time to dismantle the half-ass charities where 25% of proceeds go to administrative costs :P

While I don't subscribe to any form of formal religion, I don't really have any problem with it in general. And I do believe in God or more accurately, a creator. What I do have problem with is the teaching that this book is the actual word of God, even though it is full of contridictions and really horrible teachings. These books were written, not by God or Jesus, but by men who had stories to tell about another man and his teachings. Those stories were changed and parts were taken out if they didn't suit the pope or king of the day, and the actual words have been reinterpreted over and over, each time, bringing with it a different meaning (and I truely believe that this is the case with other religions too, not just Christianity). Sadly, we have people living today insisting that we all should live and teach our children to live based on stories that are very far from the actual teachings of this man that the stories were actually about. This doesn't even begin to take in the hypocracy of many Christians who praise the bible, but will disparage the needy - but that is another conversation!

Patrick....the statement Spartain made was..

The US is the only developed country in the world to have a significant creationist or anti-science population. And that's percentage wise.

So I was interested in Spartain's reference. Because the way his statement is phrased is left to much interpretation. personally do not believe that just because a person is a Christian that they must forsake Science. But then I also do not believe Science has the answer to all aspects of a Society. Free will intersects both.

http://www.pewforum.org/Christian/Global-Christianity-exec.aspx

According the pew forum the only way he is correct is by attaching developed country to his statement. But then I believe many in Brazil would argue that they are at the point of being developed. As for Mexico the only thing that creates them from actually joining the Developed nations is a corrupt Government that is tied to the drug Trade. And neither of those components have a thing to do with Religion...Science through Chemistry maybe.

Surprisingly South Korea is much more creationist and anti-science than the US. They've actually gone to the step of removing famous examples of evolution from science textbooks. Even the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology has a very prominent creationism display. Percentage-wise they don't have a lot of Christians and not a lot of strong fundamentalist faith. It's just not an issue people care about in South Korea, so the people with the megaphone dictate policy in this regard.

Your concerns about the vaccine should be discussed with your doctor.

Read this: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/hpv-vaccine-victim-sues-merck.aspx

Isaca--to my knowledge there have NEVER been any deaths or disabilites from this vaccine. But as a woman whose mom died when I was ONLY 34, of Cervical cancer, I can tell you that there HAVE been deaths from NOT being vaccinated.

And citizin-- I will go look at your site, but you DO know that advocacy groups have claimed for years that autism was caused by vaccines, and it turned out that all their claims came from one doctor's theory and faked test results. But let me ask you this--IF there were a vaccine to prevent Pancreatic cancer (and I picked that one because of its REALLY high mortality rate), and there was a vaccine that would COMPLETELY prevent your child of getting that awful cancer, but one in a million people might have a bad reaction to it, wouldn't you STILL give it to your kid?

I sure would. I'm not a gambler, but those are odds I'd take.

I urge all who have posted comments on this arcticle or reading through these comments to look at the damadge done to adolecent girls in Texas during Gov. Perry's "mandated" h.p.v. vaccinations for school aged females. Gardasil was dangerous in its controlled testing phase and still is. Don't buy the hype put out there by these people. Teaching your children propper hygene along with sound decision making would yield far better results than allowing public institutions to maim and poision them. I for one am not dissapointed with the American public's lack of information on these matters or our general state of confusion when we are confronted by so called experts. Instead I am upset with the criminals who attempt to sell you these falsehoods,preying on the concern for your childrens well being....please do not comment back as i will not look back on this part of the page again..thank you

The manufacturer, Merck and Co., has distributed more than 16 million doses of Gardasil nationwide. As of June 30, there were 9,749 VAERS reports of adverse events following Gardasil vaccination. Of these, 94% were classified as reports of non-serious events.

There's no link between the vaccine and neurological disorders. Its a probability anomaly, not a real risk.

What about the testing phase data and the 6% that is still quite a number. correctopinion you should perhaps switch to our side....the force is strong with you despite your choice in employment. Well done my child now answer those last two

There are well-understood risk factors for taking vaccines.

The CDC lists known contraindications on their web site and your doctor should be aware of them. The only thing currently listed is a prior allergic reaction to any vaccine.

The CDC tracks cases where people got sick after they were injected. The vast majority of those cases were very minor. Of the few that were serious, there is no indication that it was caused by the vaccine. (People get sick for reasons other than vaccines.) This is explained on the CDC VAERS page. There are some people who misrepresent the actual science - any idiot can make a web page. The best source is the CDC information page.

jedi7--stop engaging in disingenuous math.

9749/16,000,000 = 0.00061 = 0.061%. Now take 6% of that number and you have a whopping 0.004% of vaccinations leading to serious events. Wow...huge number there...

Now take the number of people of that have died of these cancers and divide that by the total population of the planet - you will find the numbers are strikingly close.

Jedi7
Perry tried to mandate it but it never went through so there is nothing to study.

Google: mercola quackwatch

Jedi7

I urge all who have posted comments on this arcticle or reading through these comments to look at the damadge done to adolecent girls in Texas during Gov. Perry's "mandated" h.p.v. vaccinations for school aged females.

DSB is correct. Perry did not get the mandate passed. This is a double edged sword...the reason to pass the measure was to make sure that low and no income children has direct access to the vaccination at no cost. This was actually a very compassionate, and expeditious method to support the entire community of young women. Unfortunately, it also was a policy that dictated parental right to informed medical care for their children. It was messy public policy. No one truly wished to deny children access to medical treatment but, as a mother of a daughter I was not going to have the state mandate the care I would offer my own daughter. That decision is one that was between my husband, my daughters Doctor and myself. So the state needed to find another way to fund vaccinations for low and no income children if their parents chose to vaccinate. This is accomplished through a program from the Department of State Health Services. Most of the funding comes from the Federal Government and now the state will also vaccinate boys.

What I found striking about your argument...

.please do not comment back as i will not look back on this part of the page again..thank you

You don't seem to be the least bit concerned about listening instead you are content to spout. Go figure.

@death magnet. read 8.8.

"9749/16,000,000 = 0.00061 = 0.061%. Now take 6% of that number and you have a whopping 0.004% of vaccinations leading to serious events. Wow...huge number there..."

Your comparison is flat out wrong and misinforming. Don't post if you know nothing on the subject.

"as a mother of a daughter I was not going to have the state mandate the care I would offer my own daughter".

How would Perry's proposal have been any different, in principle, than say paying into Social Security, or stopping at stop signs? When you are a member of a group (say "residents of Texas") you give up the independance to do whatever you darn well please, in some situations. We all do it, all the time. I imagine you (personally) probably do it dozens of times every day.

Not sure where the idea came from on the right wing, that because we all have to "play nicely" for our society to work (at all), there is some conspiracy afoot to destroy individual rights. You guys are all the same. You want your daughter to live a healthy life. Rush Limbaugh wants everybody to hear his message on the radio. If everybody's daughter gets their HPV vac, your daughter will be safer! (Its called "herd immunity".) If the federal government did not control the air waves, it would be chaos, and nobody could hear Rush's chatter! (He not only benefits from federal regulations, he depends on them!) Your daughter not only would benefit from every other girl being vac, it could save her life. You, and Rush, want government to do what you want, to benefit you, you just don't want it to require you to do what you don't want to do.

That's very human, and very understandable. But things just don't work that way. If everybody disobeyed any law they didn't feel like following, society would disintegrate, and we'd ALL (every one of us!) be tossed back onto the savannah, with no vacations, no roofs over our head, and 35 year life expectancies! Sorry!

Jedi, its 6% of 9,749 or about 584 cases. With 16,000,000 in distribution, the number becomes infinitesimally small. Hate to quote an objectivist like Terry Goodkind, but people will believe something either because they want it to be true or because they fear it to be true. In this case, the fundamental fear is the only source of evidence that the vaccine is dangerous. I'm not saying trust everything. But rejecting something because you might not have the background to understand it (and someone said my daughter took the vaccine and something bad happened) is not a good method.

Big Ed..

How would Perry's proposal have been any different, in principle, than say paying into Social Security, or stopping at stop signs?

If you work legally in the United States you pay into Social Security with the promise that the Government will return a portion of that investment to you. Driving is a choice so if you choose to drive you have to follow the law. The State has no right to compel a parent to vaccinate their children at a prescribed time with a prescribed drug. Once size does not fit all, even if it suites the purpose of averages. It is a parents right and responsibility to care for their child or children.

When you are a member of a group (say "residents of Texas") you give up the independance to do whatever you darn well please, in some situations.

In some situations yes but not in all by any stretch of the imagination. Actually in Texas we do not give up all sense of independence which is why we take legislation in our state seriously. WE do like our freedom.

Not sure where the idea came from on the right wing, that because we all have to "play nicely" for our society to work (at all), there is some conspiracy afoot to destroy individual rights.

So we all play nice for society to work and pretty soon we have no individual rights and someone will always profess to know better for us than we know for ourselves. Why would anyone trust a bureaucratic board to make health care decisions that are best served by a patient and their Doctor, or in this case a patient, parent and Doctor. Rick Perry didn't need to have all that much control of my child nor did he have any right to say at what age she should require a medical treatment. Those are personal decisions that by all means should be informed decisions but not mandated for all because a few need to have subsidized access to medication. I have no problem with the State, or in the case of Texas the Federal Government, providing medications free to children who's parents cannot afford access to medication or medical care.

(Its called "herd immunity".)

And yet we are not cattle nor are we incapable of making informed decisions for our children.

You, and Rush, want government to do what you want, to benefit you, you just don't want it to require you to do what you don't want to do.

As for Rush...he is not welcome to make health care decisions for my kids either. What I wish if for our Governments (local, state and Federal) to perform their individual functions and I will gladly perform my individual functions. Each has a time and place. What if the government, any government chose to start sterilizing women when they hit the age of 35, because having children beyond that age increases risk factors for birth defects and other high risk factors for pregnancy. According to your perspective that would be fine because some might argue that that would benefit society overall.

If everybody disobeyed any law they didn't feel like following, society would disintegrate, and we'd ALL (every one of us!) be tossed back onto the savannah, with no vacations, no roofs over our head, and 35 year life expectancies! Sorry!

Rick Perry used an executive order to try and enact this mandate. It never was a law and a problem would have most certainly been many who would not follow the mandate. Like many socially proactive societies we took back our rights and personal responsibilities and Perry was backed down. Low income and no income children in Texas do have access to the vaccinations and parents who can and often do provide informed care decisions for their children are still able to make those decisions. It is actually a win/win.

Elegantly put Big Ed. The ferocious individualism that seems to be the talk of the right wing these days is fundamentally anti-social. We all benefit from living in a society.

Pragmatic...ferocious individualism that is fundamentally anti-social? We benefit from society best when we are encouraged to introduce individuality so each can still maintain an identity. Without an exchange of ideas and debate what do we have? Iran (strict religious code), China (one child per family then forced sterilization), Cuba or Venezuela (the head of state knows better for it's subjects than the people themselves). So why do those on the Right scream so much for their rights to protest while demanding the government marginalize the Right? Personally I prefer a society that appreciates individualism.

We benefit from society best when we are encouraged to introduce individuality so each can still maintain an identity.

We're not talking about the same kind of individualism. You are speaking of the uniqueness in character of a person. I'm speaking of a mentality that favors "let me choose what I want!" Example: Why should I have to pay for roads I don't drive on? It doesn't benefit me!

When you said:

Why would anyone trust a bureaucratic board to make health care decisions that are best served by a patient and their Doctor, or in this case a patient, parent and Doctor.

I couldn't help but think of the way cities used to be, before public sanitation. You had a chamber pot where you went number 1 in the night. When morning came, you dumped it out the window, even if you were on the third floor. If you did that now, because you chose not to pay for a toilet and sewer connection, you'd get a ticket or get arrested.

Well this is the same thing. Some bureaucrat says you gotta go buy a toilet, pay a plumber to hook it up (better have running water first!), pay the city to connect it to the city sewer, and then pay a recurring bill! Excreting used to be free! Now I gotta pay for it?!

What if the government, any government chose to start sterilizing women when they hit the age of 35, because having children beyond that age increases risk factors for birth defects and other high risk factors for pregnancy.

You might be surprised to learn that states like North Carolina had eugenics programs and did this kind of thing up until the 1970's. They performed forced sterilizations of "feeble minded" or people deemed unfit to raise children. Some sterilizations were performed on children as young as 10. It was for the "public good." Other states had eugenics programs that were abandoned after a "little thing" called the holocaust.

To me your argument is a slippery slope argument, which I don't buy. Laws are passed by and large by popular mandate. As Rick Perry found out, you can't dictate an unpopular mandate. People push back. The only way stuff like this gets passed is when it doesn't impact the majority. Women over 35 are a large part of the population. They always will be. There are those who will have a moral conscious who won't be impacted by it. In other words, it ain't gonna happen. The North Carolina eugenics program was allowed to continue because it mostly targeted black women, a minority. And even then it was a rare practice.

I've said below that we tend to take for granted all that living in this time has given us. I can raise a family of two children and be 99.9999% sure they will both survive to adulthood. This is quite a change from less than 2 centuries ago where I could be 99.9999% sure they would not both survive. Public health policy has contributed to that almost entirely. (Better nutrition helps too.) And that came at the expense of the personal liberty of dumping your urine onto hapless passers by.

In 2 centuries, do you think our great great great grandkids will be discussing the same thing, only substituting dumping urine with electing not to take a vaccine to prevent a disease out of some petty sense of personal freedom? Urine was dumped out of necessity. There's no necessity here.

fair enough...

I'm speaking of a mentality that favors "let me choose what I want!" Example: Why should I have to pay for roads I don't drive on? It doesn't benefit me!

let me see if I get this right..."let me choose what I want"....isn't that like protesting wall street, they want what they want and have someone else pay for it. Then the it's like Arabs Spring Protests to overthrow their own governments, they wish to choose what they want and wish for someone else to pay for that. Perhaps that is about women maintain reproductive rights and having the federal government or state governments pay for their care, you know wishing to have a choice and demanding that someone else finances those choices. Perhaps it is about illegal immigrants protesting in a foreign country demanding the same rights as citizens, they want what they want and to have someone else pay for it. Then again there are the tens of millions of dollars spent on GLBT issues because that community wishes to choose what they want and to have someone else pay for it. Why must we have a double standard?

I couldn't help but think of the way cities used to be, before public sanitation.

Based on your remark it is apples to oranges. Public sanitation is a consideration for the entire community. By improving public sanitation you remove the cause of wide spread disease. The comparison is just bogus...The vaccination to prevent HPV exist and are on the market. Access to these drugs are subsidized for low income families so equal access exists. Not all parents wish to introduce a drug into their child's system for a variety of reasons. Many parents did not wish to introduce this into their kids system at a young age because where this may be appropriate for a child at risk for a variety of reasons it is not necessarily appropriate for all children. The time and place for that decision was not a unilateral move by Perry. The time and place for that decision is between Parent/guardian, Doctor with respect to the child. The situation has been repaired. There is absolute access for low and no income children to be vaccinated at no cost in a setting where the necessary discussions can be addressed between a parent/guardian and doctor. If parents are not particularly engaged in what the vaccination is and the need to follow the boosters in the proper succession then we should truly be concerned for the general welfare of those child. If parents pursue the discussion and do not feel the remedy is necessary then it is their right as parent or guardian to not vaccinate through informed consent.

The problem we have is with so many close-minded people who are not a big believer in science. Heck, even my mother who is a 2nd generation Christian, I tried to get her to watch Avatar 8 times and every times she tells me that she doesn't like watching "demons".

From the past several months we also learned that there are lots of senators who hold this belief that "science is from hell" or such and yet they sit on top of science committee for the US, that tells you something.

You say out touch with science and reality? Hmm What about Swine flu vaccine in the 70's care to explain how reactions to it caused more deaths and problems than the actual flu itself?

Maybe you like more recent example of anthrax vaccine when it first started being intro'd to the military had huge reactions issues. Something like 300k sick now by magical fairy tale sarin plume that didnt affect citizens in countries where veterans were affected. We all know the anthrax vaccine is safe look up cases like Sgt Lavester Brown and you will see a true story being pulled from the web.

Maybe you like the cases of where vaccine manufacturers got special protection from Congress setting up a special court for vaccine injuries to protect them from lawsuits forever. Completely ignoring the Constitution while doing it.

There are people with gentic conditions that make them vulnerable to vaccines but that is ignored now days and not talked about. NO testing is done before hand.

The odds of you having a life ending or life threating reaction to most vaccines , except anthrax vaccine that is, is 1 in 250,000 approx. If it does happen though you can expect the federal judge in the new "special" vaccine court to rule against you. He or she will cite no evidence that shot caused the problem that it was caused by an pre existing condition. Your family will be ruined, but hey good news no one is responsible because you believed the propganda that nothing bad ever happens from vaccines.

I hate people who say get vaccinated then when people lose loved ones or are destroyed for life by a vaccine then suddenly they no where to be found. Fact is reactions are rare, except for anthrax vaccine, but if it does happen the government will got out of its way to make your family into a liar and cheat you of justice anyway it can.

Sara M is the one out touch with reality. She ignores testimony from swine flu vaccine victims. She ignores testimony in 1993 from desert storm veterans citing the anthrax vaccine made them sick. She ignores court cases in the new special vaccine court set up that destroy well over 90 percent of the cases presented before it. These are serious cases not faked ones mind you. Go ahead believe people like her propganda you can end up dead or injured beyond repair with no recourse to justice.

Wes,

It's called natural selection, and it's darwinian science at work. It's better to rid those genes from the pool. My condolences to the victim and family, but the reality is our healthcare system saves too many idiots who should die (I'm not referring to vaccines, just people doing stupid things and then getting miraculous reparative treatment for injuries that would normally kill) and halts evolution and natural selection. I know I'm cold in saying this, but tough. Your end of the gene pool clearly shouldn't reproduce.

Among industrialized democracies folks, WE have the highest "religiosity" ( the USA is most religious), We also have the highest teen pregnancy rate, abortion, STD rates, and crime. Not only do we, as a nation, have this distinction, but among our states, the most religious states, also show this trend!

Go ahead believe people like her propganda you can end up dead or injured beyond repair with no recourse to justice.

If a vaccine cripples or kills you, your family has avenues to explore in the realm of legal responsibility towards the manufacturers or doctors.

If a preventable disease cripples or kills you, there is no appeal possible, only grief and regret.

Most everyone who is alive today takes what we have for granted. Less than 2 centuries ago, it was normal for a mother to birth 8 children and have 3 of them survive to adulthood. It didn't matter if you were rich or poor. Today it is considered normal for a mother to birth three children and have every single one survive to adulthood. This is due to phenomenal advancements in public health, and among these advancements are vaccines.

The odds of you having a life ending or life threating reaction to most vaccines , except anthrax vaccine that is, is 1 in 250,000 approx.

And the mortality rate for anthrax when inhaled is about 1 in 1. If you get it on your skin, it is 1 in 5. If you have a darn good reason to expect to be exposed to anthrax (either working with it, or going into a warzone where it could be used in a weapon against you) it would be foolish NOT to get vaccinated.

Alot of people get reactions to vaccines. however, hepatitis causes liver damage and you will get damn sick and pray for death. menengitis causes brain damage every time it occurs. polio WILL cripple you for life every time it occurs if it dont kill you. chicken pox can give rise to shingles in later life. reubella can blind you and mumps can make a male sterile. Do i really need to go on. some people will get serious side effects of every vaccine, every drug, and every treatment known in the medical world will cause side effects. Medicine is not perfect. but for the wide majority it beats living with the residule of a dreaded disease.

Madie, if everyone thought like you, then kindergardens would be full of kids with measles! I guess in your daughter's case, better late than never, but you risked her health and safety in the name of not letting the government tell you what to do. Your feeling that age 10 or 12 is too young makes no sense, as there is really no such thing as "too young" - the age was chosen as the best one for the general population because it has to be before the girls become sexually active, and they need time for the course of vaccinations to become effective. Are you saying that age 10-12 was not prior to your child becoming sexually active?

The whole point is to vaccinate them as early as possible, so that when the time comes, they'll be protected. While it's great to be given the freedom to choose, you can't be allowed a choice that could spread disease and endanger others.

Vaccinate everyone and we'll all be safe

The reason they recommend giving the vaccine so early is that it takes time to build up immunity. You daughter might not be immediately immune at age 16.

Madie-1861558

I had my daughter vaccinated at 16. I would not allow the shot at 10 or 12, I felt it was too young. The point being the decision was ours as to when to give her the shot - not some government agency.

Nature decides when a person is ready to bear children, not you or a government agency. With puberty comes fertility AND super powerful hormones that may or may not be successfully resisted...more likely not. Get the protection where ever you can get it asap...it would only be stupid not to.

cul... The topic has nothing to do with fertility. Its about sexual behavior, and HPV. Girls may occassionally have sex before they are able to concieve!

The topic has nothing to do with fertility. Its about sexual behavior, and HPV. Girls may occassionally have sex before they are able to concieve!

It doesn't end at behavior. There are young girls below puberty who are raped. Being fertile has nothing to do with being able to get HPV and cervical cancer. It's just that fertile girls are more likely to engage in the behaviors because there's hormones encouraging it.

This vaccine is only effective if given before the child has been exposed to the virus. The recommended early age for vaccination is to assure that no previous exposure has occurred.

HPV is also dangerous to boys, thus the penis reference.

One thing about HPV- it is spread through skin to skin sexual and oral sexual contact. So, a lot of kids who are doing "everything but" actual intercourse are contracting this disease.

I did teen pregnancy prevention work for many years. We were asked to go to a few churches as the leaders were finding out that when their teen members were taking the "abstinence pledges" that the teens viewed this as they could do "everything but" actual intercourse.

Hopefully, this vaccine will be approved for males very soon.

Even if your daughter is a virgin when she marries, if the guy she marries has had sexual contact with just one other person, your daughter can get HPV and risk genital warts and cervical cancer.

Or- if your daughter is still a virgin but has engaged in heavy petting, she can also get HPV.

HPV is rampant among teenagers. We can help protect them by getting them vaccinated.

Terry, I hope you are only trying to be facitious!! In recent months they are also recommending this vaccine for boys too. If a boy has HPV that he got from someone who got it from someone else, etc. then guess what, he is going to be a candidate for certain cancers also. Many adult women and men are getting a certain throat cancer caused from having oral sex with someone infected with HPV so it's smart for both sexes to have the vaccine if it prevents 1 cancer it's worth it!!!

It's also the ONLY vaccine that prevents cancer! It's practically a miracle! Imagine if we had a vaccine to prevent breast cancer. All those pink ribbon campaigns paying off in full. Oh wait, it's on the breast and must be evil! Not having a mastitis will just make women bear their breasts more! Evil! Scandalous! Sinful! Must be banned!

"Parents who are that stupid should not be allowed to breed!" Too late. they already did. Kids generally don't think too much about STDs- they're almost abstractions to them. (as opposed to pregnancies- a risk most teens understand ) That's why it's up to parents to take preventative steps to protect their children from STDs.

Kids generally don't think too much about STDs- they're almost abstractions to them.

Risk is an abstraction to a teen. Consequences are these blobby amorphous ideas and not real things that happen to people.

I agree!! She "represents" my district and I tried to vote her out last time to no avail. I have no idea who the he!! is voting for that complete moron. I wish she would go back to Iowa where she came from, and take her crazy a&& husband with her.

Sara needs to respond to why the swine flu vaccine 70 killed and harmed more people than the flu itself.

She needs to respond why veterans from Desert storm who testified that the antrax vaccine made them sick where ignored and mandatory testing of the vaccine resumed.

She doesnt answer why "special" courts exist to protect vaccine makers from bad reactions to vaccines.

She talks about science but ignores pre existing gentic condidtions , such as g6pd as example. Where vaccines can kill you.

She doesnt explain that if you read "the science label" on a vaccine vial with warnings you will see even for common proven vaccines the possiblity of a lethal or life ending reaction is 1 in 250k. If it happens your ruined for life and people like Sara dont want hear the truth then.

Wes, I double checked your fact on the CDC website, you're full of bologna. And once again, natural selection. that's a republican philosophy right?

Fear is nothing when there's hope. Fear won't stop those who enjoy life, because you only live once. Fear won't stop those who hate themselves, because they welcome the consequences.

dose anyone remember being a teenager. its the only time you truly believe you are invenceable. nothing will happen to you. teens are still like this. this plus ignorance leads to teen pregnancy and stds and many other things. Teenagers even though they may look like adults and think they are adults are really still children and need to be taught how to live.

Ted, if your children grow up to marry a person who has ever, even once, engaged in sex or heavy petting, your children can catch this virus and later get cancer.

Ted,

This has nothing to do with raising children with good morals. It has to do with death by cancer! The HPV virus is prolific. Even if your daughter is a virgin when married, she can contract HPV if her partner has had one other partner with HPV.

Please do not judge the efficacy of a drug by how many late night commercials there are for class action suits by attorneys. If you go to any of their websites, you will find that they have class action suits for almost everything, including aspirin. They are trying to throw a net over all of the drugs and hope that one lands a big fish.

While I laud your efforts to eat and live healthy, I consider your advice to be contrary to your intended goal. Do you suggest that we should have never eradicated smallpox, or that we should still have children with crippling polio (my brother-in-law had it, and life was not easy)? Living healthy can also mean taking advantage of the medical breakthroughs that inhibit cancers such as the HPV vaccine.

If we all followed your advice and did not avail ourselves of the vaccines that are available, life would be very different and death, infertility (mumps), and crippling diseases would be rampant.

I would rather ensure that my children have a set of good morals, learn to live and eat healthy, and provide them with the vaccinations that are necessary to protect them from the effect of ravaging diseases.

Ted There is no vaccine to prevent heart attacks...just Lipitor, insulin, HCTZ, metoprolol, lisinipril, cardizem, zocor, CABG, pacemaker,

.I could go on but don't want to bore you my medical terms...they are too advance for ignorance..

And relate it to someone besides a late night attorney seeking a quick case....mesothelioma is a direct result of asbestos yet it was not known until many years after it was started being used. All kinds of things re used and hen later have detrimental results...how do you think the medical profession evolved....trial and error. Document results, continue to study the procedure or meds.

Trust me, your children will most likely engage in premarital sex....most people test drive the car before purchase...so believe all you want, but protect your children for Gods sake..if they do make a "mistake of morality" at least the protection will be there.

It would be sad to see your child die of a disease that you, as a loving parent, could have prevented.

And which morals did you raise them with, Ted? The morals of The Bible? The same book that gives explicit instructions for acquiring and maintaining slaves? The same book that says it's o.k. to send your virgin daughters out to be raped by a mob? The same book that says you should go to hell for picking up a stick on a Saturday?

Why don't you try being human instead?

Creep.

Ted, you are not a moral person and you are not a good judge of morality. We should teach our children the best way we know how AND make sure they are protected. Your poor reasoning ability and general pettiness as a human being do not justify keeping children ignorant and unprotected.

If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. We have become a nation of puritannical believers in junk science ... if you believe that a vaccine, or birth control or INFORMATION will lead teenagers to have sex, if you believe the earth was created 6,000 years ago, or that man and dinosaurs lived simultaneously ... you are probably an uniformed, religious idiot who places more value in bible 'stories' and the garbage spewed on FOX noise than mountains of research and scientific evidence.

This is why we need the FDA more than ever. To prevent harmful medications that have not been tested enough.

BTW has anyone stopped to consider that you could contract this disease through rape. Why risk getting cancer. you may raise a daughter to be chaste and save herself for marriage. but what if she is raped and contracts this disease. is it really worth the risk? or what if her loving husband decides to cheat on her. I had a friend that got herpes this way so it does happen. better safe than sorry

Got love these people tell you vaccines never harm anyone. Then you listen to them follow the rules get vaccinated and your loved one dies. They no where to be found you find yourself in a "special" vaccine court. The court will find your loved one had prexisiting condition they were not tested for. Your case will be dimissed. Don't belive me check out the decisions for yourself.

Those quacks telling you get vaccinated are ingoring that some people are gentically vunlerable to vaccines. NO theres not alot them but if does happen the system is set to ruin you for life. You get no jury trial now days for that when it happens.

Wes, that's your failure to test. Responsibility runs both ways. God you sound like the moneygrubbers down at unemployment who want a career instead of a job so they can at least get moving again! Oh wait, that means either you're a liberal, which you're not obviously, or those grubbers are...dear god...conservatives who got arrogant and lost?

Look it up on Wikipedia. Serious side effects are extremely rare (only a handful of cases out of the millions of injections so far), and the vaccine has never been a confirmed cause of death. Talk to your doctor if you have any concerns.

Read this: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/24/hpv-vaccine-victim-sues-merck.aspx

Please....Please do not spread this pseudoscience in here. mercola is a dangerous quack. Citizin. I'm begging you not to spread that stuff. You are indirectly responsible for people dieing of cancer because you can't figure out what good and bad science is.

please don't do this.

unsub: Mercola is not the only site with tragic details regarding the risks of this vaccine. Here is the abc News link with CDC Report regarding the Gardisil vaccine: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/CancerPreventionAndTreatment/gardasil-hpv-vaccine-faces-safety-questions/story?id=8356717 HPV by itself does not cause cervical cancer. Evidence shows it takes a combination, or co-infections – multiple viruses or virus/bacteria combinations to cause cervical cancer. Examples include Epstein Bar virus, HIV, and Chlamydia, along with HPV. You should be begging parents to research, unsub. It has never been proven that the HPV vaccine prevents cervical cancer. There is no scientific evidence of any kind. All the marketing assertions are false. It is one of the largest, most harmful medical hoaxes of our time.

You speak of no successes of which there are millions...sorry for those that lost a loved one to a vaccine, but my mother died after a kidney transplant in 1971.... Does this mean no other person should have one? NO. Because there have been millions saved by transplants..

That is medicine and it's continuing improvement....millions save vs a few lost.....sorry I go for the side of millions.

And I was on the side of one lost...my mother. So yes I know what that feels like and it took some time for me to see the value in medicine. And as you can see by my title, I appreciate all it has done for me and my family/ friends. And I would like to think that what was learned from my mothers illness helped form the medicine of today.

And I strongly believe in medical technology...it saves lives.

Moderator,

Please shut down this quack, citizin's, posting privileges.

Mom RN: Gardasil is possibly the most dangerous vaccine on the market with the potential to injure, maim, or even kill the children who receive it. While Merck, the FDA, the CDC and the medical establishment all deny that there have been serious, life-altering adverse events associated with Gardasil, the fact is that compared with the mandated vaccines which are given with greater frequency, Gardasil still has the most adverse events reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) of any vaccine. And since reporting of adverse events is not mandatory in the US (although outbreaks of so-called vaccine-preventable illness are), it is likely that only 10% even get reported.

The real issue is: what is the benefit of this vaccine? Do the benefits outweigh the risks? There is a risk of a seizure disorder or an autoimmune disorder versus the benefit that it might reduce cervical cancer. But Gardasil doesn’t eliminate the need for regular Pap testing, which is already safe, and there isn’t good evidence that it prevents cervical cancer. In evaluating risk and benefit, when all the facts are known it becomes a pretty easy decision – the vaccine is more dangerous than any benefit. Unfortunately, medical professionals tend to read and listen to information provided by the manufacturers, which doesn’t adequately present the risks involved, so they actually aren’t sufficiently informed to advise their patients.

I appreciate the value of medicine - however, I also see the dangers. The pharmaceutical industry has made a habit of putting profits above all else. Despite a track record of bringing us drugs that kill and maim, such as Vioxx, AZT, Fen Phen, and Thalidomide, there is never an apology, never a commitment to improve, never even an acknowledgement that they have done anything wrong. Now, as if we have learned nothing from history, the drama is unfolding yet again, this time with Gardasil.

While I respect your opinion as an RN, I trust the opinion of leading Neurologists, such as Dr. Dwight Lindholm. More on him here: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4781857n

You can pick between your few opinions that you have cited, there are far more that support the side of the vaccine...

And given that I will advise on the side of safety...yes even in the 1980's when I was infected they talked of cervical cancer. It is a FACT that is causes dysplasia of the cervical cells and thus leads to much higher risk of cervical cancer....no everyone that gets the virus does not get cancer buts the incidences of cervical cancer of women that have had the virus is much higher than those who have not.

You can play with the lives of your daughters, wife, sister. But I do go with technology proven. Yes, it is a risk of side effects but the benefits far outweigh risk.

Watching a woman die of cervical cancer is horrendous...just FYI. Let your daughters make their own informed decision. Because ultimately, it is their decision.

Oh and HPV of the throat is awesome too. Neck dissection....sound fun to you? See it done, thanks I will pass.

This may shock you, but many things you read on the Internet are poorly reasoned nonsense from questionable or outright false "facts." The CDC keeps track of the actual data through their VAERS system.

VAERS is joke. Military has had cases of anthrax vaccine reactions removed from it repeatedly. I am desert storm veteran sick from service. Do not tell me the government tells the truth. Examples exist they have hard time with look up Sgt Lavester Brown. Ruined for life by anthrax vaccine. Government says it didnt happen that way but it did.

Fact is reactions to vaccines are rare but if happens VAERS system will be modified and tampered with numerous examples exist of this happening in the military. Someone gets sick after anthrax vaccine they die. VAERS entry done suddenly its removed the reference cited pneumonia killed the veteran not the vaccine itself. Doesnt matter that the veteran was healthy before the vaccine was adminstered and got sick immediately after the vaccine. Keep beliving the propganda put out like good little sheep.

If you want a real horror story look at the cases in the vaccine injury court and the decisions there. Every once and awhile they let a few cases win but serious deadly cases are often already decided. Pre existing condition caused the injury or death. That is the fault of the family and not the vaccine maker. Therefore your case is dismissed. BTW Good luck finding doctors that will go against the vaccine industry or government.

You vaccinate odds are you be ok, but it's like winning the lottery in reverse. If you have bad reaction it, destroys your family, you will not be compensated for it. No compensation, no justice. FYI its not even news worthy now days just another poor case of 1 in 250,000 destroyed by the propganda machine to vacccinate no matter what.

This vaccine DOES cause death and many, many injuries! 12 deaths that have been reported, but somehow they are not sure they can actually link them to the vaccine, yeah right!! Go on cattle, believe everything your government tells you, espescially since your politicians (AKA: your government) rakes in millions of dollars towards their campaigns from large drug companies like Merk. Do some REAL research, no, not just on the internet, there are many doctors and neurologists who are finally speaking up about certian vaccinces and their side effects. HEALTH DOES NOT COME FROM A SHOT OR A PILL! Does our society seem to be getting more or less healthy?

Wes and Jes,

Do you have any idea how hard it is to do a total pathological workup to determine the causal links of death? And actually, most cases of anthrax vaccine adversities have been removed because the plaintiffs came forward and admitted they lied. The Sergeant may be a true case, but let's actually wait for the science to say so. And jessica, our lifespans are currently the longest ever recorded. Would you like to go back to the era of mid 40s as the average? Get over the fact that science must continually improve. There will be casualties, but they are being minimized. Meanwhile, if you don't have the correct gene set to survive, then you shouldn't survive according to the law of natural selection most conservatives swear by. Darwin says you should die, and I agree with him!

Yes there will be casualties, just as people who GET the vaccine will also get cerivcal cancer. There are no guarantees either way, but I will take my chance with natural selection. I would rather leave it to that then subject myself or my child to a vaccine injury or death trying to prevent something that may never even happen to either of us. The CDC website itself says 90% of HPV cases are cleared by our own immune systems within 2 years. It's a game of risks wither way. I never said we are not living longer, I spoke of HEALTH while we are living. They are two different things. People fight one cancer just to get a totally unrelated form of cancer 10 years later etc.... We need to look other places besides a needle for better health.

research the stats on how many have died from cervical cancer

Lynn: again, listen to my points here: this vaccine does not ensure you will not get cervical cancer. I am not saying it's good for people to die from anything, but it's also not good to risk death or a severe reaction just to get this vaccine. Again, it's an odds game either way, as is life! But I would rather not take the chance of deliberately putting something into my daughters body that has been shows can cause harm. That's a risk as well. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

You're familiar with the phrase correlation is not causation? Just because one thing happens after another doesn't mean the second thing was caused by the first. People die every day for reasons unrelated to vaccine. I know it's hard to stop and thing when your emotions are so high, but that's why we have groups like the CDC keeping track of the actual data.

Guys can take it too, but it's not quite as useful. I haven't gotten it yet, but I probably will be vaccinated someday.

This just proves that Democrats can be dumbasses too. Republicans are slightly worse due to their general anti-science stance, but going against the other party trumps everything else no matter who's side you're on. And taking away personal liberty is something that both parties agree on.

Bump
The main reason Perry tried to mandate it was because one of his cronies is connected to the manufacturer. And it wasn't just the Repubs but Dems also who ran the hue and cry. Public opinion ran against a mandate issued by the governor without any hearings or public input. In this case I have to agree. All young girls should have the vaccine but it should not be an executive mandate.

In a way it was more Perry's assumption of power than anything. Just one more step he took in a really long line of cronyism that even the Repubs are getting tired of. They pulled his chain quite tight after this but it was just the final straw.

Excellent analogy.