Many know the jingle "I want to be one less--one less." It is the popular advertisement for the Human Papillomavirus (or HPV) vaccine Gardasil encouraging teenage girls to become one less of the many that have cervical cancer. What many don't know, however, is that "one less" can now be "two less." In 2006, Gardasil became available for girls ages six to 24. In 2009, the vaccine became available for males. The majority of people are unaware that the vaccine is effective in males as well as females.
When my doctor told me that I should get the Gardasil vaccine, I was hesitant, to say the least. Many suspect that doctors prescribe new vaccines because the pharmaceutical companies push incentives. This may be true in some cases. However, I've had the same doctor for my entire life and he is rated one of America's top doctors, so I knew he had my best interest at heart.
Gardasil, manufactured by Merck & Co., as well as the lesser-known Cervarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKlein, are the only two HPV vaccines on the market. Gardasil is currently approved in 109 countries. The vaccine protects men and women against not only HPV but also against further development of the virus into cancers of the cervix, vagina, anus and penis. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection -- half of all sexually active adults contract HPV in their lifetime.
The Centers for Disease Control estimates that 20 million Americans are currently infected with a strain of HPV.
A study in the New England Journal of Medicine was performed to evaluate the efficacy of Gardasil in men. Among study participants who completed all three doses of the vaccine, it was 85.6 percent effective at preventing persistent HPV infection and was almost 100 percent effective at preventing genital warts (both were compared with a placebo group). These percentages were very similar to its effectiveness in the female population.
The vaccine was thrust into the political spotlight late last year when Texas governor Rick Perry issued an executive order adding the vaccine to the states required vaccine list. This order was later struck down by the Texas legislature but sparked heavy debate on whether this vaccine one day should be required. Opponents of the vaccine say that not enough testing has been done and not enough time has elapsed to see if there are any possible long-term effects.
The problems that arise with the vaccine are lack of publicity and cost. A study done by the University of Maryland in 2010 found that only one third of girls who start the three dose vaccine finish all three doses, thus lowering the rate of effective prevention by two thirds. I conducted my own informal survey and spoke with both males and females about the vaccine. The girls I have spoken with have either received or plan on receiving the vaccine. On the other hand, not one male has received it or even knew that it was available for them. Apparently, word is not getting out there to the young the male population.
Since three doses of Gardasil -- the required amount for effective protection -- cost approximately $400, the cost alone is a hardship for many. A further problem is that some insurance companies do not cover the Gardasil vaccination for boys. This creates another roadblock for the spread of vaccination to males.
Just weeks ago the Australian government started a new $21 million program to vaccinate schoolboys. It is imperative that our government, insurance companies and health care providers do all in their power to publicize the vaccine and make it as cheap as possible.
I was administered the vaccine a year ago and have not experienced any side effects. I would encourage all of my adolescent peers to become vaccinated and spread the word about male and female vaccination. The vaccination of boys is crucial to bolster the effect of the female vaccination.
Mehmet Oz, M.D.: The HPV and Cancer Stats You Can't Afford to Ignore
http://newworldliberty.com/newsarticle/30-stunning-facts-they-don%E2%80%99t-want-you-know-about-gardasil-and-hpv-vaccines
http://gaia-health.com/gaia-blog/2012-03-04/fda-approved-gardasil-without-safety-testing-proof-in-fda-document/
These vaccines have now been administered for more than 10 years with no serious adverse safety issues.
They are safe and effective for preventing a variety of diseases, some of which are life-threatening, i.e., cancer.
Why not prevent cancer with a simple series of injections?
A better question: what is motivating people like rikadarling to keep people from having these life-saving vaccines?
What you wrote is absolutely false, as you'd know if you had bothered to search for any of the seven clinical trials that were performed before FDA approval--or even if you'd read the package insert.
http://sanevax.org/sarah-from-the-uk/
That's not just a few cases of cervical cancer.
You state secondly that it is "ridiculously expensive", but how expensive is cancer?
Thirdly, you say that it is dangerous. This is incorrect. The vaccine has been safely administered now in tens of millions of individuals with no serious adverse effects. The incidents you speak of are those that have been reported to the VAERS database but not verified by anyone. I could go on there tomorrow and say that the tomato juice I had for breakfast this morning caused me to have leprosy. Is that true? Who's to say?
Lastly, to say that "we as a population are over vaccinated" is just downright foolish. Why do you think measles and whooping cough are making a comeback? Because people like you are talking other people out of getting their kids vaccinated.
It's crimiinal what you do.
It is sometimes incorrectly termed a cancer vaccine, yet it may in fact actually cause cancer in several ways:
- Carcinogenic effect of the individual ingredients (the vaccine has not been tested for carcinogenicity)
- Replacement (where the virus strains which are replaced are always replaced by new ones which may be more carcinogenic than the original ones)
- Presence of recombinant (gene manipulated) DNA which has recently been discovered in the vaccine.
Do you think it's possible to get cervical cancer if you do not get the precursor lesions of cervical cancer? Do you even know anything about cancer in general, or cervical cancer in particular?
Replacement is not an issue with HPV or other double-stranded DNA viruses, which evolve only slowly and thus, unlike bacteria, which evolve more rapidly, are unable to mutate in a way that would allow them to "replace" other viral strains that have been reduced via vaccination.
Do you know anything about viruses, or are you just pretending to know about viruses.
The vaccines have been rigorously tested and found to be devoid of genetic material, recombinant or otherwise. Do you know anything about DNA?
I didn't think so.
What there is no proof of is any background on rikadarling's part that qualifies him or her to make such outrageous statements. Is he/she a physician or scientist? Undoubtedly no, or he/she would not be on here spouting such utter nonsense.
The epidemiological data indicating this increase are solid and irrefutable, except by the unknowing, who post their drivel here. I'm talking to you, Tracy Dale Andrews. What are your qualifications and background that qualify you to speak to such matters?
http://sanevax.org/gone-after-gardasil-jessica-new-york/
Honestly, those "100 LIKE JESSICA" include:
--at least six suicides
--death due to leukemia days after vaccination
--death due to falling down a well
--death due to an ovarian cyst
--death due to relapse of years-old idiopathic thrombocytic purpura and intracranial hemorrhage 84 days after vaccination
--deaths of patients with previous history of cardiac problems, such as one case of a male with asthma and "cardiac history" who died of cardiac failure while playing hockey 28 days after vaccination; the death from cardiac failure of a girl with a five-year history of prolonged QT syndrome, and proguda syndrome with seizures; etc.
--death of HIV-positive, drug-abusing female with Bell's Palsy, and migraine due to cerebral edema 45 days after vaccination
--death 499 days after vaccination
--death from meningitis 115 days after vaccination
--death of a patient from rapidly progressive ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) who was carried a mutation associated with early-onset, rapidly progressive ALS, about one and half years after vaccination
--death from a ruptured cerebral aneurysm 86 days after vaccination
--numerous cases of hearsay reports based on reading something on the intenet
Perhaps, as you suggest, these patients are "like Jessica," which does little to support the claims about Jessica. Perhaps you are simply exceptionally credulous.
Did you not understand that reports of those who allegedly "died from this vaccine" include wacky stuff like this?
"Information has been received from an office manager and a consumer who reported that she had seen reports of deaths following GARDASIL on television. This is one of two cases from the same source."
"Information has been received from a consumer who saw a report on the internet about a 23 year old patient who was vaccinated with 3 doses of GARDASIL. Subsequently the patient died, the cause of the death was unknown. This is one of several reports received from the same source."
"Information has been received from a consumer via an internet newspaper concerning a patient who on an unspecified date was vaccinated with a dose of GARDASIL. . . . This is one of several reports from the same source. "
"Information has been received from a Nurse at the physician''s office who heard from another Nurse that a patient came in to the office to receive the third dose of GARDASIL and the friend of the patient told her not to get the third dose because she knew of another girl that received the third dose of GARDASIL and died "within the last month" (cause of death not reported).