The vaccine is considered most effective when given to
girls before they become sexually active. Some health officials had girded
themselves for arguments from religious conservatives and others that
vaccinating youngsters against the sexually transmitted virus might make them
more likely to have sex.
My thoughts: Yes, it will make sex look more acceptable outside of marriage. Or in general. It's saying that we don't need to worry about being responsible anymore, because with a good old vaccine, we will "eliminate" the risk of STDs. To think that wouldn't show intercourse as a lighter issue in an adolescent's mind is naive and absurd. It's not as if 9 year olds don't wonder why they have to have the shot. What is the explanation? "well, honey, in a few years you might have sex with a guy and we don't want you to get his disease...or pass it on to the next guy you sleep with at 15!" Even if you tell them they are not supposed to, having them recevie the shot is a silent form of permission. It's telling them we doubt they'll listen and NOT have sex, so here is our precautionary measure. Can you imagine?
And what about the ingredients? Planned Parenthood is already advocating adding this to the "mandatory" list of required vaccines. PLANNED PARENTHOOD. Sure, they're known for doing a lot of good.
6 comments:
I rather give it younger, befoe my daughter knows what the shot is for. I don't like it, but I find it to be a way to open the discussion for other STDs. "Sex with multiple partners passes diseases." The vaccine is evidence of that.
I was no virgin when I met my husband. So as someone who was mislead to believe she was immune to the reality of natural consequences and found her way it is sad, but dying of cerivcal cancer is a hefty price to pay if my daughter's future husband has slept with others previously to her.
I don't find it necessary to explain every single vaccination given to a child. Well, other than the blanket statement of "it's so you won't get sick later." This vaccination makes perfect sense to me.
There is nothing wrong with wanting to protect yourself or your family from something as bad as cancer. But it is a completely different thing to be protecting them against something their lifestyle alone would cause them to get. Most virus are spread by air, meaning you didn’t do anything to catch it except be in the wrong place breathing the wrong air. (which I know can be rationed down to naturally preventable also)
But for something that can be prevented by simply saying don’t have sex and you won’t get HPV, is undoubtedly unnecessary!
This is a false safety net that allows people to take an emotional attachment like physical intercourse and turn it into something that is casual, nonchalant and not serious. When in fact it is very serious indeed because there exists such STD’s and cancer causers abound. So sex should not be something casual, it should not be something nonchalant, it should be something that is taken very seriously because there is so much riding on it. You should start with knowing your partner on a serious committed level, which to most, including myself is a level only achieved by marriage. With so much riding on it, it just isn’t worth the risk should you get a disease, or HPV.
Contraception and this vaccine aren’t a safety net, they aren’t intended to be either. None are 100% effective and I for one, as a parent, can’t see the sense in injecting anything into my child and feeling *safe* about her going out and having sex with no consequences. It is one thing to think *realistically* about what your child will do in their teenage years regarding sex, but it is another to instill amongst your child that he/she is capable of doing better things, of being a better person. If you don’t instill self respect, esteem and confidence in them who will? Believe in them and you will find that they are capable of more you can imagine.
pb- you said well what I was thinking about a moral issue.
I think what makes a good parent is doing what you feel is in the best interest of your child. Protecting them, praying for them, being there for them…and you all show how great of parents you are in your posts. You are doing what you feel is right and best for your child.
I am also doing what I feel is best for my child. I think it's important for ALL parents to find out what they can about something before letting it (something so serious) enter their child's body. As parents, WE are responsible for what happens to them- good and bad.
If we look into the school they go to, the food they eat, the parks they go to-why would we not look into vaccines? Because a doctor and big money-making company tell us it’s safe? Well, doctors also tell us the pill does not cause a spontaneous abortion. Doctors also tell us tricking our bodies into having only 4 periods a years is safe and fine, and that it doesn’t alter our ability to have children “when we’re ready”. They tell us many things, and they are not all true.
In fact, much of what doctors tell us are “safe” are actually contributing to the problem they are now trying to “fix”. The birth control pill/patch screws up a body and creates conditions proper for cervical cancer. Altering your natural cycle so you don’t have to deal with a period creates improper hormonal balance, which in turn sort of shocks our bodies and causes the rest of it to not be able to handle more common conditions. (And therefore we can’t fight those things with the optimum immune system we were created with). Half of what doctors do is helping with the problem of needing a vaccine. They are contributing to HPV. Why would I trust them just because they say its fine? Doctors say a lot. A second opinion (or 3rd, 4th, 5th) can be priceless.
So my main reason lies in the health risks. Being such a new vaccine, there is insufficient results regarding the potential side effects. It's not that I have no faith in modern medicine. Women are advised to have routine Pap smears. THAT is supposed to be a powerful screening process- WITHOUT the chemicals and foreign ingredients...WITHOUT the strand of the virus itself. We don't want our children to catch the virus, but we are ever-so-willing to inject it into them?
Some facts:
An FDA review of the results of studies on the vaccine found two important concerns, according to documents released of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products advisory committee.
* The first is that the vaccine may lead to an increased number of cases of a cancer precursor among patients already infected by any of the four virus types at the time they receive the vaccine, and whose immune systems have not cleared the virus from their bodies.
* The second concern is that any advantage the vaccine provides in protecting against the four virus types could be offset by infection by any of the multiple other types of HPV that the vaccine does not cover, according to the FDA documents.
In clinical studies, a higher number of breast-feeding infants (n = 6) whose mothers received GARDASIL had acute respiratory illnesses within 30 days post-vaccination of the mother as compared to infants (n = 2) whose mothers received placebo. In these studies, the rates of other adverse experiences in the mother and the nursing infant were comparable between vaccination groups.
Gardasil
From the package insert
Virus-like particles of HPV Types 6, 11, 16 and 18.
" The purified VLPs are adsorbed on preformed aluminum-containing adjuvant (amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate). The quadrivalent HPV VLP vaccine is a sterile liquid suspension that is prepared by combining the adsorbed VLPs of each HPV type and additional amounts of the aluminum- containing adjuvant and the final purification buffer."
"Each 0.5-mL dose of the vaccine contains approximately 225 mcg of aluminum (as amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate adjuvant),
9.56 mg of sodium chloride,
0.78 mg of L-histidine,
50 mcg of polysorbate 80,
35 mcg of sodium borate,
and water for injection.
The product does not contain a preservative or antibiotics."
They say the product does not contain a preservative, yet sodium chloride (aka table salt) is often used as a preservative. We consume enough salt on our own without having it directly injected to our bodies. Excess salt contributes to high blood pressure which in turn leads to many other health risks.
Polysorbate 80 was identified as the causative agent for the anaphylactoid reaction of nonimmunologic origin in the patient. Polysorbate specific IgE antibodies were not identified in enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and immunoblot examinations, confirming the nonimmunologic nature of the anaphylactoid reaction.
Conclusions: Polysorbate 80 is a ubiquitously used solubilizing agent that can cause severe nonimmunologic anaphylactoid reactions.
Administration of polysorbate 80 was associated with inflammation and squamous hyperplasia of the forestomach in male and female mice, and with ulcers of the forestomach in female mice.
sodium borate--> Sodium borate is the main ingredient in boric acid. (Powdered boric acid is often used to kill cockroaches.) The main symptoms of boric acid poisoning is blue-green vomiting, diarrhea, and a bright red rash on the skin. Other symptoms may include:
• Fever
• Twitching of facial muscles, arms, hands, legs, and feet
• Convulsions
• Significantly decreased urine output (or none)
• Collapse
• Blisters
• Sloughing of skin
• Low blood pressure
• Drowsiness
• Lack of desire to do anything
• Coma
For infants, the death rate from boric acid poisonings is high.
Christopher- great idea! And so true. I'm sure any doctor would brush it off by trying to say they've already received the vaccine. I'd be more than willing to find out when they're due for their next booster, and have my apt. at the same time to watch them inject themselves.
Maybe I'll try it next time...
Thanks for stopping by.
First, I definatley avoid vaccines so this isn't one I'd likely get myself, or have my daughter get in the future...especially a vaccine with no long-term studies and most likely very little safety studies (not to mention all the dangerous additives that are in the vaccine!!). However, for those who choose to recieve the vaccine I don't believe that it will make girls more prone to having sex or make sex at a young age seem more condoned. My opinion of why adolescents are having sex so early these days has more to do with their trying to meet needs that weren't met in infancy and childhood (for love, comfort, attention, acceptance, whatever) and they're desperately seeking those things as they get older (an unmet need never goes away...and a person will grow to seek ways to meet those unmet needs). I think if you do your job as a parent and make every effort to meet your child's needs (as inconvenient as they may seem for you at the time) and you model the behavior and values you want your children to adopt, and you maintain a close relationship with your child as they grow (so many parents are afraid to be "friends" with their kids out of fear that they'll never respect them as parents...but it is very possible to gain the respect you want as a parent without sacrificing the relationship. And I know I definatley want to be more influentioal than my kids' peers! A great book on this very subject is called "Hold On To Your Kids" by Gordon Nuefeld). Anyways, I'm sorry to ramble on! But the more I read about the impact our parenting has on our children's development, especially from the ages of birth to 3, the more sense it makes that we see such promiscuous behavior (both sexual and drug-related) in our teens today. I think for so long, we've been "reassured" as parents that "it's not our fault" our kids grow up to be so morally irresponsible ...but I definately disagree...we have much greater impact than we know. And our best intentions can often fail us if they're sending the wrong message to our children. A child who is unconditonally loved, valued, and respected in childhood will grow to view themselves as worthy teens and adults who would never dream of disrespecting their bodies by putting themselves in the danger that promiscuous behavior would cause. Just my 2 cents :)
Post a Comment