Stimulating Commentary

I was going to respond to a comment on the previous blog by my friend Maeve. She always shares a good point of view and usually results in me rethinking about my point of view. I've clarified and maybe repeated myself but here are the results.

Maeve wrote:

If I remember correctly, the vaccine is encouraged for young women to protect them against 3 forms of the human papillomavirus virus or HPV that has been linked to cause cervical cancer. Now if this is causing problems then yes it needs to be stopped, but I don't see anywhere in their advertisements where it is "MANDATORY".

There are certain vaccines that need to be given. Chicken pox happens to be one if a person has gone through their life somehow without getting chicken pox. For an adult that disease can be deadly. There are many diseases that are there that if we can prevent a body from getting it then it means the person has a better quality of life.

Majority of vaccines though are not mandatory. Heck I got a Hepatitis B vaccine while a lifeguard to ensure that a preventive measure against any possibility as I was doing my work as a lifeguard to not risk getting it. This though was my choice and due to my job at the time it was felt to be a good precaution. It was not mandatory for my profession but I was told it might be a good idea. This though happens to be basically on the subject of vaccines and immunization a topic that you and I are going to differ on strongly.

My response to this is as follows:

I understand what you are saying. And I'm o.k. that we differ. I'm all about knowledge. This is about informing people of the risk, which I don't think has been done aggressively enough.

You are right about vaccines for highly contagious disease that are easily passed from person to person. We need to have those, and we do. And they ARE mandatory for children to go to school. In many states, you can't enroll a child until they have all their shots. That's mandatory vaccination. Even most day care facilities will no longer allow a child to attend until you provide a shot list. Sarah had to actually get shots before she could go to a day care. So, mandatory vaccines are here. But these are childhood diseases that are highly contagious and can cause serious epidemics.

As a side note, there are some who say there is a connection between child vaccinations and the increase in autism in this country. This disorder begins around 3-4 years of age. The increase in cases has been rapid, and began after the increase in vaccinations began in the late 50's and early 60's. So, the connections appears obvious and you can find articles and people who believe there is a direct correlation. This is unproven but still questionable. The latest reports are that they can't find a reason for the increase in autism. Hmmm.

However, HPV vaccine is for a virus that is spread by unsafe sexual practices. It is a sexually transmitted disease. It can be avoided the same way we avoid typhoid, ecoli, and staph -- cleanliness. If a woman wants to have unprotected sex with 35 people, she can expect to pick up the germs of more than 500 people. That is assuming each of her partners had 10 other partners. That is the number was released when the aids epidemic began and people were told to consider when having sex with someone. I always felt it excessive but they are the experts. So disease is highly probable. BUT -- HPV is a very avoidable disease and is only contagious from a specific source.

The cancer this virus causes is not contagious. Merck touts this cancer as as a result of the HPV that results from unsafe sexual practices. Some women, a vast number, will never, ever get this disease, no matter how many partners they have. In fact, the research I read said the body usually fights off HPV disease.

My research also indicated that the federal government is being pressured by Merck to make this vaccine mandatory. http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/457/31/ We have several vaccines that are already mandatory for children to go to school. They are for diseases that are easily passed from one person to the other.

Catching the virus is a gamble the participants take of their own free will. The cancer is the payoff some will get from the gamble. So, I oppose drug companies forcing citizens who make better choices to take a drug that will result in even worse disease that can't be cured with a vaccine. I oppose the taxpayer having to pay for the results of someone's promiscuity. I oppose drug companies manipulating legislation that takes the right to choose away. How is enforced vaccination different from an enforced ban on abortion? Or China's enforced abortion laws? It isn't.

I oppose abortion and I oppose legislation to force me to take a medicine that I don't want or that may make me sicker. The person who takes the risk had a choice. Why can't I?

If a woman wants the vaccine, go for it. But Merck should publish, loudly, the effects this vaccine can have. Not some fast talk shoved in over smiling faces and stuff I have to read while you are warning me. Publish loudly, that it is a choice. People cry about a woman's right to choose but from where I sit, it only applies to those who want other people to pay for their bad choices. I resent that. Publish, loudly, how this disease is spread and prevented. And don't use taxpayer dollars to pay for the shots for those who say they can't pay.

So, guess who the maker of Vioxx was? Yes, Merck. "FDA analysts estimated that Vioxx caused between 88,000 and 139,000 heart attacks, 30 to 40 percent of which were probably fatal, in the five years the drug was on the market." That little fiasco has cost them billions and they are still setting aside money to pay for the litigation.

"Merck has reserved $970 million to pay for its Vioxx-related legal expenses through 2007, and have set aside $4.85bn for legal claims from US citizens. Patients who claim to have suffered as a result of taking Vioxx in countries outside the US are campaigning for this to be extended." Wikipedia article.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vioxx

Could Gardasil be their saviour? Could the high cost of this medicine be their way to pay for Vioxx? Do they often rush drugs out and tout them as 100% effective without revealing evidence to the contrary? If the Fed makes this vaccine mandatory, will taxpayers have to share the cost of any litigation? Why yes, you will.... Uncle Sam can be sued as a result of any deaths or other serious injury that results from a mandatory vaccine. Find and read what Vioxx has cost Merck and tell me they are purely interested in protecting innocent young girls. I don't buy it.

Sorry. My drug company soap box! You should read Michael Crichton novel "Next". The novel itself is not as good as most of his books but the information he shares in his Bibliography on how much control these companies have over our genetic codes is frightening. Their power with our government is the second most frightening. Third most frightening is how much stuff Critchton knows!

Thanks, Maeve for a stimulating comment! I always like it when someone does that!