Dear Colleague:
Why the heavy hand in promoting the HPV vaccine?
Steven W. Mosher
President
PRI Weekly Briefing
9 March 2007
Vol. 9, No. 10
Notes on the HPV Vaccine
By Joseph A. D'Agostino
The efforts to force all American girls to receive a new, unnecessary
vaccine with unknown long-term side effects seem to have lost much of
their momentum for now. Merck has dropped its campaign to convince states
to mandate the vaccine for sixth-grade girls before they can enter school,
and strong public resistance has appeared in many states. This curious
episode in the history of American public health is likely to be repeated
many times over the next decade or two as the health profession grapples
with the ever-rising rates of sexually transmitted disease in this
country.
Some states are still moving forward with mandatory plans, but generally
with allowing parents to opt out of the vaccination program. Even
Canada's provinces have so far decided not to distribute the vaccine at
government expense.
Forty-five years ago, only two sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) were
known to have firm footholds in the American population, and they were
largely confined to high-risk populations such as prostitutes and sailors.
Today, there are at least 26.
Human papillomavirus (HPV) is one of those and is very widespread among
sexually active girls and women. Scientists think that the four strains
(there are others) of HPV included in Merck's vaccine cause 70% of
cervical cancer cases and 90% of the genital warts in the United States.
So what's the problem with giving this vaccine to girls?
First, it implicitly normalizes the abnormal state of modern girls'
self-destructive sexual practices. It says that girls as young as 11
could be sleeping around and must receive this vaccine, called Gardasil,
for protection. Rather than spend hundreds of millions on injecting
everyone with this HPV vaccine, a better strategy would be to tackle the
culture of promiscuity instead, especially since Gardasil will do nothing
to combat all the other dangerous STDs girls and women can catch.
Second, like most medical treatments, Gardasil has side effects. National
Vaccine Information Center analyst Vicky Debold, RN, Ph.D., says, "The
most frequent serious health events after Gardasil shots are neurological
symptoms. These young girls are experiencing severe headaches, dizziness,
temporary loss of vision, slurred speech, fainting, involuntary
contraction of limbs, muscle weakness, tingling and numbness in the hands
and feet and joint pain. Some of the girls have lost consciousness during
what appear to be seizures." NVIC says that 82 adverse event reports have
been filed between July 2006 and January 2007 for Gardasil, suggesting
that serious side effects are rare but hardly unheard of.
Third, no one knows what long-term ill effects Gardasil could cause. It
is simply too new, and untried in a large population.
The most curious thing about Gardasil was the attempt to force it on 11-
and 12-year-old girls across the country. Why was something so new, so
relatively untested, with unknown long-term effects so quickly adopted as
mandatory by some such as Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R.)? Virginia's Gov. Tim
Kaine (D.) is also considering mandating it. Both states will allow for
parents to opt their children out.
Obviously, there are the lobbyist connections and campaign cash drug
companies have. But there is a more fundamental problem: The assumption
that youth sexual promiscuity is here to stay and fierce measures must be
taken to combat the resulting diseases, and caution cannot be afforded
when a promising new treatment comes along. Would that such energy be
directed at keeping pornography away from minors or high school students
of opposite sexes away from each other when not chaperoned. These
measures would combat all STDs at once and reduce teen pregnancy as well.
It might make sense for parents who believe their girls are at high risk
of sexual activity to give their daughters the vaccine, and for girls and
young women who intend to sleep around to take it (hopefully, at later
ages than 12). Then ten or so years down the road, after the vaccine's
effects are better known, perhaps the health profession might
encourage--not mandate--more widespread use of the vaccine.
But this cautious, common-sense course was not pursued. Instead, the
top-down heavy hand came into play immediately. This attitude of our
political class and medical establishment does not bode well for future
efforts to combat the rising tide of sexual infections among American
youth.
Joseph A. D'Agostino is Vice President for Communications at the
Population Research Institute.
________
PRI
P.O. Box 1559
Front Royal, Va. 22630
USA
Phone: (540) 622-5240 Fax: (540) 622-2728
Email: jad@pop.org
Media Contact: Joseph A. D'Agostino
(540) 622-5240, ext. 204
Website: www.pop.org
_________
(c) 2007 Population Research Institute. Permission to reprint granted.
Redistribute widely. Credit required.
_________
If you would like to make a tax-deductible donation to PRI, please go to
http://pop.org/donate.cfm. All donations
(of any size) are welcomed and
appreciated. _________
To subscribe to the Weekly Briefing, go to:
http://pop.org/subscribe-weekly.cfm or email us at
pri@pop.org and say
"Add me to your Weekly Briefing."
The pro-life Population Research Institute is dedicated to ending human
rights abuses committed in the name of "family planning," and to ending
counter-productive social and economic paradigms premised on the myth of
"overpopulation."