Comments on: The irony of opposing HPV vaccination

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:20:33 +0000

Maurader, when there’s an opt out the vaccine isn’t mandatory.

By: Marauder

Marauder — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 12:35:43 +0000

Saying people are mad because he “supported the vaccination of young Texas women” is disingenuous, and I would think a site as fact-oriented as this one probably realizes that. People are mad because he mandated the vaccination of pre-teen girls. I don’t blame them. If kids got HPV vaccines, it should be because their parents made that decision, not because the government said, “Your kid’s getting this vaccine unless you go out of your way to make sure she doesn’t.”

By: Charles

Charles — Sun, 18 Sep 2011 11:36:15 +0000

To really control the HPV virus mass inoculations are in my opinion necessary. Public health officials need to step forward and educate the public about the vaccine. Someone said that Perry had worked out a deal with Merck to give inoculations at a greatly reduced price to the teenager getting the vaccine…..which sounds great to me. Also, it might be noted that people who do get the vaccine will need to get booster shots. And, the amount of time between getting the vaccination and a booster shot has not been determined. Also, there is a test to determine if you already have the HPV virus. So if you have he virus there is no need to get the vaccine.

By: BlackDog

BlackDog — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:13:02 +0000

“But this whole “the facts are up for debate” and “science is just another belief system” nonsense is imperiling all of us.”

I’m getting to the point where I think “Stupid should hurt” is what I feel regarding these matters.

As for people who think that the threat of a dangerous disease will somehow enforce their personal morality code on anybody…and try to act on this. I honestly think that kind of behavior is downright anti-social and dangerous…and ought to be illegal.
First amendment be damned you can’t play with a community’s health like that.

That’s not shouting fire in a crowded theater…it’s placing smoldering embers in people’s backpacks.
Believe what you want…but when your beliefs start endangering the general public…then they become a problem and while you are free to believe that you should not be free to practice it.

To use a hypothetical…would these people be in favor of not providing a vaccine to protect against a Zombie Apocalypse Virus if such a virus broke out, but a preventative vaccine of some kind were available…on the grounds that Zombies are “Of the Devil” and only bad people will get bit by them??

Why some of these things are even issues, I don’t know. The flip side to unlimited freedom of thought in America was that…when they came up with this the framers of the constitution assumed people would keep THINKING and not engage in unthinking stupidity.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 00:48:01 +0000

I would support any insurance company that refused to pay — or capped — claims on any woman eligible for Gardasil who refused to take preventative care, but later developed cancer as a result. Folks who didn’t have access to the vaccine, or folks for whom the vaccine didn’t work would be in a different category. But this whole “the facts are up for debate” and “science is just another belief system” nonsense is imperiling all of us.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:57:59 +0000

I am not in favor of governmental forced anything, pretty much.

However, small government libertarians – with whom I share significant ideology – must remember that government does have a role. And while that role might not be “choose your child’s health options”, it does include protecting citizens from threats. HPV is more than a health choice, it’s a societal threat.

Few libertarians would argue that polio vaccines were undue imposition of the government on the people. Few would argue that the World Health Organization should immediately stop tracking influenza or making the flu shot vaccine available. (And that’s not even Federal, it’s multi-national).

Pandemics are issues that individuals simply don’t have the capacity to address. And in today’s global economy with rapid emigration, local decision making on such an issue may be a bit pointless. States are about as small an entity as can have any relevant approach to HPV.

By: Timothy (TRiG)

Timothy (TRiG) — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:21:19 +0000

Désirée,

Vaccinations only really work when they create “herd immunity”. Opting out of vaccinations is antisocial behaviour.

TRiG.

By: Diego

Diego — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 17:00:10 +0000

It’s not being stressed enough that boys should be vaccinated too. They might not get cervical cancer, but they are the primary carriers of the virus. On top of that, as gay men we should realize HPV can still cause throat and anal cancer. We shouldn’t leave out a generation of young gays to be exposed to potential cancer.

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 15:42:05 +0000

A number of people here have decried mandatory vaccinations. The vaccinations weren’t mandatory, there was an opt out – no one was forced to do anything.

Ben said “It’s not that they’re afraid of losing their moral authority, it’s that they are afraid of losing their belief in their sense of their otherwise wholly imaginary spiritual superiority…”.

Oh, I think its both, Ben.

Laura said ““Painful vaccinations”? I’ve never had cervical cancer but I’m willing to bet that the shots are much less painful than that.”.

Good point, I never thought of that.

By: Laura

Laura — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:27:44 +0000

“Painful vaccinations”? I’ve never had cervical cancer but I’m willing to bet that the shots are much less painful than that. Sadly we can’t ask the 450,000 women that die of cervical cancer every year which was worse.