Skip to main content

A recent study on the efficacy of the vaccinating young girls against Human Papllimoma Virus. HPV, which can cause genital warts and is linked to a half dozen types of cancer including cervical and oral, is obviously horrible. Luckily, there is a vaccine that helps prevent these cancers in both men and women. Let's pick up the story from CBS News:
Rates of HPV strains related to genital warts and some cancers have decreased 56 percent among American teen girls since a vaccine was introduced in 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Wednesday.

Emphasis all mine. That's right. Science does work. If you get further into the numbers, it's even more impressive. So we've managed to reduce the rates of both genital warts and some cancers by more than half since the vaccine was released. But what's even more impressive is the fact that most of the girls in the study didn't even receive the full course of the vaccine, which combines three shots over a six-month period.

While the HPV decrease was significant, the CDC is urging more people to make sure that their family members get the full dose of the vaccine. The U.S. has a goal of an 80 percent vaccination rate, but only 35 percent of girls in 2011 received the full dose, CDC researcher and study lead author Dr. Lauri Markowitz said on the press call.
So the good news is we're making a serious dent in HPV infections. The bad news is the scientists in the article keep having to assure the public that the vaccine is safe over and over again. One can only assume its because vaguely famous actresses like Jenny McCarthy make statements about vaccines causing autism. But what's even worse is when our elected representatives like Michelle Bachmann repeatedly get in front of microphones talking about how the vaccine causes mental retardation. These are all of course laughably untrue statements backed up by the scientific equivalent of non sequitur "reporting" in dark corners of the internet. But people still seem to take that crackpot seriously.

The less-discussed opposition point here, though, is the more sinister undercurrent in the right-wing anti-health tide -- the idea that getting your child (sons or daughters -- although it's always daughters that get discussed) vaccinated will somehow turn your abstinent little angel into alustful cockmonster. Apologies to Chris Kluwe.  It's an opinion that has rightfully died down a little in the years since Gardasil was released and the number of teen pregnancies / STIs didn't totally shoot through the roof -- even the Family Research Council has an updated statement on HPV that allows that Gardasil is probably sort of basically safe for your daughters, although ABSTINENCE IS STILL THE BESTEST, but in terms of health policies, the conservative default is to oppose making these vaccinations mandatory or even instating an opt-out policy. Even though this issue is a crystal-clear public health concern with increasingly compelling results that would push for doing just that as a society, the refrain of "protecting parental rights" still stands. Those rights, of course, come at the expense of everybody in society, including their own children, and in effect is still their way of saying that if you'd rather just repeat Abstinence Until Marriage 50 times in front of a darkened mirror as soon as your child hits puberty, that's just as good.

But it is not, and statistics are not fucking around when they say that 1) HPV is still a big thing in the US; 2) so is cervical cancer; and 3) we very clearly have the means to fix that problem, if only the will can follow.  And that will be the key. If we expect to get our vaccination rates past Rwanda (yes African nations are doing better than us here), we really need to get on the ball. We have a preventive measure that will reduce cancer rates, folks. Let's try a little more science.

Originally posted to The Non Blogosphere on Fri Jun 28, 2013 at 10:21 PM PDT.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The Lady I Share A Yard With (13+ / 0-)

    who lives behind me is a raging liberal. I might have mentioned to her she has "lady parts" (she has a 14 and 17 year old daughter) and that going to the doctor was a good idea. She is happy about Obama Care. Happy about a lot of stuff.

  •  Vaccinating boys helps reduce the spread (17+ / 0-)

    of the virus, too (duh!). Ain't science (and Nature) grand?

    I'm part of the "bedwetting bunch of website Democrat base people (DKos)." - Rush Limbaugh, 10/16/2012 Torture is Wrong! We live near W so you don't have to. Send love.

    by tom 47 on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 03:25:53 AM PDT

    •  I figured it would be a good idea for boys to get (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The grouch

      the shots even before the study came out, and pushed to get my sons vaccinated as soon as possible.  One of the reasons we switched pediatricians was his refusal to vaccinate them.

      "Harass us, because we really do pay attention. Look at who's on the ballot, and vote for the candidate you agree with the most. The next time, you get better choices." - Barney Frank

      by anonevent on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 09:22:07 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  CDC says other cancers caused by HPV too (17+ / 0-)
    Human papillomavirus (HPV) has been found to be associated with several types of cancer: cervical, vulvar, vaginal, penile, anal, and oropharyngeal (back of the throat, including the base of the tongue and tonsils). Each year, more than 21,000 HPV-associated cancers occur in women; cervical cancer is the most common. More than 12,000 HPV-associated cancers occur each year in men; oropharyngeal cancers are the most common.

    I'd tip you but they cut off my tip box. The TSA would put Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad on the no-fly list.

    by OHdog on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 05:09:15 AM PDT

  •  An argument for the right (6+ / 0-)

    Sometimes we have to be a little creative in how we frame issues for the ultracons - so maybe "the vaccine protects your daughters if they were to be raped".

    I think the reason the vaccine has not been given to guys is that its effectiveness has not yet been confirmed yet on men .. but using basic stats if it were then vaccinating men as well could counteract some of the non vaccination of women. Depending upon transmission rates there is a tipping point (for vaccinations) above which infections rates will drop substantially.

    There's room at the top they're telling you still But first you must learn how to smile as you kill If you want to be like the folks on the hill

    by taonow on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 06:20:32 AM PDT

    •  You meant... (8+ / 0-)

      "The vaccine protects your daughters if they were to be legitimately raped."

      We are taking about ultracons here.

    •  Warts only spread if it's 'accurate' sex, I'm told (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      happymisanthropy

      Snark.

      I ain't often right, but I've never been wrong. Seldom turns out the way it does in this song.

      by mungley on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 09:36:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yes, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      splashy, libnewsie, Debby

      an article I read last week in the BBC flatly stated that the "herd immunity" was already kicking in, because the reduction in incidence of HPV infection (they had tested infection rather than cancer rates) had dropped far more than the actual rate of vaccination.  With STDs (well, actually with all epidemics) you tend to have a few individuals who transmit the majority of new infections, while the majority of infections are "dead ends"; i.e., the infection doesn't continue from that point.  With sex, obviously, the number of Casanovas is very small in comparison with the number of people who really don't have sex all that much.

      •  Casanovas? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        libnewsie

        There are women who do the same thing. Not just men. The women hide it more because other people are so judgmental when women like variety.

        That being said, you are right on the rest. :-)

        Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

        by splashy on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 01:27:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually it's a term (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kyril, Denver11

          that anthropologists and sociobiologists and even epidemiologists use.  The spread of everything from fashions to STDs is very uneven, and tends to concentrate around a few key individuals.  For instance, in the recent outbreak of coronavirus in the Middle East, most infections dead-ended -- the person got it and didn't pass it on.  But there are one or two individuals who passed it on to entire constellations of recipients numbering up to two dozen.  In a generic sense the name "Casanova" is extended to wolves, lions, and females, and to both sexual and simply social behavior that leads to much higher than normal rates of contact and transmission.

          •  Well, you learned me something (0+ / 0-)

            Love to use that wording for fun!

            Women create the entire labor force. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

            by splashy on Mon Jul 01, 2013 at 11:32:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Part of Ultracon policy is to punish rape victims (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not sure if they have goal of punishing the victims, or if that is just a side effect, but the result is the same.

      There is no point in telling them the effect something can have on a rape victim, because their minds just shut down after they hear the word "victim" or any related concept.

  •  A colleague of mine just published some work (16+ / 0-)

    indicating that HPV might be responsible for a condition called Focal cortical dysplasia Type II, which is a cause of epilepsy. if this turns out to be true, this would be the first type of epilepsy that could be prevented, via the vaccine of the mother.

    Ann Neurol. 2012 Dec;72(6):881-92. doi: 10.1002/ana.23795.
    Detection of human papillomavirus in human focal cortical dysplasia type IIB.
    Chen J, Tsai V, Parker WE, Aronica E, Baybis M, Crino PB.
    Source
    PENN Epilepsy Center and Department of Neurology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19140, USA.
    Abstract
    OBJECTIVE:
    Focal cortical dysplasia type IIB (FCDIIB) is a sporadic developmental malformation of the cerebral cortex highly associated with pediatric epilepsy. Balloon cells (BCs) in FCDIIB exhibit constitutive activation of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) signaling pathway. Recently, the high-risk human papillomavirus type 16 oncoprotein E6 was identified as a potent activator of mTORC1 signaling. Here, we test the hypothesis that HPV16 E6 is present in human FCDIIB specimens.
    METHODS:
    HPV16 E6 protein expression was assayed by immunohistochemistry in FCDIIB specimens (n = 50) and control brain specimens (n = 36). HPV16 E6 DNA was assayed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and in situ hybridization; HPV16 E6 mRNA was assayed by reverse transcriptase PCR. HPV16 E6 was transfected into fetal mouse brains by in utero electroporation to test the effects of E6 on cortical development.
    RESULTS:
    HPV16 E6 protein was robustly expressed in all FCDIIB specimens in BCs, but not in regions without BCs or in control tissue specimens including normal brain, lymphoblasts, and fibroblasts, cortical tubers, and U87 glioma cells. E6 expression in FCDIIB colocalized with phosphoactivated S6 protein, a known mTORC1 substrate. HPV16 E6 DNA and mRNA were detected in representative specimens of FCDIIB but not control cortex, and were confirmed by sequencing. Transfection of E6 into fetal mouse brains caused a focal cortical malformation in association with enhanced mTORC1 signaling.
    INTERPRETATION:
    Our results indicate a new association between HPV16 E6 and FCDIIB and demonstrate for the first time HPV16 E6 in the human brain. We propose a novel etiology for FCDIIB based on HPV16 E6 expression during fetal brain development.
    Copyright © 2012 American Neurological Association.

    "None of us got where we are solely by pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps" Thurgood Marshall

    by UTvoter on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 06:41:47 AM PDT

  •  Religion is still the best way to protect (11+ / 0-)

    Religion is still the best way to protect families against unwanted pregnancy and STDs.

    Just ask Sarah Palin's family.

    Besides, the Lord of Light has commanded that vaccines cause autism.  So is it now, so shall it ever be.

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 07:26:48 AM PDT

  •  "I was totally going to be abstinent (15+ / 0-)

    but only because I was afraid of getting cancer 20 years from now from a virus I never heard of.  But then I got vaccinated, so I HAD to run out and have sex.  Which is way worse than getting cancer."

    Or as Katha Pollitt called it:  Virginity or Death.

    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his payroll. - Edna St. Vincent Millay

    by Tara the Antisocial Social Worker on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 07:52:25 AM PDT

  •  My daughter had the full course. (8+ / 0-)

    She is neither autistic, nor mentally retarded.

    Plus she's protected against a number of cancers.

    I ain't often right, but I've never been wrong. Seldom turns out the way it does in this song.

    by mungley on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 09:38:35 AM PDT

  •  If you repeat Abstinence Until Marriage 50 times (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Debby, Praxical, kyril

    in front of a darkened mirror, you will summon the spirit of Mary Worth, who died of a back alley abortion... and she will eat your face.

    •  Yeah, yeah. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      libnewsie

      Look, no decent liberal these days expects that you should just automatically shag your boss because he expects it, or that guy your parents introduced you to because THEY want you to marry him.  But sometimes they forget that some of us just don't have any particular interest in shagging, period.  

      Nobody should be celibate because The Church Commands it.  Love is for sharing, and physical love is important to a lot of people.  But there are other kinds of love, and some people prefer to concentrate on those that aren't physical.  Which does make contracting STD's pretty unlikely, and a whole suite of expensive medical procedures pretty much unnecessary.  But you don't choose the lifestyle because of that, or because anyone else tells you to.  You do it because it's what's right for you.

  •  Yes, it works. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZenTrainer

    Which does change the fact that mandatory vaccination is the equivalent of taking out a fly (annual chance of diagnosis with cervical cancer = 1:12,000) with a bazooka.  Furthermore, that fly has a well-defined flight path: HPV is an STD, which means that while teenaged girls may not be behaving as their parents prefer to believe, the girls themselves most definitely know whether or not they are at risk of contracting the infection.  And it's an EXPENSIVE vaccine still being sold under patent for SUBSTANTIAL profits.

    For all of these reasons I find a legal mandate to privately purchase the vaccine offensive, especially since in the case of the actual recipients there is a double layer of coercion: State coercing parents who must then coerce their daughters.  That's just multiplying the obtrusive intervention into a very private and personal space for an adolescent girl, and not even touching on the additional intrusions that are likely once said girl is dragged into a gynecologist's office.  Procedures, you know.  Many doctors refuse to issue the most basic preventatives if they can't also perform (and charge for) a laundry list of "recommended" examinations and tests.

    An alternative that I would unhesitatingly support would be free public provision of the vaccine to anyone between the ages of 13 and 30, male or female, requesting it.  This could be done either at a public health clinic or on contract through an NGO such as Planned Parenthood.  The difference is that the person making the decision would be the person receiving both the costs and the benefits, as well as the ONLY person who would actually know whether or not she was at any significant risk of contracting an STD.  Not all of us spend our youths hopping from bed to bed.

    The mileage of this one depends on your mileage, and nobody has any right to that information except you.  But the costs of rampant STDs and the benefits of herd immunity adhere to the community, so it's worth the community's money to pay for it.

    •  that's why Perry blew it a few years ago (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      libnewsie
      it's an EXPENSIVE vaccine still being sold under patent for SUBSTANTIAL profits.
      Clear out of the blue, he suddenly mandated that all teenage girls get it.....and it was for his buddies in the company to make a big profit.  It blindsided everybody since there was no groundwork laid.  No "why don't we consider doing this" discussion or ability for parents to realize what a benefit it would be.  He just flat out demanded it.
      And then oops, when he got pushback.
      If he had done it for the right reasons and gotten backing from school groups or medical experts, well then it may have turned out differently.  But he was in it for the money.

      Never regret something that made you smile

      by Texnance on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 12:46:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  sorry, but what's offensive is blaming women (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      libnewsie, Debby, kyril, bethcf4p

      which is exactly the position you and vaccine opponents espouse. Yes, HPV is predominantly a sexually-transmitted disease. Note that I say predominantly. HPV is transmissible by other means, risk factors which can have nothing to do with one being a "good girl" or not. Then there is the issue of involuntary transmission, a risk factor which is a justifiable concern for adolescents and young women, in particular. I have a sibling who can attest to this. There are degrees of risk, but this is not a black/white distinction. For this reason, a mandate is the correct public health choice.

      I'd be happy with a bigger tax bill to provide more government assistance to those who need it. I disagree with subsidizing those who can bear the cost and especially just choose not too, though. Yes, the risk of cervical cancer is relatively low compared to say lung or breast cancer. However, ovarian cancer risk is less than double this, and I guarantee that an ovarian cancer vaccine would be eagerly accepted without all the rhetoric. Compared to the cost of treating HPV-associated cancers, vaccination is minimal.

      •  And that's just paternalistic. (0+ / 0-)

        Look, I'm a PAGAN.  It's got nothing to do with being a "good girl".  It's got to do with other people wanting to intrude into my personal space on the ASSUMPTION that I just HAVE to be behaving like they would, and therefore be running and posing the risks that THEIR behavior does.

        Everybody's got a different take on sex.  Some people do it with their hands.  Other people, believe it or not, don't do it at all.  Nobody, and especially not the collection of busybodies constituting the State, has a right to dictate to others what they do with their own bodies on their own time.  And because of that, it's not the State's business to decree that we all be treated as if we are hopping in and out of bed like bunnies in spring.

        Make the vaccine available freely and on-demand, and let individuals determine their own risk profiles.  Those who are actually at risk will be very quick to take advantage of the opportunity.  But risks do need to be considered on an individual basis, because there is no treatment or vaccine known that doesn't have its own risks, side effects, and personal costs.  Those usually hover in the range of 1-3 per THOUSAND.  When the risk of the illness being prevented is on average 1 in TEN THOUSAND, you have a statistical disconnect that makes individual analysis much more appropriate.  Because within the general population, you will have those whose behavior brings their risk closer to 1 in 500, and those whose behavior makes their risk more like 1 in 100,000.  And the cause of that risk difference is NOBODY's BUSINESS except the individual's.

        It's amazing how people who are otherwise ready to take to the streets to keep the government out of our bedrooms suddenly take the opposite tack the moment it becomes a matter of Holy Science.  Which is my other point.  Science is a method, not a religion.  As a method, it works by use of individual facts, not broad, sweeping emotional judgments of what is Right For Everyone.

        •  public health policy is necessarily paternalistic (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ticorules

          because many people are simply not capable of assessing risk or make rational choices when risks are well understood. People still smoke, consume alcohol and drive cars, don't use helmets or seat belts, can be manipulated by fear of terrorists, and buy lottery tickets. Public health decisions must also account for societal costs. So, while the health benefits of the HPV vaccine primarily accrue to the individual, their children and their partners, the costs of screening for and treating HPV-associated disease are borne by all. In the US, this is estimated to be as much as $4 billion annually (2004 dollars). Similarly, the aggregate costs of any potential vaccine side effects are part of the equation. One must also be mindful that HPV is a disease itself and causative agent for a number of other cancers which are much more difficult to screen for and treat, affect both sexes, and have higher mortality than cervical cancer. [Full disclosure-I have been involved in cancer research for 2 decades and the work which identified the major subtypes of HPV associated with cervical cancer was done by a departmental colleague.]

          The problem with your argument, which I tried to point out is that you assume that risk of contracting HPV is entirely self-determined and  controllable through one's own behavior. This is simply untrue. Aside from known avenues of non-sexual transmission, a woman's risk of being sexually assaulted is significant (often reported as 1 in 3 lifetime). Males are also victimized, but possibly at lower rates. The figure of 30,000 pregnancies annually due to rape gets thrown around, and transmitting HPV is much, much more likely than that. Hand-to-genital contact is sufficient. I don't think this can be minimized or ignored.

          You also imply that individuals, especially young teens, on their own autonomy will make rational, pre-meditated decisions to engage in sexual activity, and take steps to complete a lengthly vaccination cycle before proceeding. Teen pregnancy rates should be convincing evidence to the contrary. Consequently, parents have a responsibility to, for lack of a better term, be paternalistic for their minor children. Many not being equipped to make an informed risk assessment will otherwise act (or not) from naivety, emotion or religious belief. For this reason and because the weight of evidence and cost-benefit is convincing, there is a compelling state interest in mandating this vaccination.

          Science is a method, yes. It weighs the individual findings to arrive at a coherent, if imperfect and constantly evolving, description of the world around us based on a preponderance of evidence. It certainly does arrive at sweeping generalizations with broad implications, climate science and public health being particularly good examples. It does not produce absolutes, and individual scientists are not emotionless robots. Emotion gets injected into the mix when scientific findings must be practically applied and balanced against conflicting interests in the formulation of public policy.

  •  Apologies to Chris Kluwe? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    splashy, libnewsie

    I suspect he approves. More seriously, we need athletes to speak up on this issue. An even greater source for the spread of HPV, far worse than lustful fornication or Satan worship, is transmission in locker rooms., Your perfectly chaste daughter might pick the wrong bench on which to sit naked, and presto, new HPV infection.

  •  More science: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZenTrainer

    here.

    *118 deaths because of Gardasil vaccination have been reported to the VAERS (the Government Vaccine *Adverse Event Reporting System) as of August 2012
    *Since 2006, over 26,000 adverse reactions reported to VAERS
    *894 reports of disability according to VAERS
    *517 life-threatening adverse events recorded in VAERS
    *9,889 emergency room visits recorded in VAERS
    *2,781 hospitalizations recorded in VAERS
    *HPV vaccines have never been shown to prevent cervical cancer
    *There are at least 15 pre malignant strains of HPV, and the HPV vaccine only inoculates for 2 of them (strains 16 and 18)
    *HPV vaccinations actually increase HPV high-risk infections
    *Abortion Stillbirth Events from Gardasil Far Exceed All Other Vaccines

    Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government. ~ Edward Bernays

    by 4Freedom on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 12:38:10 PM PDT

    •  Yes and then there are the side effects, some of (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      libnewsie, ZenTrainer

      Which are migraine headaches, narcolepsy, impaired immune system and its related diseases (lupus, MS, ALS, etc) and goddess knows what else.

      People brush off narcolepsy,a s they see it as a "nap disorder." But when your child has to be home schooled during the HS years as otherwise they might fall asleep immediately from the effects of narcolepsy, while walking down  flight of stairs, and it s easy to conclude it  is not a fun disease.

      People in other countries where citizens are better informed, (as the pro vaccine forces haven't managed to take up every single Mainstream Media headline), don't even consider this Gardisil vaccine.

      Offer your heart some Joy every day of your life, and spread it along to others.

      by Truedelphi on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 12:59:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  nice to see the anti-vaxers are still around (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cocinero, Mote Dai, kyril

      The good thing, I suppose, is that while the rightwingnut anti-science folks get to run the EPA, ours just get laughed at.  (shrug)

    •  And here is what the CDC says (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The grouch, kyril, Emerson, Ticorules

      This was based off of data published a few years ago, but still relevant.  94% of the adverse effects were non life threatening:

         

         More than 23 million doses were administered nationally since the HPV vaccine was licensed in June 2006. There were a total of 12,424 reports to VAERS of adverse events following HPV vaccination through December 2008.
          Since the HPV vaccine was approved, the vast majority (94%) of adverse events reported to VAERS after receiving this vaccine have not been serious. An adverse event is considered serious if it is life threatening, or results in death, permanent disability, abnormal conditions at birth, hospitalization or prolonged hospitalization.
          The most common events reported were:
              Syncope (or fainting)–common after need injections, especially in pre-teens and teens
              Local reactions at the site of immunization (pain and redness)
              Dizziness
              Nausea
              Headache
          Of the 12,424 reports of adverse events, 772 (6% of all reports) described serious adverse events, including 32 reports of deaths.
          The 32 death reports were reviewed and there was no common pattern to the deaths that would suggest they were caused by the vaccine. In cases where there was an autopsy, death certificate, or medical records, the cause of death could be explained by factors other than the vaccine. Some causes of death determined to date include diabetes, viral illness, illicit drug use, and heart failure.
          There were two reports of unusual neurological illness (per autopsy, probable variants of Amytrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) often referred to as “Lou Gehrig's Disease”) that resulted in the death of two young females. There is no current evidence suggesting that the HPV vaccine caused these illnesses, but researchers from several highly regarded academic centers are studying the cases.
          There was increased reporting of syncope and pulmonary emboli (blood clots of the lungs) compared with what has been found for other vaccines given to females of the same age. Of the people who had blood clots 90% had a known risk factor for blood clots, such as taking oral contraceptives (birth control pills). VAERS reports cannot prove the vaccine caused the adverse event in women with these risk factors. However, this finding needs further investigation.
      You have to dig deeper to get the real story instead of just looking at the top line numbers without knowing what they actually mean.

      The sequester is the new Republican immigration reform plan. Make things so bad here in the US that no one will want to live here.

      by Mote Dai on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 09:30:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So 6% of events were life-threatening, even (0+ / 0-)

        according to the CDC? That is not an acceptable risk level, that's the real story. The VAERS numbers are government numbers, aka hard research data, not some CT output.

        On digging deeper, perhaps a perusal of CDC stakeholders, and you have to read all the way down the list to come to the governmental and corporate stakeholders, might indicate to an independent observer that those stakeholders had an interest in the outcome of such research.

        I understand the uses and misuses of data. My wish is that all aspects of such a vaccine be readily and publicly available in plainspeak, not scientific terminology. If more people had adequate information to make an informed risk/reward decision, then let the public go ahead and decide. I wouldn't want anyone who thought there was benefit to be derived to be deprived of that benefit.

        But I think the issue is lack of full disclosure. Consumers should be aware that there are more than two strains of HPV, and this and other potentially adverse effects need to be fully and clearly disclosed, as well as being easily accessible in summary form.

        Drugs come with these tissue-paper thin advisements in tiny print legible with magnification, worded through layers of lawyers to inform as minimally as possible. Consumers lack adequate protection from adverse drug events. The way much medicine is practiced today doctors often don't have the time to discuss drugs they prescribe fully with patients. And a recent top FDA appointee is a former Monsanto VP.

        I do not think full disclosure is anti-scientific. I think it bolsters the value and validity of science. Suppression or manipulation of information in any realm is a curtailment of the freedom of information, and, to me, that curtails a constitutional right.

        Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government. ~ Edward Bernays

        by 4Freedom on Sun Jun 30, 2013 at 09:46:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  NO!! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ticorules

          You are simply misreading this data and what the adverse reporting is!!  The adverse reporting is a catch all for anything that happens afterthe time someone gets vaccinated and may not be vaccine related.  With Gardasil, almost ALL of those being minor things like headaches.  The other six percent were investigated and none had anything to do specifically with the vaccine.  Doesn't mean they didn't happen, it just means there is no clear link to the vaccine.   If you vaccinate hundreds of thousands of people, by chance two unrelated health events might coincide.  

          The sequester is the new Republican immigration reform plan. Make things so bad here in the US that no one will want to live here.

          by Mote Dai on Sun Jun 30, 2013 at 03:06:44 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  I have that T-shirt! (4+ / 0-)

    science does work. In my own career we went from manual DNA sequencing (something I once was an expert at...a totally obsolete skill now), to automated sequencing, to sequencing entire genomes, to now being able to sequence an entire genome of individuals. The rate of progress has been staggering. And, of course, the ability to detect problems, cure problems and vaccinate against problems (vagueness deliberate since there are so many different issues science covers) has been improving as well.

    Now if only we can vaccinate against the Teabagger virus...oh yeah, I think that vaccine is good public education. Not 100% effective but it helps a lot.

    FREEDOM ISN'T FREE: That's why we pay taxes. NYC's Progressive/Reform Blog

    by mole333 on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 01:38:38 PM PDT

  •  HPV vaccine (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kyril, Ticorules

    I think in 25 years the HPV vaccines (there are a couple different ones on the global market), will be seen as one of the greatest public health initiatives duirng that time.  The impact will be HUGE especially as immunizations increase in the Third World (because of the higher mortality of cervical cancer because of a lack of pap smear screening).

    And get your boys vaccinated too!

    The sequester is the new Republican immigration reform plan. Make things so bad here in the US that no one will want to live here.

    by Mote Dai on Sat Jun 29, 2013 at 09:25:29 PM PDT

  •  As a doctor, it just drives me crazy that I must.. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Justus, kyril, bethcf4p, Mote Dai, Ticorules

    repeatedly spend time during office visits explaining to patients that 1) yes, vaccines are remarkably safe, particularly compared to cervical cancer, polio or tetanus; that 2) yes, no matter what they think say or do, their daughter will almost certainly have unprotected sex some day no matter how innocent she is at age twelve and that 3) yes, Jenny McCarthy is a moron.

    100 years ago people had a visceral understanding of the lethal nature of infectious disease, because they could expect to lose several children to one of the many plagues circulating through the population at all times. Nowadays? Our Craven Corporate Media™ leave folks with the impression that infections only happen to other people. You know, teh gays, like AIDS. Not to good white suburban folks.

  •  Two additional points (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bethcf4p, Ticorules

    1. Even if your child is abstinent until marriage, he or she could end up marrying someone with the disease, even when they are 30 or older. The time to vaccinate has a window of opportunity and that window exists in late teenage-hood.

    2. This is not about parental rights. This is about eradicating HPV for all generations to come. I don't have a right to dictate whether my great grandson or great great granddaughter still have to live with it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site