One word - wow! They'd rather see their daughters die than allow for a possibility of suggestion about premarital sex. Just how screwed up must one be?Plans to vaccinate young girls against the sexually-transmitted virus that causes cervical cancer have been blocked in several US states by conservative groups, who say that doing so would encourage promiscuity.
Advocates of the vaccine point out that the jabs work against human papillomavirus (HPV) - which causes virtually all cases of cervical cancer - and are safe.
The latest data from a large clinical trial of Merck's cervical cancer vaccine, Gardasil, found it offered 100% protection against cervical, vulval and vaginal diseases, caused by HPV (types 6, 11, 16 and 18) and 98% protection against advanced pre-cancers caused by HPV types 16 and 18 (New England Journal of Medicine: vol 356, p1915).
After around three years of the four-year trial, almost all girls who received the vaccine before being exposed to HPV 16 or 18 appear to be protected...One word - wow! They'd rather see their daughters die than allow for a possibility of suggestion about premarital sex. Just how screwed up must one be?
Monday, May 14, 2007
Let cancer put the fear of God in them!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Your comment had almost made me think that perhaps I should've done a bit more research. Perhaps they blocked that vaccination initiative because it really wasn't all that it cracked up to be. And (gasp!) it was I who allowed some religious fundamentalist to score a fact-supported point against the atheistic camp. However this fleeting thought put me at ease: the objection on the grounds of (arguably) unproven efficacy or the high price of the vaccine would be legitimate if there was a potential for allowing this initiative to be implemented had these objections been overcome. But the truth of the matter is, it makes no difference how efficacious or expensive this vaccine is. Condoms are inexpensive, and have proven to be extremely effective in preventing sexually-transmitted diseases. Yet, the religious conservatives are equally adamant about keeping them out of the classrooms. The reason is the same in both cases: it might plant an extra thought of premarital sex in the minds of the schoolchildren, while at the same time removing a reason for abstinence.
I was going to ask, so does that mean that if the efficacy of the vaccine is improved, and its price tag is lowered you (and other God-fearing folk) would support its use in schools? Of course not! (See the point about the condoms above.) So why bother with citing of the numbers when in the end, they really don't matter to you anyway?
You must have me confused with wingnut. I agree that the argument that GARDASIL promotes promiscuity is 100% ridiculous.
All of your reasoning is sound. I just wanted to point out that rational individuals also have some valid reasons for foregoing this vaccine, especially if they have (or suspect that they may have) already been exposed to HPV 16 or 18.
True as well. And thanks for dropping in.
Post a Comment