Followers

Facebook Badge

Athena Smith's Facebook profile

Sunday, October 7

A Different War on Drugs




A Promising New HPV Vaccine Gets Caught Up In The Culture War
BY MATTHEW VALJI
January 17, 2007

Twenty million Americans are currently infected with the Human Papillomavirus, more commonly known as HPV. According to the Center for Disease Control, a shocking 75 percent of Americans ages 15 to 49 have acquired HPV at some point in their lives. For most, this STI will clear up quickly on its own with little or no permanent aftereffects, but for about one percent of women infected, it results in cervical cancer.

....

Read the whole article at http://hprsite.squarespace.com/different-war-on-drugs-012007/


Should this vaccine be required just as other vaccines are required for school children of a certain age or should it be left up to the parents?

72 comments:

Monica Rivera Agard said...

Monica- I beleive this should be require just like Flu shots. I believe this because it will help. I believe it will help by promoting awareness and more education. With this more young women will view sex diffrently, maybe as a possible virus that can kill them and not have sex so freely. I also feel that this is a plus because if a young women is having sex this way, which is her choice she can be protected with a chance for a longer life to make her own decision and not decision based on a past choice: un-safe sex that led to cancer, which means more problems- such as money, medication and lifestyle.

Danatrose said...

I think that the decision should be left up to the parents. The government( big brother) is behaving as if we can't think for ourselves and to the rescue they come. Does a parent have to consent for birth control in a child this young? Abortion? If parents parent to me this would not be a problem. too many kids are left alone with too much free time. But the again it's a catch 22 because parents have to work and many are furthering their education so more and more kids are left at home. Ultimately every family is different and the decision should be made by them, the parents as to what fits their lifestyles the government should have nothing to do with it.

Alexandra said...

I think this decision should be made by the child the vaccine would be injected and the parents of that child. I think if sexual education was given the right way, there would be less chance of any disease. Lets face the facts here: teens are between the ages of 13-19. Teens are learning about their bodies and are growing into them. so many changes are occuring. Peer pressure from your friends make it hard to say no when you are curious about sex and the fact you have never been taught the consequences (not just getting pregnant) or how to put on a condom or the MANY other ways to protect yourself against pregnancy and other STD's. without sexual education, teens can only go by what they hear. the brave ones will ask parents. but even most parents will be shocked to find out their 14 year old wants to have sex. Like i said, i think the shot should be a choice, not a demand. just know with choices, there are consequence.

mmedina10 said...

I am glad that Michigan made it mandatory because it shows the teenagers that this is for prevention to stds, and it hurts imagen if they did get something through how many vaccinations will they have to go through to just live 10 more days. I think this will help many teenagers to think before they become sexually active.

mmedina10 said...

I also agree with monica because i think that introducing the vaccine means more sex education because teenagers are going to want to know why they are getting that extra shot.

Alexandra said...

i know when i was offered the shot they told me to wait. you have to get 3 shots. 1 every 2 months. and if you go to get one after 2 months, they have to start the whole process over. i live in NY and go to school here in FL. i dont go home every 2 months and i dont have the money to pay for a flight every 2 months to get the shot. my insurance would cover it there, but i havnt found a gyno here to take my insurance. and i remember talking to my gyno about it and she told me SOME information about it, but gave me the pamphlet and told me to bring it home and discuss it with my mom. YES i could have kept asking questions and maybe at a younger age they would go into more detail, but i just think it should be a personal decision. there are plenty of people out there who are waiting till marriage to have sex, so for some people i feel its a non issue. however if i do find a doctor who will take my insurance, i will get the shot, just to be on the safe side.

Athena Smith said...

Alexandra
The chaos with the insurance companies and who accepts what is faced by many and in more serious situations.
For example here in Tampa, a huge college up to recently was using a major insurance company to insure the employees. Guess what.
Their HMO plan (which is usually chosen by 90% of the employees) was not accepted by Moffitt.
And if you have cancer, you don't go to St Josephs... you go to Moffitt...


So be very careful if you guys buy insurance on your own or when you choose an amployee's plan. See which hospitals accept it first. Make sure Moffitt and Tampa General are on the list.

As far as I know no insurance will cover phychattric treatment....... Instead they send you to some counselors....who will make the diagnosis and refer you...
Let's not speak on that issue of mental health coverage at the moment...

Athena Smith said...

And as far as vaccinations are concerned, my daughter was in the same class with the girl that died of meningitis. USF called her to ask if she had any symptoms.
They did not mention anything about vaccinating her.
I had to see my family doctor who knows that my kids are at USF who urgently told me "Vaccinate them ASAP."

bdraper said...

I believe that the vaccine choice should ultimatly be left up to the child. If the child is already sexually active and would like to take the vaccine they should have the right to tell the doctor. More girls are having sex with out their parents knowing, and for most parents they do not want to believe that their child is sexually active therefore they may automatically refuse the drug. This drug can help safe families from high medical bills and continuous returns to the doctor for check ups. Getting this drug may not promote sexual activity, it really has no difference on the outcome for who has sex. There is birth control, depo shots, and condoms that many young people can get their hands on so why would this vaccination promote sex. It may is some small degree but all the newly vaccinated girls will not start sleeping around. I believe it should be a required vaccination at a certain age, even if the girl is not sexually active she may decide to become sexually active a few years down the road and is already protected. The future is unknown and all the drug companies seem to want to do is protect from futured mishappenings. What is they came out for a vaccination against HIV/AIDS, you could take it and be guarranted to never contract those viruses, would parents want their children to receive this. More than likely yes. You never know who is carrying around what STD or sexual virus, so to be on the safe side if a young girl does decide to have sex (which is her choice) it can protect her from a lifetime of pain.

bdraper said...

I agree with monica, this should be a required vaccination. If it is optional it should not be left up to the parents, if is the girl who is having sex, thinks she is going to have sex's choice. It is a new form of protection that can help save many lifes.

Danielle said...

Whoever thought that teens will not have sex or that having sex is a "chosen lifestyle" is crazy. This is what humans do: eat, sleep, and have sex. Therefore I find it extremely pertinent for teenage girls to recieve the vaccination. There should be no question about it. This vaccination is proved to save lives, not kill lives, and any parent who denies this shot is ultimately killing their child. It is obvious that the U.S. is extremely sexually active; i mean just look at our teen pregnancy rates. If a parent trusts the government to educate their child everyday, why not trust them to protect and vaccinate their child from HPV too? I say that if the parent doesn't like the idea to vaccinate the child, they should pull the child out of school and teach them theirself.

Danielle said...

commenting on danatrose:
Are you saying that if a parent were to watch their child they could prevent that child from aquiring HPV? Are you suggesting that a parent should chain their child to them every waking moment of the day in order to prevent them from having sex?
If so, that is ridiculous. Even if the parent watched every move their child made, they could not prevent HPV. What happens when their daughter gets married and has sex? She could still aquire HPV and now it would be too late to get a vaccination. How would you feel, after all of that "protecting" you did for your child, they got cervical cancer later on in life. Don't you think that vaccinating early on in life is the right way to go?

Danielle said...

comment on alexandra:
I agree. Yet another case where sex education would bring about a greater change.
But, if we didn't make this vaccination manditory, many people wouldn't recieve it. Just like the hepititis shot(s) and the polio shot this should be a one time thing that the child gets before going to school the next year. If i were still in sixth grade and it was my choice to take a shot, i would say hell no. I wouldn't care about some HPV or sex or anything of the sort. I would do anything to avoid a shot (and still do). So what would you do then?.....
I still say that the vaccination should be manditory.

Angelica D. said...

I agree w/Alexandra - the decision to receive the vaccine should be made by the child - and if sex.ed. was included in the school cirriculum - or should I say taught properly & efficiently, there would be less cases for teens to come in contact w/STD's.

Not all teens are open to talking to their parents about sex, and vice-versa. First of all, if teens feel they are responsible enough to have sex, then should be aware of the consequences. For those who still do not handle it safely - they should have the choice to receive the vaccine if warranted.

I do not believe this vaccine should be mandatory - What happened to freedom???

We need to focus on prevention - starting with the reinforcement of sex education in school and at home ....Not a solution for after the fact....

Crimsonzero said...

We are talking about school children. I beg to differ and I'm outraged with Rep. Stahl who calls HPV exposure as a "lifestyle" choice. In this country, sex under the legal age, even if it is consensual, is considered statutory rape. With sexual molestation of young girls of what I believe to be 1 out of 3 has contributed to this alarming rate of HPV and its resultant cervical cancer. His line of antiquated thinking goes back to the times when it was said that women got what they deserved. Raped because her dress was too short-her fault. These children get HPV and possibly cervical cancer due to their "lifestyle" choices. Give me a break. Also, how many of us if we had a chance to change our teenage years would do it differently? There's a lot to weigh here. Whether this vaccine should be mandatory or not, first and formost to be considered are the parental rights. How about offering parents free vaccinations for their children, with the option to accept or deny this vaccination via permission slips? Remember, parents are the ones that would have to live with and take care of any "drawbacks" or shall we say any possible reprecussions of this vaccine in years to come. Why not give parents of all social status the option to vaccinate their child, free of charge?

Athena Smith said...

One of the factors that determine what becomes "mandatory" or not is cost. One of the strongest factors actually.

And by the way here is Rep. Stahl's bio

Athena Smith said...

In the article Will cancer vaccine get to all women? I read the following:
1.DEATHS from cervical cancer could jump fourfold to a million a year by 2050, mainly in developing countries

2. In the US, religious groups are gearing up to oppose vaccination, despite a survey showing 80 per cent of parents favour vaccinating their daughters.

3. HPV is extremely common. Half of all sexually active women between 18 and 22 in the US are infected. Most cases clear up, but sometimes infection persists and can cause cancer decades later.

brooke said...

I think it should be required to recieve this vaccine. Obviously sex education isnt teaching how to be safe and protect yourself they are promoting abstinence and no one is doing it. If it was required I think it would be a huge help on stopping cervical cancer. A lot of the time teenagers are sexually active and are scared to tell their parents. I dont think it would encourage sex. It is still the childs decision on to have sex or not. But why not be on the safe side if yu change your mind or they do make the decision to have sex and not want to tell their parents. I just beleive everyone would be better off if they had the vaccine less people would be infected with cervical cancer.

brooke said...

I disagree with bdraper because if you wait until the child is already sexually active it is not guarenteed to work as well as if the child was a virgin. Thats why they want to give it to them at the age of 12 or 13. They should already e required to have this vaccine so IF they become sexually active they would be protected. I dont understand why it would be such a huge deal to have a vaccine to protect you child or your own health? You never know what decision your child would make so why not atleast have them protected.

Angelica D. said...

Comment to Brooke -
I agree with you 100% as far not knowing what decisions children will make - so why not protect them - But I think if parents want to protect their children, they should educate them right from the start about sex, properly - by letting them know that their are responsibilities and precautions to take- and unfortunately, consequences. Not only are their physical dangers, but sex is also very emotional, and young girls are not always prepared to handle what comes along with sex.

I know that the vaccine is a prevention, but it is also sending a mixed message to young girls, and taking away some responsibility from the parents. Yes the parents can decide to give their children the vaccine, but again, I feel that if parents talked openly and honestly about sex, their daughters would know to take precautions. If they chose not to, then they have to deal with the consequences later.

chronos said...

I actually have a friend of mine that is infected with this virus. I have to say the effects it has on someones body is horrible. Sometimes it was difficult for her to even get out of bed. She is still being tested as we speak to see if she is developing cancer. I don't see any reason that this vaccine should not be administered. It is ridiculous that people believe that giving a child a vaccine for a disease will give them the idea that they can start having sex because they are safe. If we had the right amount of sexual education to begin with then they would know that there are many other dangers in having sex. Any vaccine that is available for our children should be administered if it can provide them a better chance of living longer.

chronos said...

I agree with mmedina10 that it is great that this vaccine is mandatory in Michigan. This is a great opportunity to prevent multiple deaths later in life. Not to mention it will also allow them to have children because in many cases they have to have their ovaries removed. I don't think that it will encourage pre-teens to start having sex at an early age. If anything it will make pre-teens more aware of this disease and others that can be contracted from having unprotected sex.

HoneySweet G. said...

The decision should be left to the parents. It is in everything else when you're still a minor. I honestly don't know if it should be mandatory or not, but it should definitely be kept open for discussion.
But even if the child is sexually active or not, she should be protected from what's out there.
Education is the key to everything that is wrong in this universe.

HoneySweet G. said...

I wonder what this world would be like if females would keep their leg closed till marriage and guys would keep it in their pants. (Guys can control their bodily functions; some just choose not to.)
bdraper...but if the decision was left up to the girl, and she just so happens to be a minor, the doctors can't technically do anything without the parent's consent.
So what are we going to do now?

Sierrablue said...

In this country it has been proven that the form of sex education taught does not work.I think that is mainly the parent's fault. It should be their responsibility to teach their children about sex, however most push it on the backs of the education system which does a bad job. So how can we trust these same parents to make the right decision in this case. Their track record speaks for itself. I think the vaccine should be mandatory just like all the other vaccines given to school age children. These vaccines are given to protect the child and stop the spread of disease. That is exactly what the HPV vaccine is for.I see no difference here. No one complains about parental rights when the child has to take his measles shot.

Sierrablue said...

I disagree with bdraper and some of the others who say it should be left up to the child. The key word being "child". Children should not be making decisions as serious as this one. It is the job of the parent to see to their child's welfare and unfortunately this is not always the case. And because this is not just something that affects their child but others they come into contact later in life it should be mandatory just as measles, chickenpox and all the other vaccines that are required before you can go to school.

Sierrablue said...

The words freedom and rights have been tossed around a few times in this blog. Possibly becoming a public health threat, which is what a person would become if they contracted this virus and passed it on unknowingly, is not a freedom or a right. When it comes to matters of health, the whole population is considered and as Athena Smith stated from her article
the number of cancer victims will become much higher unless something is done to prevent it.

Athena Smith said...

Many young girls (and I mean over 18) although acknowledge the need for the vaccine simply neglect to do it.
So if adults are that negligent, what can we expect of children?

Sierrablue said...

I guess the public getting the flu is higher on Rep. Stahl’s list of priorities than women getting cervical cancer.

REP. STAHL ENCOURAGES FLU VACCINATION NOW
October 10, 2007
State Rep. John Stahl today joined the Lapeer County Health Department in encouraging residents to get their influenza vaccination sooner rather than later this flu season.

"Flu season is upon us," stated Rep. Stahl, R-North Branch. "October and November are the best months to get vaccinated. Please get a vaccination to prevent this illness."

"I wish everyone a happy, healthy fall and winter and hope this reminder serves the public welfare in illness prevention," Rep. Stahl said.

Athena Smith said...

As far as immunization rates are concerned, they are very high for children but not that high for teenagers. According to Dr. Chang from WebMD Medical News the artes for young kids are 77%.
When it came to teens, an 88% had gotten the recommended dose for hepatitis B vaccine and the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, but only
12% of them had received the new meningococcal conjugate vaccine and only about 11% had gotten the combined tetanus, diphtheria, and whooping cough vaccine.

Athena Smith said...

And here is a Forbes article on the teens falling behind on the newer vaccines.

Athena Smith said...

And from the Women's Health Center in the UK I copy the following:
"The UK Government may decide to vaccinate schoolgirls against cervical cancer.
Cervical cancer is a sexually-transmitted disease in the sense that it is caused by a strain of the human papilloma virus (HPV) which is passed on through sexual intercourse. Vaccines against HPV have been effective in clinical trials and will be licensed soon. The development could wipe out cervical cancer - already in decline because of screening programs. The UK Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization, which advises the Government, is now considering how best to use the HPV vaccines."

Sierrablue said...

Athena Smith said "One of the factors that determine what becomes "mandatory" or not is cost. One of the strongest factors actually."

I believe this to be very true however, I also believe it is time America starts taking care of its own.

Crimsonzero said...

The primary responsibility for protecting children belongs to parents, so educating parents about the benefits of the HPV vaccine is a must. What if there were an HIV vaccine out there, preventing AIDS? Would parents want their child to get it, or would they fear that they are promoting sexual activity by giving the child this vaccine?

I'm all for impressing on the child's mind that sexual abstinence is very important from a moral standpont also stressing the consequences a few minutes of pleasure could have. However, we have to lose the appaling mentality we have of women as shown by the derogatory remark "females should keep their legs closed till marriage". One is assuming that this is how all women with HPV contract this virus and deserve it. A review of studies from 21 countries suggested that in some places as many as 36% of women have been subjected to sexual victimization in childhood. Also I would like to add a personal touch. I do have a family member who had cervical cancer and yes she was immoral when she was in her teens. She married and years later had two children and then developed cervical cancer, which nearly killed her. I can't imagine what her husband would have done without her raising two boys on his own. Many adults are responsible, caring, loving parents today and do not resemble anything of their youthful days of wild abandon. How many young women have died needlessly and left their loved ones behind, or cannot have children as a result of cervical cancer, because this vaccine was not available to them?

There's so much to think about here. Who of us wants to cast the first stone? Are you a virgin now, or will you be a virgin when you marry? What do the statistics show? Don't you think that HPV vaccine is a good idea?

Athena Smith said...

Crimsonzero
Once you have had a personal experience with a disease or you know someone who has had it, then the outlook is very different.

GatorGirl06 said...

I think that the HPV vaccine should be required. However, I don't think it should be done as young as 11...maybe closer to when kids enter high school. I think it is something that should be required because if kids want to have sex, they are more than likely going to whether their parents approve or not, and this vaccine could help protect them against HPV.

GatorGirl06 said...

I also agree with Chronos. I don't think administering the vaccine would be encouraging young teen to have sex. As Chronos mentioned, with the right amount of sex education pre-teens would become more aware of this disease and others.

peachykeach said...

I feel that the vaccine should be given along with other vaccines for school age children. If we can prevent something and we don't, we are only harming our future. If we make it optional than we are going to miss many young girls whose parents may not be able to afford the vaccination or who may not make the finacial cnoice to give it to their children. I personally will teach my children abstinence as I was taught but if they later on in life chose to be with someome who may not have made the same choices as they did, I want them to be protected.

peachykeach said...

Ms Smith
I know what you mean about HMO's not accepting Moffit. My mom had lukemia and we had to fight for a very long time to get her covered at Moffit. They saved her life, Brandon hospital was in way over their head.

peachykeach said...

I agree with Sierra Blue. A child should not be left to make a life altering medical decision. It's sad that we can't leave the parent up to it.

ssnipes said...

I believe the choice should be left up to the person involved-the young woman. If she is going to be sexually active she should educate herself about what she is getting into. This is another thing that no one learns about in school. Several of my friends have HPV and it is such a hassle, if they would have known that there is a vaccine im certain that they would have taken it to begin with to save the trouble and often pain of having HPV. This just goes to show how much more sex ed we need in schools!!!!

ssnipes said...

i agree with alexandra - the decision to receive the vaccine should be made by the child - and if sex.ed. was included in the school cirriculum - or should I say taught properly & efficiently, there would be less cases for teens to come in contact w/STD's.

I wish we could do something to get them to start more sex ed in schools!!

Jeneice said...

I think this vaccine should be required jus as the flu shots and etc I think that its a bigger picture to this whole thing .. as a country we should want to stop the disease from spreading as much as we can. It shouldnt be about if teen girls are going to have sex because at some point in life sex is going to occur.

mattsarnowski said...

Whoever thought that teens will not have sex or that having sex is a "chosen lifestyle" is crazy. This is in the natural lifecycle of human beings: eat, sleep, and reproduce. With this going on all around us, it is very clear that young girls should recieve the vaccination. There should be no question about it. This vaccination is proved to save lives, not kill lives, and any parent who denies this shot is ultimately killing their child. It is obvious that the U.S. is extremely sexually active; as you have seen in the previous post. If a parent trusts the government to educate their child everyday, why not trust them to protect and vaccinate their child from HPV too? where else is the child going to recieve this kind of education? On the street? cause this is where they are getting it now and things arn't going so well.

mattsarnowski said...

in comment to honeysweetg: I don't think it should be solely up to the parents. If you try and control what is going to happen for your child, then they may feel underminded and want to act out. That is probably one reason why so many teens are having sex in the first place; they are acting out.

kenny said...

I beleive that the gov't should have control over the vaccinations because some parents dont have the knowledge of symptoms and effects of major diseases around today. If the parents dont have this knowledge it could put their children at risk of infections.

Also most kids dont just come out and tell their parents their having sex which would make their parents believe they arent and they have no need for this vaccination.

Overall it would be concern of the children if this vaccination was mandatory.

Michael Rose said...

Most of the time I am rather optimistic about are government telling us that we have to do something, especially when the subject is about sex, drugs and are daughters. However, if the drug were proven not have any harmful side effects, why wouldn’t it be a mandatory injection? Personally, if I were to have a daughter, I as a logical person would know that there going to have sex. Why not be safe?

Neishia said...

I dont think its a good idea for everyone to get this shot. Just like every other vaccine it has to be experimented with and I know that I wouldn't want this in my system without years of it being in the market.

Natalie said...

In my opinion I dont see a problem with preventing cervical cancer. The HPV vacination is clealy a safe and easy way to protect young females from getting infected with cervical cancer. It should become a maditory vacination for girls 11 and 12. It is not giving these girls an excuse to have sex, but instead protecting them when they begin to have sex. If we promote this vacination now, we can infact prevent infection in future cases. With this vacination becoming mandatory we only hope to put cervical cancer a thing of the past.

Natalie said...

To Alexandra: Practicing abstinence until marriage does not protect you from worrying about this virus. All it takes is one partner to pass the virus. Females should still vaccinate themselves regardless, because you never know the sexual history of your future husband. Unless you are both virgins the risk is still there.

Natalie said...

To danatrose: As much as we would love to live in a society where parents "parent" the way they should, its not the way it is. Many, many parents will not take the time to research and understand the promise of this vaccine. If its not something mandatory then parents just look at it as one less thing to worry about it. This gives those girls who parents are not worried about it a chance to a cervical cancer free life. We are not talking about issuing birth control to children, we are talking about a society generations from now having cervical cancer being a thing of the past. Children are vaccinated at that age because the vaccine is more effective BEFORE the child becomes sexually active.

jeje 21 said...

I think that the decision should be left to the child but since the child is not old enough to make a decision like this one it should decided on parents for the best of their child. The vaccine should be provided when the person is somewhere around his 14-15 year old. I think is good because it protect more people from spreading the diseases and provides a better future for the people.

jeje 21 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jeje 21 said...

I mean the vaccine is free, it keeps you protected from viruses, why wouldnt you take it?? People are now more sexually active than ever and without using condoms. Chances are pretty high to get infected. I think this could be a great thing to fight HIV/STD virus in a way.

jeje 21 said...

I agree with Natalie, we should be acting ealier and faster before the child becomes sexually active.

Cervical cancer is the second most common cause of cancer deaths in women worldwide, resulting in nearly half a million diagnoses and 240,000 deaths each year. According to estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) more than 20 million men and women in the US are infected with HPV, and more than six million new infections are reported each year, making it the most common sexually transmitted disease in the nation. If we dont act now, it could already be too late.

bigbuddy said...

I believe that it should be mandatory. Kids are having sex at a much younger age. If this would help avoid cancer and the spread of std's why not do it.

bigbuddy said...

I agree with danielle sex is part of life. We know its going to happen. If its proven to help and gives you a better chance for a longer life why not.

kenny said...

I agree on what mattsarnowski said on how America has a high sexual activity rate and therefore should not just ignore these young girls having sex and instead just apply the vaccination.

kenny said...

I agree on what mattsarnowski said on how America has a high sexual activity rate and therefore should not just ignore these young girls having sex and instead just apply the vaccination.

dfrank2 said...

I agree with danatrose on this one. It should be left up to the parents. Although i think it would be stupid for parents to not get this shot for the child, I think you should leave the individual responsible instaed of finding out there is a drawback or sideffect, and then have the general population mad at one company. That would cause an unneccessary mess.

dfrank2 said...

I laugh everytime I see people say something like a shot that prevents something from sex promotes it. What is about free will the parents and politicains don't get? You can talk a child to death about abstenice and not having sex. You can talk until your blue in the face, but in the end it's out of the parents hands. Those who think that and dont get their daughter a shot are foolish and dont get this worng because I would never wish this upon anyone but.. Lord forbid they dont get the shot and their daughter does have sex and contract this, maybe then they'll understand their mistake when their explaining why they let her get cancer.

scarpenter said...

I think it is very important for people to understand wht the drug is for and the statistics behind it before stating their views one way or the other. HPV is a widespread STD that affects 90% of women who have had sex. The main reason being, guys sleep around as well. Even if it is your 1st time sleeping with someone you can catch it if they have been with someone else. Secondly, children are having sex at younger ages. When I worked at a daycare, we had children who were in foster care, but their mother had given birth to the 1st child when she was 11 years old. That completely blows my mind, but it's true. Yes, there needs to be more sex education. Children need to understand the point of sex, which is for married couples. We don't need to tell them that sex is bad, but make sure they understand that it is not something to take lightly. There are consequences, far beyond what is even taught. Yes, there are pregnancies and they don't even understand the full consequences to that. They think that well fare will take care of them or their parents. They don't take into consideration what it actually takes to raise a child. Also, they are not fully educated on STD's. There are emotional affects as well. But i think the vaccination would be good for girls as a form of prevention. It is a good way for sex education, but also, it can protect them just in case they either fall in to peer pressure, or God forbid they are raped by someone who is a carrier. That is another factor to take into consideration. Yes, we can educate out kids as much as we want, but lets face it. This world is getting crazier and crazier. And more and more people are being raped. Just a thought.

Jondeflorence said...

I for one have had some personal experience with this vaccine. I work in a pharmacy, and my fiancee was contemplating getting this done. Upon further research we found out that there have been reported cases of people coming down with paralysis permanently after being injected with it. I think they were too rushed into putting this vaccine on the market. further testing should have been done instead of trying to get it out as fast as possible. I believe the govt. is too concerned with making the general public afraid of every single little symptom, thus tightening its grip by providing more and more "miracle cures." Never take anyones word for anything, always do your own research before you make a decision that may affect the rest of your life.

Jondeflorence said...

I for one have had some personal experience with this vaccine. I work in a pharmacy, and my fiancee was contemplating getting this done. Upon further research we found out that there have been reported cases of people coming down with paralysis permanently after being injected with it. I think they were too rushed into putting this vaccine on the market. further testing should have been done instead of trying to get it out as fast as possible. I believe the govt. is too concerned with making the general public afraid of every single little symptom, thus tightening its grip by providing more and more "miracle cures." Never take anyones word for anything, always do your own research before you make a decision that may affect the rest of your life.

Kung fu Hustla said...

If this vaccine is going to help against a threat that will protect them in the long run, than i think it should be required with all the other required vaccination. This can help prevent STD's, and also lower the rate for infectedness.

Kung fu Hustla said...

Comment on alexandra I dont agree with letting the child make the decision or the parent of the child to make the decision. First of all the child is not going to want to have a flu shot or any kind of shot, because as most children dont even like shots.And second this is a vaccine that will help the child later on in life. And if parents dont want to do it its very irresponsible of the parent.

chris martinez said...

I also agree with Monica. I think that the shot Guardasil should be mandatory unless refused by the parents. When I was younger I dreaded to think of the day when my parents were going to talk to me about sex. I bet some parents didnt even talk to their kids about the birds and the bees, some kids might ask their parents if they are that curious, but I think mostly kids are too nervous or scared to ask and not educated enough on "safe sex practice" or "abstinance".

chris martinez said...

With this being said and young teens being curious and facing peer pressure would cause them to make poor choices.However, some of the choices youths make by being curious and uneducated about sex will cause teens to suffer the consequences because their parents failed to have the talk about sex and educate them as to help them make more hopeful choices for their future. Conclusively, i beleive that we should make the vaccince mandatory. Also promote abstinence and raise our sexual awarness levels whithout promoting teens to think its alright to engage in promiscuous manors. It would be a huge step to prevention through informing and make our youths aware.

anthony kolodziej said...

I personally think that it should be put in the parents hands on whether the child receives the shot or not. What if they gave the shot to the child without the parents consent and for some reason the child reacts to the shot.

anthony kolodziej said...

I can side with what alexandra if sexual education is given the right way. It is the parents job to talk to their children to prevent those children that are willing to give in to peer pressure at such a young age.

irishbabe said...

i believe that the descion of the vaccine should be left up to the parents. the governmnt should not be able to say what is best for a child that is up to the parents to decide how they want to teach there child right and wrong good and bad.

irishbabe said...

i agree with jeje21 when they said the vaccine should be given when the chil is 14-15 yrs old. because is the time when most hit maturity physically. if it promotes a healthy future i dont see why the parent would not have there child take the vaccine