Why Are HPV Vaccine Rates So Low?

Tell that to that Mothers whose daughters are now DEAD, because the recieved this Vaccine. Tell that to the FDA who KNEW AND DOCUMENTED that HPV IS NOT the cause of cervical cance, Thell that to Merck who are currently litigating MASSIVE lawsuits because their last amazing drug VIOXX, which they said was safe, killed 160000 Americans. Tell that to JAMA who documented on research and trials, with end results that Gardasil was USELESS, and offer NO therepeutic benefit whatsoever. Tell that to Merck whos own documented research shows that the huge percentage of women who do have a HPV virus, the chances of increasing lesions go up 44%, increasing your chances of cancer. Tell that to Merck whos trials showed the vaccine ingredient Polysorbate 80 causes sterility in the animals it wass tested on, and why Merck had NO proof the it was safe from causing mass sterility in girls in the future when asked in the first bill before the commitee. Or how about actual documented FDA papers stating that Merck does not even know if Gardacil is safe.
Ask yourself this seriously, there are massive amounts of diseased girls after recieving Gardacil, and also dead ones. Want to gamble with your family tree coming to an abrupt end, do the math. Watch this and wake up Mothers, because Merck is lobbying to make Gardacil madatory for boys. Shots = $950 X 60,000,000 kids = lots of cash for Merck.
http://www.naturalnews.com/Report_HPV_Vaccine_7.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XK97CHQZhq0

Women have always been the ones to take care of their own health. I can't believe that women would not take this shot when it only benefits them. My daughter took all three injections willingly and with no side effects or pain. Sure injections sting but good health is the ultimate goal. My daughter is not sexually active, but in this day and age with diseases rampant, one less disease to worry about is good.

You know why I didn't get shots two and three? the damn things hurt like a MO FO

To all the non-thinkers: If you want to trust your future to a company that puts profits above you, that's your bad call. Nobody in any comment I can find stated that they should not make money. However, when all the other criteria rides on that, then once again you have the tail wagging the dog. Hey, it's just sex right? And everybody is going to participate right? Then why worry about a little old vaccination at all, that has already proven out not to be 100%. So, the way I see it: if you want to behave like a couple dogs hooked up in the front yard, hey! it's just sex. If you have that much trouble with self control, then I say: cut loose all your fantasaical desires and trust some vaccine to bail your pathetic ass out of the jam that you got yourself into.

Well parents dont fear....Sooner or later the government and pharm companies will pull there popular tactics and make it a requirement just to keep kids in school, then eventually call it misdemeanor child neglect if one doesnt have there childs immune shots updated with it. So eventually the Merck co. and Gov. will get there way.

Seriously? Are you guys even thinking about the long term benefits? Okay, the company makes money, and yes it's a sexually transmitted disease, but kids are having sex! To turn a blind eye to the fact that teenagers do engage in sexual activity is ludicrous. As a parent, you would think that your ultimate goal is to protect your children, even if you don't agree with when they decide to engage in sexual behavior, and if the vaccine could possibly greatly reduce the risk of an STD, or cervical cancer...I don't see the problem.

After having cancer as a child, (now I'm in my 20s) I knew the risks involved in not getting the Gardasil vaccine. I know what surgery and treatment are like. However, I am also aware that the vaccine was not tested long term, and the sample size was very small. In addition, I take issue with the fact that young boys are not encouraged to get the vaccine as well. It takes two people to be sexually active and everyone should feel responsible for the health of their partners. I agree with the parents who with hold from giving their children a vaccine which should be tested long term.
Also

How totally irresponsible you are. How much did Merck pay you not to mention the:

???8 more deaths connected to HPV vaccine; Adverse reactions from Gardasil number in thousands??? (World Net Daily, October 06, 2007) or

???As of June 30 2007, VAERS had received 13 reports concerning GBS after Gardasil. These 13 GBS reports are currently undergoing expert review.??? CDC/Office of the Chief Science Officer/Immunization Safety Office.

You are acting as the marketing arm of Merck by ommiting these facts. Any chance that the writer of this article previously worked at the New York Times?

This article also assumes that parents have total say over our adolescent daughter's medical care. At lest in my house, adolescents are old enough to begin making decisions about their own health care. I've a 16yr old step daughter who's sexually active and although I've advocated the vaccine to her, particularly while she's still covered by our insurance, she's having none of it. I'm in no way going to start some battle with her over a personal mecical decision that has both pros and cons. The farthest I went was to encourage her Dr. to articulate the pros and cons of the vaccine to her personally, but the decision remains in her hands. So let's not look at this issue without acknowledging that we're talking about a group of young people who are capable of exercising signifigant say in their own healthcare.

So experts are beginning to wonder whether the vaccine should also be given to boys? Well, males may not get HPV-linked cervical cancer but they certainly get genital warts and are half the equation in spreading the HPV virus. They should be strongly urged to be vaccinated as well.

I manage a pharmacy and have access to the industry publications, so was able to see the development of the vaccine as it was progressing. As soon as my insurance approved Gardasil; my daughter began receiving the vaccine (she was 13 at the time). Yes, there is a curve in any drug or vaccine, but there are also people who are more susceptible to diseases. Family history needs to be taken into account when deciding.

Is it just about sexual activity, or long term consequences? How does the vaccine react to the devloping bodies of tween and teenage girls? Have any long term studies been done to validate the saftey of the vaccine? While I can understand the good intentions of those within the pharmaceutical community to mitigate the onset of serious disease, I am reminded of another drug that was touted as a sedative for pregnant women that caused fetal abnormanlities back in the fifty's...that drug was thalidomide.

It's possible that many people are waiting to see what (if any) long-term side effects of the vaccine will be. I'm sure that some parents and young women are wary of this fact - I know I am. If the teen/young woman is not sexually active, I see no reason to go and rush out to get this vaccine. After all, as it states in the article, they don't even know how long the immunity lasts; how could they know at this point what the long-term side effects could be?

My state requires an 11 yr checkup and dpt shot. My doctor also offers the Guardisil and Menetra shot at that time. I went in planning to start the series with my twins. My insurance covers the dpt shot and Menectra but not the HPV shot. Since ins covered one of the shots I was ineligible for the state financed HPV shot and his office charges 180 per shot so the total for my twins would have been 1080.00. So we will be waiting a little longer. If i no insurance I could get it for free. I will wait until coverage gets worked out.

This vaccine is NOT a good idea! Only a tiny percent of people with HPV ever get cervical cancer. Cervical cancer is one of the most easily prevented, detected and treated of all cancers. In the first place it's impossible to get it unless you have sex. Since this vaccione only protects against 70% of the strains that cause cancer.. it is USELESS against the other 30% .. then sexually active women and girls have to get pap smears anyway. And people who get regular pap smears do NOT die of cervical cancer.. usually they don't even get it. Regular papsmears can find pre cancerous conditions beofre they become cancer. What about tose 3700 people that die of cervical cancer... they have not had regular papsmears and the majority of them have NEVER had a papsmear.

It makes no sense to make your daughter get expensive , painful shots that don't work and that she doesn't need. (Since the shot is only good for five years, giving it to baboes would be even more ridiculous). Women musy have sex to get cervical cancer and women who get pap smears don't die of cervical cancer. We must continue to inform people that girls don't need these shots and they are a very bad idea.

Every medication has its side effects. To the end its about whether the benefit out-weights the side effects. If I was the young teen, I will be very unhappy that my parents will not allow me to be vaccinated, and allow me having a higher chance to get cancer later. There is NO CURE for most of the cancers!!