tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post8926136464837465322..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Cervical Cancer Vaccine by Executive FiatAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-26364386392312801282007-02-06T15:10:00.000-07:002007-02-06T15:10:00.000-07:00After reading this article about side affects:
ht...After reading this article about side affects:<br /><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/business/20070202-100152-9747r.htm"> http://www.washingtontimes.com/business/20070202-100152-9747r.htm</a><br /><br />and reading some other information here:<br /><a href="http://blogs.modestlyyours.net/modestly_yours/2006/10/gardasil_marche.html">http://blogs.modestlyyours.net/modestly_yours/2006/10/gardasil_marche.html</a><br /><br />I do not think that is it right to try to force this on people, or to convince governments through huge lobbying efforts and advertisements. <br /><br />I agree with your comment about the logcal fallacy, but I it is still relevant, especially if Merck expanded their operations on the expectation on the sale of the vaccine. <br /><br />Merck has a big stake in this being successful, so I would assign a large value to the small voices out there trying to address health risks. I have seen enough examples of profit winning over what most of us would consider ethical behavior, to not look into that possibility.<br /><br />Like you said, we do not have the time or knowledge to research this ourselves, so we rely on experts. How many times have the experts approved drugs only to later reject them due to dangerous side effects that came out after time? <br /><br />I believe it is too early to decide that every 11 year old girl should get this vaccine. It should be available to those who decide that the possible risks of the vaccine outweigh the risks of infection. Is that reasonable?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-1479603585293320092007-02-06T05:50:00.000-07:002007-02-06T05:50:00.000-07:00Lacking a degree in medicine and the time to do de...Lacking a degree in medicine and the time to do detailed research on every subject, I adopt the rule of following the recommendations of people who do have degrees of medicine and who research these issues full time.<br /><br />The Centers for Disease Control (and the unanimous recommendation of its Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices), the American Cancer Society, the Mayo Clinic, all recommend the vaccine.<br /><br />As for the costs, the Governor's resolution call for state agencies to cover the costs for those who cannot afford it (as is the case with other childhood vaccinations).<br /><br />It is my experience that when non-experts raise objections to scientific findings that have the near unanimous consent of experts, they cherry-pick and distort the data to support their conclusion.<br /><br />For example, Stickdog's Item #5 was covered in the Mayo Clinic recommendation as, "The cervical cancer vaccine has proved to be remarkably safe. The most common complaint is soreness at the injection site, the upper arm. Low-grade fever or flu-like symptoms also are common. But the effects are usually mild. No one in the clinical trials discontinued the vaccination series because of side effects."<br /><br />The fact that MERCK will profit from the vaccine is irrelevant - an example of <i>ad hominem circumstancial</i> fallacy - that is, "Your conclusion is false because you will benefit if I were to believe it."Alonzo Fyfehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-11506811519196904252007-02-06T02:29:00.000-07:002007-02-06T02:29:00.000-07:00I can fully understand the temptation on the part ...<i>I can fully understand the temptation on the part of the governor to take action. If I were governor, I would approach this issue by imagining myself sitting in the hospital room of a young woman with cervical cancer. I would imagine myself being forced to tell her, “You are in this situation because your parents were fools. Even though I could have forced them to make a wiser choice... even though you would not have been in this situation if I had done so... I choose to allow your parents to remain fools and to put your health, even your life at risk. I cannot deny some responsibility for this....”</i><br /><i>Those citizens who do not take steps to educate the population about the moral requirement to get the Legislature to approve this legislation, those are the citizens who should imagine themselves sitting at the bed of some future young woman telling her, “I could have saved you from this, but I did nothing.”</i><br /><br />Actually, that's not quite a correct analysis of the decision as enacted. Because there is an opt-out option for parents who object, the decider (whether Governor or citizen) could still end up having the same conversation with a woman with cancer. It would merely be less likely or frequent with the executive decision in force.Randyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16862162157713428951noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-50827639384727545552007-02-06T01:20:00.000-07:002007-02-06T01:20:00.000-07:00The Facts About GARDASIL
1. GARDASIL is a vaccine...The Facts About GARDASIL<br /><br />1. GARDASIL is a vaccine for 4 strains of the human papillomavirus (HPV), two strains that are strongly associated (and probably cause) genital warts and two strains that are typically associated (and may cause) cervical cancer. About 90% of people with genital warts show exposure to one of the two HPV strains strongly suspected to cause genital warts. About 70% of women with cervical cancer show exposure to one of the other two HPV strains that the vaccine is designed to confer resistance to.<br /><br />2. HPV is a sexually communicable (not an infectious) virus. When you consider all strains of HPV, over 70% of sexually active males and females have been exposed. A condom helps a lot (70% less likely to get it), but has not been shown to stop transmission in all cases (only one study of 82 college girls who self-reported about condom use has been done). For the vast majority of women, exposure to HPV strains (even the four "bad ones" protected for in GARDASIL) results in no known health complications of any kind.<br /><br />3. Cervical cancer is not a deadly nor prevalent cancer in the US or any other first world nation. Cervical cancer rates have declined sharply over the last 30 years and are still declining. Cervical cancer accounts for less than 1% of of all female cancer cases and deaths in the US. Cervical cancer is typically very treatable and the prognosis for a healthy outcome is good. The typical exceptions to this case are old women, women who are already unhealthy and women who don't get pap smears until after the cancer has existed for many years.<br /><br />4. Merck's clinical studies for GARDASIL were problematic in several ways. Only 20,541 women were used (half got the "placebo") and their health was followed up for only four years at maximum and typically 1-3 years only. More critically, only 1,121 of these subjects were less than 16. The younger subjects were only followed up for a maximum of 18 months. Furthermore, less than 10% of these subjects received true placebo injections. The others were given injections containing an aluminum salt adjuvant (vaccine enhancer) that is also a component of GARDASIL. This is scientifically preposterous, especially when you consider that similar alum adjuvants are suspected to be responsible for Gulf War disease and other possible vaccination related complications.<br /><br />5. Both the "placebo" groups and the vaccination groups reported a myriad of short term and medium term health problems over the course of their evaluations. The majority of both groups reported minor health complications near the injection site or near the time of the injection. Among the vaccination group, reports of such complications were slightly higher. The small sample that was given a real placebo reported far fewer complications -- as in less than half. Furthermore, most if not all longer term complications were written off as not being potentially vaccine caused for all subjects.<br /><br />6. Because the pool of test subjects was so small and the rates of cervical cancer are so low, NOT A SINGLE CONTROL SUBJECT ACTUALLY CONTRACTED CERVICAL CANCER IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM -- MUCH LESS DIED OF IT. Instead, this vaccine's supposed efficacy is based on the fact that the vaccinated group ended up with far fewer cases (5 vs. about 200) of genital warts and "precancerous lesions" (dysplasias) than the alum injected "control" subjects.<br /><br />7. Because the tests included just four years of follow up at most, the long term effects and efficacy of this vaccine are completely unknown for anyone. All but the shortest term effects are completely unknown for little girls. Considering the tiny size of youngster study, the data about the shortest terms side effects for girls are also dubious.<br /><br />8. GARDASIL is the most expensive vaccine ever marketed. It requires three vaccinations at $120 a pop for a total price tag of $360. It is expected to be Merck's biggest cash cow of this and the next decade.<br /><br />These are simply the facts of the situation as presented by Merck and the FDA.<br /><br />For a more complete discussion on GARDASIL with sources, click on my name.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-91166300423810166472007-02-05T11:55:00.000-07:002007-02-05T11:55:00.000-07:00As a Texan, I agree completely with both your poin...As a Texan, I agree completely with both your points. If I had a daughter, I would have her vaccinated. I think any parent that wouldn't is guilty of neglect.<br /><br />Also, I agree that Governor Perry should let the state legistature make this call. The only exception would be if the legislature has already vested the executive with the power to enforce vaccinations. I don't know if this is the case, but it's a possibility.<br /><br />I'm surprised that Perry did this. He is very religious, and this seems to fly in the face of the opinion of most christians on this subject.<br /><br />BTW, I've met Perry, and while he seems very nice, I'd really prefer that he stop signing legislation in churches.Curiosishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14499563937438812742noreply@blogger.com