The Cervical Cancer Vaccine

first of all, I would love to believe that vaccines actually infer lifetime immunity but that hasn't always proved to be the case and this is a very new vaccine.
If you are using a condom you aren't going to catch a sexually transmitted disease which is what HPV is. So far, I don't see the need to vaccinate for this. I remember the days when they used to say that you got cervical cancer if you were promiscuous, that there was a connection between multiple partners and this disease.
I caught HPV by having unsafe sex. I had it back before we knew there was a connection between HPV and cervical cancer. I had mild cervical dysplasia that was treated more than 20 years ago.
I want my daughter to have safe sex all the time.

More important that vaccinating against HPV, IMO, is to make sure that all women, from the time they are sexually active need to get regular pap tests done. My husband works in cancer research and he says that main reason that there is a public campaign to vaccinate against HPV is because not all women are getting regular pap tests. Cervical cancer, if detected early by a pap test, is a curable disease. He also says that cervical cancer is a rare response to a common infection. Many young women get HPV, their immune systems deal with it and they never get any cervical anomalies at all.
Another question, men are the ones who carry HPV, they could be vaccinated too or instead.

Knitting Woman, I have just one thing to say:
One out of Four.
Your daughter may never *intend* to have unprotected sex. But millions of women have unprotected sex forced upon them.

We vaccinate, so it's not that issue with me. And it's not the sex issue; I really doubt my DD would go out and have sex because she's had the vaccine. I really think that pregnancy is the foremost concern in that situation; kids don't think about disease, in my humble opinion.

I am concerned about the safety factor. How much testing has been done on this vaccine? What horrific side affects could turn up years down the road? I remember the drug given to women for morning sickness in the '70s. No one thought it was harmful, but then some babies were born with birth defects from it. I would just like to see some more testing and some irrefutable evidence that it is 100% safe for my daughter.

Vonnie

Clairee: The only thing that separates us from the animals is our ability to accessorize.

"Steel Magnolias"

I second all you mom's that have concerns about safety. The "requirement" clause bothers me as well or "ruffles" my "mother protection" instinct...just a tad. It concerns me to have our daughters requried to have a vaccine, when it all seems so new and untested. What are the long term effects, I dont think anyone knows that at this point?

I very much want my daughter (who is 14 and not yet sexually active) to start her round of these vaccines. Since they take 6 months to finish, and she has Bipolar Disorder Type I, I do worry about her making a bad choice on impulse, although she is not planning to have sex anytime soon. (Whew!)

I'm of mixed minds about requiring it, though. I'm on Medicaid. Does it need to be a requirement for her to get it for free? Or can she get it because I want her to? Her ex-physician said we'd have to order it; he feels our rural/conservative area won't have enough interest to keep it around. Knowing how common HPV is, having it when I was only 25, and having part of my cervix removed (burnt off, actually ) are reasons I want her to get it. They are also reasons I don't understand why parents __who aren't against vaccination in general__ don't want their daughters to have it.

HPV accounts for about 99% of cervical cancer. And though it usually isn't mentioned, this vaccine can protect males (and more females, since you sleep with everyone your partner has slept with), by reducing the rate at which women pass it on. Would so many people be against their sons getting it, I wonder? And how can information and shots (what fun those are) create a desire to go have sex? This is an argument I find ridiculous, especially when lack of info has been shown to increase activity and teen pregnancy.

Flu vaccine, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051221091232.htm : "In a commentary on the studies, Professor Paul Glezen of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston said: "During the period from 1989 to 1997 the vaccination rate for people aged over 65 in the US increased from 30 to 67 per cent. Despite this increase, mortality and hospitalisation rates continued to increase rather than decline as would be expected if the vaccine was optimally effective."
So the flu vaccine isn't doing so great--the article recommends vaccinating school kids, because they transmit it to more people.

Chicken pox vaccine, http://larchmontgazette.com/2006/teenhealth/20061026vaccinenew.html : Changing the recommendations for the vaccine, to add another, because it isn't working as well as expected. The goal is adding another for the 4-6 year range, since teens are getting chicken pox--another group which can easily transmit it to a large number of people.

Cervical cancer is CANCER. They finally came up with a way to lower a very common cancer rate. Who would deny their child a cancer vaccine? Would it make a difference if it were breast cancer, prostate cancer, or pancreatic cancer?

Parents keep their contagious kids home--we hope--and teach them to avoid sick people. Parents are the ones who convey information--we hope--and values about sexual activity. The chance of not getting cancer, giving someone an STD, and possibly decreasing their daughter's ability to carry a child to term.... Again, why say no?

HPV vaccine,