Apparently some people in Texas think it's horrible that researchers now have the power to prevent the suffering and death that results from cervical cancer. They think that it will encourage young girls to have sex.
Let me ask you this:
If the risk of
*pregnancy,
*the transmission of a wide variety of sexually transmitted diseases,
*suffering physical pain as a result of losing virginity,
*getting caught by friends or family,
*or having friends and family otherwise finding out
didn't stop teenage girls from having sex, what makes you think that cervical cancer, a disease that is caused by a virus that may or may not be transmitted and may or may not cause cancer decades in the future stop them?
That's like saying it would be more beneficial for society to NOT have an a vaccine for lung cancer because it would encourage people to start smoking.
But why stop there? Why not protest a vaccine for all cancers because it might encourage people to eat Plutonium?
2007-02-25 14:46:00 · 7 answers · asked by Think. 3 in Health ➔ Other - Health
Basically there are a lot of ignorant hypocritical idiots in the world!
I live in Australia, and really dont know of anyone against it!
I am a survivor, of cervical cancer. Just. Its was the worst thing i have ever been through and would not wish it on my worst enemy!
I would never withold this miricale from my daughters!
Wouldent you think that these close minded parents are in a way commiting child abuse?? They are withholding a treatment that could save their daughters lives!!Therefore putting their girls at risk!!
I personally would rather run the chance that my girls will have sex than run the risk of them going through what i did or dying or having a hystorectomy, and not getting the chance of having their own children! How would you ever forgive yourself???I couldent.
I think that the way we raise our girls and the morals we instill in them would have more effect on their behaviour than withholding a life saving immuinisation!
Wow!!!!..........some people hey?
2007-02-25 15:06:13 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I am a 43 year old survivor of cervical cancer. I had a full hysterectomy at 40. They had to slice me from hip to hip in order to go into my abdomen to check the lymph nodes to see if the cancer had spread. It was very painful and I have an ugly scar.
My daughter contracted HPV during her first sexual experience at 17. This virus is so prevalent that 75% of sexually active adults get it during their lives. It doesn't always cause cancer, but it happens to about 15% of women who get the virus.
The vaccine is only good if it is administered BEFORE a person has caught the virus, so it's best done when someone is still a virgin.
I can understand people worrying about the safety or the effectiveness or the cost of the vaccine, or being forced to have any kind of vaccine by the government.
But most of the people who are protesting are religious nuts who seem to think if they keep their kids ignorant they won't have sex.
That is just plain stupid. Your daughter is going to have sex at some point in her life, unless she becomes a nun. Even if she saves herself until marriage, who is to say her husband doesn't have HPV?
Once the vaccine has been proven to be safe and effective, why wouldn't you vaccinate your kids?
Stupid...
2007-02-25 15:30:35 · answer #2 · answered by magicalpossibilities 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The problem in Texas was that the school district was going to make it MANDATORY to have the vaccine before going into 6th grade. You know how people are when they are told something is mandatory. We are a people that treasure our right to choose. That was the issue; not that the vaccine is bad per se'. but that they HAD to get it. This was compounded when it was discovered that Merck, the maker of the vaccine was secretly pushing for the mandate. This would give them a sure fire huge profit for an already expensive product. Yes, there are people that disagree with giving their sweet daughters a shot to prevent an STD, but the reason for the protest was that it was mandatory. hope this clears things up.
2007-02-25 15:36:21 · answer #3 · answered by Yo C 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm right there with you. It's like telling me to take a million dollars and me going crazy saying that you can't force me to take it. It can only benefit. I am a 19 year old virgin and I would get the vaccine in a heartbeat. Who knows what make come in the future? This vaccine could save millions of lives and it's a shame that some ignorant parents that think their "babies" are innocent are fighting so hard to stop it.
2007-02-25 15:16:38 · answer #4 · answered by crazyjen 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The debate isn't about preventing cervical cancer, it's about the unknown long term effects of the vaccine. What good is it if it creates the possibilty of a brain tumor 30 years down the road?
2007-02-25 14:54:53 · answer #5 · answered by xtowgrunt 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Parents should have the right to refuse the vaccine! If a family teaches abstinence, they should not be forced by the government to have a vaccine. All vaccines have associated risks.
2007-02-25 14:48:42 · answer #6 · answered by ccguy 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's all about rights......The right to an abortion, whether it be right or wrong. The right to have or have not this vaccine, whether it be right or wrong. This is the USA---it is all about RIGHTS!
2007-02-25 14:50:47 · answer #7 · answered by cdpaso 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋