English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

10 answers

I believe that they should. We have been receiving vaccines as children for years that have helped. Smallpox for example.

HPV is the most common venereal disease and most people carry the virus in their system. There are some forms that can have a greater effect on health. By getting the shot you help protect yourself from getting cervical cancer.

Even if a girl is not sexually active she should be concerned about the the future as well as the possibility of rape and staying safe.

2007-03-29 12:51:16 · answer #1 · answered by ith0 2 · 0 0

I think that in making someone to get a humanpapillomavirus shot is not right but it could come to a time that it can be recommended and beneficial. The harmful side effects of mercury is not present and has shown to alleviate cervical cancer or limit those chances in the future.It comes in 3 separate doses and is recommended to be given to girls between the agesof 11 and 12. It can be done between 13 and 26 but it is probably showed more effectiveness at the ages of 11 and 12. Now no one should tell someone else what to do when it is concerning something medical unless human life is in danger.It comes in a period of 3 doses. The next one should be given 2 months later and the 3rd one given 6 months later.The dosage amount therefore will not be overloading . But it should be discussed in the family home and I am assuming you are a minor and I hope that the decision will be beneficial for you.

2007-03-29 13:06:06 · answer #2 · answered by Dave aka Spider Monkey 7 · 0 0

No.
1. The shot does NOT mean you won't get cancer.
2. You will need boosters because it does not last forever.
3. It's very, very new and basically untested, Wait a bit!
4. I think most people have already been exposed before they have sexual contact. Day Care? School? etc. It's NOT only sexual contact that exposes you but any skin to skin contact and kids do that a LOT as kids (and with their parents and with every item in the room, and their dogs, cats horses etc etc)
5. It's a scare tactic by the pharmaceuticals to get everyone to pay for the shot before the down side is exposed to all. (Viagra, Viox et al)
6. 95% of the population is already immune and you can be tested for that which is cheaper than getting the shot.

2007-03-29 13:01:41 · answer #3 · answered by MissWong 7 · 0 0

Coming from someone who has HPV and resulting cervical cancer, I'd say let the girl decide whether or not she wants it, after thoroughly educating her on the pros and cons.

The issue of the HPV (Human Papilomavirus) vaccine (called Gardasil) has been chucked into issues of ethics and morality- though it shouldn't be that way, in my opinion. Had there been a vaccine when I was in middle school, I would've jumped at the chance to get it. However, that is not the case for everyone.

There is one issue I have about Gardasil, though: it was just newly released onto the market without much study of the side-effects. In my opinion, it should've been researched more.

But, different strokes for different folks, I guess...

2007-03-29 12:49:08 · answer #4 · answered by abark23 1 · 1 0

No, you never know what kind of side affects a vaccine could cause. Also, it doesn't seem like middle schoolers would get cervical cancer, though they may get HPV.

Anyway, who would pay for it? The school? I think most informed women would choose to get the HPV shot, but at this time it should still be a choice.

2007-03-29 12:47:54 · answer #5 · answered by spidermilk666 6 · 0 1

It should be free for those girls who want it, but I think it is a little crazy that we are assuming they will eventually have sex. I am 19 and married, and I didn't have sex with anyone until they were fully tested themselves. This was because I was educated. I don't need the vaccine because I won't be exposed to the strains it protects against unless I am raped.
I will eventually support it, but only after it has been around for 10-20 years. It is so new right now that they don't even know if it wears off after 5 years, and whether girls will need boosters for it! Time will tell, but I don't think we should be using middle school girls as guinea pigs.

2007-03-29 12:57:42 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

No. There is no logical reason to require girls to get this shot in order to attend school. It is not something that they can contract at school, therefore they are not a risk for infecting other students. If they or their parents decide that they should be vaccinated, then great, but it is not the school or government's decision. Furthermore, there is no concrete proof that HPV causes cervical cancer.

2007-03-29 12:43:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I think that they need to study the shots more before they require anything. But im my school district there are like 6th graders that are pregnant so girls are having sex at a young age and if they arn't going to protect themselvs against other transmitted diseases than they should at least protect themselves from this one.

2007-03-29 15:51:51 · answer #8 · answered by xpurple_56x 1 · 0 0

No, maybe in SOME schools, but schools with kids... I'm not trying to be racist but you know what I mean when I say this, like Mexican or something (U KNOW WAT I MEAN! I'm not racist!) then there is usually more of a possibility, like I know high school kids who r white who r virgins, i know a Mexican kid who lost their virginity in 5 grade. Well, so maybe city schools, not really though.
So no...

2007-03-29 12:47:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

yes...

--- It's just a seccond stage of protection... always use a rubber ---

2007-03-29 13:11:15 · answer #10 · answered by Amrit S. 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers