really have the publics welfare in mind or are they just looking to make oodles of money? What do you think about the vaccination that Merck has that supposedly will stop some virus that they say causes cervical cancer?
2007-03-29 21:21:55 · 3 answers · asked by RedSonya 3 in Health ➔ Women's Health
Do you think this vaccine should be mandatory? Why is no one worried about the consequences of this vaccine in our daughters unborn offspring?
2007-03-29 21:23:37 · update #1
just to let you know--I dropped out of Pharmacy Tech school last year but have some knowledge/experience in this area.
2007-03-29 21:35:01 · update #2
I very much worry about the consequences of this vaccine. It especially bothers me that some States are starting to make this mandatory for girls, especially those that are in 6th grade starting the next school year.
Even if I were in the age group of the girls and women that it was studied in (age 9- 26) I would not take it. The reason is because of the fact that not only do I already have issues with HPV (one doesn't have to be sexually active to get it) but I have health issues overall that would make it too risky.
I'm also older than the age group it was studied in.
As for the public's welfare, I think that one is up for debate.
2007-03-29 22:07:05 · answer #1 · answered by sokokl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. Read "Selling Sickness" by Ray Moynihan and Alan Cassells. It's available in many libraries. It'll make you think twice about filling that prescription.
2007-03-30 04:46:47 · answer #2 · answered by Steamysteam 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They only cure diseases that will make them money. Or prevent diseases that will make them lots of money. They get the most money from long treatments. To say they have public welfare in mind is not capitalistic. They need sick people to make money. They also need people to get better to build trust. All they do is gamble for the consumer to make them better or prolong the treatment.
2007-03-30 04:30:04 · answer #3 · answered by sar11572 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋