There has been a lot of talk about Gardasil(sp?) Which is supposed to fight HPV which causes cervical cancer, and in going for check ups for teen girls, parents are now asked if they would like to have their kids vaccinated with this. But i have noticed the doctors are really antsy about telling parents where the virus actually come from. The cause for this "virus" is actually sexual activity. But on every commercial I've seen there are girls yelling they want to be "one less". While the real issue is that teen girls are subject to soo many diseases to even count on all my hands and toes from STD's(which HPV is).
Why do you think doctors would try and tiptoe the true causes from parents?
They say that the cervical cancer rate is sky rocketing, but the gardisil vaccination is only good for teen girls!
What do you think about this vaccination? Do you think it's really the answer to this cancer epidemic?
2007-04-06 14:29:51 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health ➔ Diseases & Conditions ➔ STDs
Actually, the new HPV vaccine, called Gardasil, is for ALL young women - whether they have had sex or not.
The only benefit about being a virgin is chances of that person already being exposed to HPV are slim to none compared to a person who has already had sex.
If a girl has already had sex chances of her already being exposed to HPV are greater, especially if she has had several sex partners.
Many doctors (including mine) even suggest women WITH HPV to get the vaccine. It won't cure their HPV, but it can possibly prevent them from contracting a kind of HPV they don't already have. The vaccine protects against 4 different kinds of HPV (two known to cause about 70% of cervical cancer and two known to cause about 90% of genital warts). Say, for example, a young girl only has one kind of HPV that the vaccine prevents. Theoretically if she gets the vaccine, she'll be protected from contracting the other 3 kinds of HPV that the vaccine protects against.
I don't think it seems like doctors are tip toeing around the issue - at least not the doctors I've talked to about it. When I was first diagnosed with HPV my doctor told me it was from sex, she didn't tip toe around the subject.
I think it's a great idea to have all young girls get the vaccine. I was diagnosed with HPV when I was 17 years old. I had no clue what it was or what it could cause, just like many young girls. Most young girls tend to be pretty naive about sex, STDs and pregnancy.
The same year I was diagnosed with HPV I developed cervical cancer from it. My parents were absolutely crushed. I was worried (especially being the only girl in the family) that I would never be able to have children of my own. Now I have to go to my OBGYN every 4 months. I have been doing this for the last 6 years and I have been fighting this thing ever since! Not only is it annoying but it was one of the most painful things I have ever gone through. It's an awful STD and I don't understand why so many people are against something that could save thousands of lives!
I read that in 2006, 10,000 women were diagnosed with cervical cancer. Of those 10,000 women, 4,000 of them will die from it. Why wouldn't parents want to save their girls from ever contracting such a horrible disease?
2007-04-06 21:58:42 · answer #1 · answered by Alli 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The reason why it's for teenage girls is because older women probably have already been exposed to HPV - Human Papilloma Virus -- which is what the vaccine protects against. Some forms of HPV lead to cervical cancer, so you want to innoculate early, before sexual activity starts. Most parents don't want to think of their "little girls" as having sex, so that's why doctors avoid the conversation. Oh, and a girl doesn't have to be "promiscuous" -- sex just one time with one guy could give a girl HPV.
2007-04-06 18:06:42 · answer #2 · answered by Katherine W 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm really leery of it, because it seems like it was pushed through way too fast and I don't like the idea of my daughter being a guinea pig. Who knows what the side-effects (long term and short term) of this vaccine could be? In June 2006, the National Vaccine Information Center deemed this vaccine as unsafe. See the link to the article below. Like just about everything in our society, the bottom line is $$$ -- cash for doctors, cash for the drugmakers, cash for the people who are making it required. If they were really interested in our health, they'd improve the testing for cervical cancer. A lot more women would benefit from that than will from this vaccine.
2007-04-06 14:36:21 · answer #3 · answered by Emily Dew 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The vaccine is only effective if it's given BEFORE the recipient is exposed to the virus. This is why it's recommended for teen girls. It's not possible to know exactly how many women have HPV already, but it is believed that 50% of all people who have had sex will have it at some point in their lives.
Even if a girl remains a virgin until she marries, if she marries a man at 25 who carries HPV, she could get it and later be diagnosed with cervical cancer because of it. Cervical cancer is not the death sentence it once was due to PAP smears and laser treatment, but wouldn't it be better if these girls were vaccinated against the disease before sexual activity began?
If I had a daughter I would love her enough to get her this vaccine.
2007-04-06 14:38:56 · answer #4 · answered by Elizabeth 7 · 4⤊ 4⤋
i'm rather aggravated by technique of promiscuous females because--it may't be denied--females have had a more advantageous sturdy time gaining attractiveness than men for the time of heritage, and that i do have self assurance that women are judged harsher and are envisioned to satisfy more advantageous dumb criteria in on the instant's society. it really is unlucky, and promiscuous females are frequently those who stand out, so that they finally end up giving females a foul call. Plus, they get all the boys--no longer that i choose a guy who focuses a lot on sexuality, yet nevertheless. We get a touch jealous. :) yet to each and each and every her own, extremely. i imagine it really is staggering to be a effective lady who takes administration of her sexuality, see you later because it really is risk-free.
2016-12-03 10:21:50 · answer #5 · answered by turnbough 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if there is a vaccination that works then girls should get it with the "standard" set of needles like rubella.
Parents should be aware that if a teen is going to have sex then having or not having an innoculation isn't going to make a difference.
At least they'd be protected from one thing...
2007-04-06 14:36:26 · answer #6 · answered by Green Man 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋