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

why after 26 old we cant???

2007-10-10 08:23:53 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Health Diseases & Conditions STDs

3 answers

You can, but it would be an off-label use, and your insurance won't cover it.

For starters, off-label use isn't inherently bad. Cosmetic Botox started out as an off-label use. Off-label, however, simply means that the FDA hasn't specified that you can use a drug for that particular purpose and therefore cannot 100% confidentally and officially endorse it.

The reason that Gardasil is not licensed for use in women over 26 is that the vast bulk of women who get HPV will acquire the infection while in their teens or early 20s. If you haven't gotten it by then, then statistically speaking, you're not likely to ever get it. The researchers at Merck focused their clinical trial on the most susceptible population, which is adolescent and young adult women. Because this was their study population, once the trial was completed, the FDA licensed the drug specifically for that group.

However some people just beat the odds and pick it up later in life anyway. And those people should be allowed to protect themselves with Gardasil. You can ask your physician to give you the vaccine, but you'd better have $450 ready and available to pay for it, and your doctor needs to be sympathetic to your needs. Some docs simply will not give any medication under an off-label use.

For everyone else, you can sit tight if you want. Trials are underway to test Gardasil in males. And yes, there are trials for women over 26, too. Assuming those trials will be comparably successful, the license for Gardasil should be widened to include these groups.

//
ADDENDUM to address what t.a. said.

Gardasil was shown to be 100% effective in its 3-year-clinical trial. In the context of a clinical trial, 100% effectiveness is RARE, and 3-years is actually a long time to run a trial. If we ran trials for longer, we'd never have new antibiotics and new cancer drugs. Likewise, we'd never get new vaccines.

Three deaths is unfortunate, but what judicial Watch fails to point out is that when you compared vaccinated people versus unvaccinated people, the risk of death is the SAME. What Judicial Watch also doesn't mention is that a few of the deaths in people who got Gardasil were due to CAR CRASHES. I assure you, Gardasil cannot crash your car.

Lastly, if 3 deaths sounds scary to you, thev consider this: 4000 women will die of cervical cancer this year. FOUR THOUSAND WOMEN.

I'm glad I got my Gardasil.

2007-10-10 09:39:25 · answer #1 · answered by Gumdrop Girl 7 · 0 0

The drug company only tested the drug on woman in that age group. Their thinking was that the vaccine should be given before a woman becomes sexually active. Also there is a large number of woman you have already been exposed to the HPV viruses that are protected by the vaccine. The company is now doing studies in older woman and the age range may be changing. In the meantime your doctor can still give you the vaccine regardless of your age or your past exposure to HPV.

2007-10-10 16:40:49 · answer #2 · answered by abraham1976 2 · 0 0

The vaccine is ineffective and dangerous.
Did you know that?
You see, you will not be told that by the vaccine manufacturer. Their job is to separate you from your money. The only thing you will find on their site is propaganda so they can make money.

1,637 adverse reactions have been reported by Judicial Watch, a public interest watchdog, including three girls who died shortly after receiving the immunization. Judicial Watch obtained the reports from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration using the Freedom of Information Act.

This inf is a little dated. There have been additional deaths and many many more adverse reactions.

Do yourself a favor and visit this link.

http://v.mercola.com/blogs/public_blog/T...

2007-10-11 14:22:05 · answer #3 · answered by men in black 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers