Vaccine Watch - Cervical Cancer Vaccine

[Guest guest]

A few of us, on another list, have been ranting about the possibility that

Gardasil, a vaccine which the FDA is being urged to approve by a federal

advisory panel, may also be positioned as a vaccine that each state should

mandate for girls, ages 13-19.

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060519/NEWS01/605\

190339/1190/NEWS

Here's another spin on the issue printed in the 3/01/06 issue the Sojourners

online rag blaming the Religious Right for urging that the vaccine NOT be

approved because the Religious Right's reasoning is it may promote

promiscuity. Being a conservative Christian, I'm simply hung up on the idea

there's yet another vaccine they want to try to pump into our children -

that's the core issue, so if the Religious Right IS going down the sexual

promiscuity path, they're missing the boat. And Sojourner's, on the left,

is completely missing it also. The issue is STOP the insanity with the

vaccines already!!!

Here's the Sojourners RR bashing.....

The Religious Right's vaccination vexation

by Batstone

When it comes to teen sex, all parents hope and pray that their children

make wise choices. Children as young as 12 or 13 weigh decisions with

consequences that could impact the rest of their lives in a dramatic way. At

this point in the conversation our teenage children roll their eyes, but

parents know the risks to be real.

Parental anxiety therefore is unavoidable, all the more so because they

realize that the ultimate choices their teens make about sex are beyond

their control. That begs a question: If a child violates the moral code that

parents set, are those parents willing to put their child's life in mortal

danger? Tragically, some Christians are willing to answer, " Yes. "

A little-known debate is smoldering at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration

that may burst soon into a major fire. Two pharmaceutical companies - Merck

and GlaxoKline - have designed a cervical cancer vaccine. In clinical

trials the Merck drug, Gardasil, is proving to be up to 100% effective in

fighting the dominant strain of the virus causing cervical cancer. The

pharmaceutical companies and a growing movement of public health advocates

want all girls to be inoculated with the vaccine as they presently are for

other high-risk viruses.

The Family Research Council is leading a charge of Religious Right groups to

halt any such national inoculation program. Their resistance is driven by

fear more than common sense. The human papilloma virus (HPV) that generates

cervical cancer is most typically passed along through genital contact with

others. So as long as an individual does not engage in sexual intercourse,

he or she should be shielded from the virus. The Religious Right bloc

concludes that offering a vaccine for HPV would undercut their promotion of

sexual abstinence for adolescents.

In that spirit, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, told

*Fortune* magazine that he would not allow his 13-year-old daughter to be

inoculated. " It sends the wrong message, " Perkins said. " Our concern is that

this vaccine will be marketed to a segment of the population that should be

getting a message about abstinence. "

Globally, cervical cancer kills more than 270,000 women each year - roughly

80% of them in developing countries. The Centers for Disease Control reports

that as many as 3,700 women in the U.S. died of cervical cancer last year,

and tens of thousands more had their lives completely transformed by a

radical treatment regimen for the disease. The majority of those women are

African-American or Hispanic, and poor.

Religious Right groups are not seeking to ban the drug. They simply do not

want the vaccine to be slotted as an inoculation that every child receives

as they presently do for polio and smallpox.

Because these groups link cervical cancer so intimately with illicit sexual

activity, a mandated vaccination feels to them like a family values choice

would be imposed upon them by the state.

We abide by public health standards for the sake of the common good, of

course. In the U.S., we require motorists to wear seat belts and children to

be inoculated. It would be equally shortsighted to oppose a vaccine for HIV

if one existed. So the question here is whether the transmission of HPV is a

universal public health risk. The question of state imposition is a straw

man argument.

But more importantly, the Religious Right is wrong to so closely tie

cervical cancer to promiscuity. A woman might be chaste her entire life,

then marry and pick up the virus from her husband. It also is more than a

bit naïve to believe that a child will abandon abstinence once they have

received a vaccine. If a teen's only deterrent for engaging in sexual

activity is a fear of communicable diseases, they are likely to turn to sex

with protective devices.

I would go a step further and challenge the Religious Right to temper their

moral commitments with grace. It is the right and duty for parents to set a

moral path for their children. It pains me that so many parents abdicate

that responsibility. But we also offer protection and mercy for lapses in

judgment.

It is a daring journey raising children. It is our role to guide, model, and

protect. Parents teach values, but kids make the decisions. I would hope

that love and grace await our children at each destination.