Comments on: Gardasil For Boys: FDA Recommends Controversial Vaccine

By: Amanda

Amanda — Sat, 04 Jun 2011 02:07:01 +0000

It shouldn’t make you sick that parents want to keep their children safe. I vaccinate my children but they are not old enough for this one yet and i have been trying to decide which way to go. I know that the risk is slim but so is the risk of dying from cervical cancer. It just seems like they don’t want to give any kind of guarantee. If they don’t know how long it will last why do they want to give it to 10 year olds. If it lasts 5 years why not give it to 15 year olds. Maybe they need a little more time developing it. Why rush it to the public not that many people die from cervical cancer. It just seems like their motives aren’t to save lives and that makes me leery. The polio vaccine and penicillin saved many, many lives and should not be in the same argument. How many lives do you think gardasil will save? A bell curve would not be used to show people with adverse side effects so 5% tails are not necessary.

By: The Girls of Gardasil: Brittney’s Story

The Girls of Gardasil: Brittney’s Story — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 04:23:29 +0000

[...] you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic. Recently, Gardasil researcher Dr. Diane Harper spoke out against the vaccine, warning parents to decide whether the [...]

By: Cate Nelson

Cate Nelson — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 12:46:33 +0000

@RT: Please read this link:
http://ecochildsplay.com/?p=4446&preview=true
Dr. Harper, one of the researchers who pushed this vaccine, is speaking out because the SERIOUS adverse effects (not the little ones like pain and swelling at the injection site) are as many as cervical cancer deaths each year. Also, this vaccine is not proven to last longer than 5 years. Cost-benefit analysis? It’s not worth it. Of course if it protected for longer and against more types of HPV it would be. But it only protects against 2 kinds that cause cancer and another 2 that cause “lesions” (warts). And there are 100 types of HPV overall, 15 of which cause cancer.
That “89% effective” was only 7 months after the shots were given. Hardly a breakthrough. I want to see a few years after these are given, or it’s just not worth putting any of my children at risk for the serious adverse effects.
http://ecochildsplay.com/2009/09/15/the-girls-of-gardasil-brittneys-story

By: RT

RT — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:49:19 +0000

Honestly, it makes me sad and a little bit sick to see how big of a deal people are making about this vaccine just because it has to do with a sexually transmitted disease. Put somebody’s precious preteen in the same thought with sex and everyone goes bonkers.

Vaccine side effects are nothing new, people. Statistically, if you give enough people something, somebody’s going to have a bad reaction. It doesn’t matter if it’s Gardasil or the polio vaccine or penicillin or tylenol or the sushi from the restaurant down the street. Someone has to make up those 5% tails on the curve.

Although genital warts are “treatable,” they are not curable, and if you look it up you’ll find that treatments are not very effective. I mean, warts are stubborn, not to mention painful. Yeah, this vaccine is expensive, but have fun telling your son why you didn’t get him vaccinated after he catches it and has warts for the rest of his life.

By: richard

richard — Sat, 12 Sep 2009 13:16:42 +0000

I am surprised there is so much opposition to this. First of all, if I had a son (i have two girls) I would want to protect him from genital warts, which is a sexually transmitted disease. Second of all, i would like to offer my very real girls the best protection possible from HPV and cervical cancer. That includes vaccinating possible future sexual partners to prevent them from getting HPV! Seems like a no-brainer to me.

@Drew — this plan you have, for boys to keep it in their pants, how’s that going for ya? Good Luck!

By: Cate Nelson

Cate Nelson — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:31:06 +0000

@Bob
Are you asking why I personally would shy away from getting my sons vaccinated with this?
Cost benefit analysis, for me: risk of serious side effects for girls is about equal to the risk of death to cervical cancer. That’s for girls, yes. Will the adverse effects be much different for boys? In some cases, maybe. Some side effects were perhaps due to hormonal birth control pills. Otherwise, I wonder if the side effects would be less for males.

The cost isn’t the issue. Long-term health effects from a vaccine that is supposedly effective (tested for efficacy and safety 7 months after the last dose was administered) doesn’t give me peace of mind.
http://www.merck.com/newsroom/press_releases/product/2009_0909.html

Why would I want a 9- or 10-year-old boy vaccinated for HPV when the vaccine isn’t proven to last longer than 5 years? That seems crazy to me.

By: Bob

Bob — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:13:48 +0000

Here we have a case where I need the writer of the article to work a little harder or at least follow through.

Right now there is no way of knowing whether this is a good decision or a bad decision.

Are the statistics good or are they motivated by the $390 amount they want to charge?

You need to be responsible and dig deeper.

By: PureMothers

PureMothers — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:04:32 +0000

This speaks loudly of profits! Why cut yourself off from another entire market?! Let’s find a reason to add boys to the equation! This is why I do not trust pharmaceutical companies, the CDC and FDA!

By: Drew

Drew — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:36:58 +0000

I think that teaching boys to keep it in there pants would be the best course here. Being a male I understand how hard that can be, but its the greatest lesson I’ve learned. I am an opponent of most vaccines anyway so I am biased on this case but it sounds like more shoddy science to puff up pharmaceutical company profits.