[asa] HSLDA Opposes Mandatory HPV Vaccine in Colorado

From: Rich Blinne <rich.blinne@gmail.com>
Date: Sat Mar 03 2007 - 11:42:49 EST

Note the following E-lert:

> ============================================================
> ========== From the HSLDA E-lert Service...
> ============================================================
> ==========
> February 27, 2007
> Colorado: Bill Requires New Immunization Reporting For
> Pre-Teen Girls
> Dear HSLDA members and friends,
> The Colorado Legislature is considering a bill that would
> require all female students over the age of 12 to receive
> information about the link between human papillomavirus
> (HPV) and cervical cancer, and the availability of the HPV
> vaccine. These girls would then have to present evidence
> that they have been immunized against four types of the
> human papillomavirus (HPV) that are mainly transmitted by
> sexual contact or evidence that the parent has elected for
> the girl to not receive the vaccine.
> Immunizing young girls with a vaccine that is being
> questioned by doctors about its lack of effectiveness
> should not be paid for by taxpayer dollars. Even the
> pharmaceutical company, Merck, is no longer lobbying for
> these bills, such as S.B. 80, because of the short-term
> effectiveness of this vaccine.
> Senate Bill 80 has passed the Senate Committee on Health and
> Human Services and has been sent to the Senate
> Appropriations Committee for a hearing on Friday, March 2,
> at 7:30 a.m., Room SCR 356. The Appropriations Committee
> will only address cost and funding issues. If it passes the
> Appropriations Committee, it will be heard by the full
> Senate.
> We are working with Treon Goossen with Concerned Parents of
> Colorado to oppose this bill.
> Please contact the members of the Senate Appropriations
> Committee and give them this message in your own words:
> "Please oppose Senate Bill 80 which mandates that virtually
> all young girls to be immunized against HPV. Immunizing
> young girls with a vaccine that is being questioned by
> doctors about its lack of effectiveness should not be paid
> for by taxpayer dollars. Even the pharmaceutical company,
> Merck, is no longer lobbying for these bills, such as S.B.
> 80, because of the short-term effectiveness of this
> vaccine."

I hadn't commented previously because I hadn't looked into this in
detail. Then I got this forwarded to me. As usual, the need to
educate evangelical laypeople on science gets underscored, again,
because they are being fed more bogus information. Let's look at the
effectiveness question from the CDC:

> Studies have found the vaccine to be almost 100% effective in
> preventing diseases caused by the four HPV types covered by the
> vaccine– including precancers of the cervix, vulva and vagina, and
> genital warts. The vaccine has mainly been studied in young women
> who had not been exposed to any of the four HPV types in the vaccine.
> The vaccine was less effective in young women who had already been
> exposed to one of the HPV types covered by the vaccine.
> This vaccine does not treat existing HPV infections, genital warts,
> precancers or cancers.
> How long does vaccine protection last? Will a booster shot be needed?
> The length of vaccine protection (immunity) is usually not known
> when a vaccine is first introduced. So far, studies have followed
> women for five years and found that women are still protected. More
> research is being done to find out how long protection will last,
> and if a booster vaccine is needed years later.
> What does the vaccine not protect against?
> Because the vaccine does not protect against all types of HPV, it
> will not prevent all cases of cervical cancer or genital warts.
> About 30% of cervical cancers will not be prevented by the vaccine,
> so it will be important for women to continue getting screened for
> cervical cancer (regular Pap tests). Also, the vaccine does not
> prevent about 10% of genital warts—nor will it prevent other
> sexually transmitted infections (STIs). So it will still be
> important for sexually active adults to reduce exposure to HPV and
> other STIs.
Are doctors opposed to this because of the lack of effectiveness? Dr.
Jon Abrahmson said the FDA advisory panel of vaccination practices is
against mandating this for school admission because you don't get
this casually at school. Note nothing about length of effectiveness.
But that's not the reason you want it mandated for middle-school
girls anyway. Dr. Chris Nyquist, a Denver pediatrician, said middle
school is the best time for girls to get the vaccine. "The prime time
for girls to get the vaccine is when they are ages 11 and 12. When
you think of the cervix of a young girl, there are cells more
susceptible to disease." Also, note that the vaccine is less or not
effective if you have already been exposed to the virus. That's why
you don't wait until after you find out your child was lying about
not being sexually active. Then the vaccine does no good.

So, where are they getting this conclusion? We are five years in and
it is still effective. FDA continues monitoring and if there is
evidence that effectiveness drops off, they will approve a booster
like other vaccines like Tetanus. There was no big campaign in
Colorado opposing the introduction of varicella vaccine on the same
grounds. Yet, the CDC FAQ on length of effectiveness said exactly the
same thing, "Is waning immunity a problem with the varicella vaccine?
The length of protection/immunity from any new vaccine is never known
when it is first introduced."

Finally, they say that Merck dropped this because of lack of
effectiveness. No, they dropped it because of collective political
pressure that caught the evangelical governor of Texas completely off
guard. Andrew Schaffly has been on the cable news networks opposing
Merck because of this would somehow promote promiscuity. You know
this name. He's the founder of conservapedia and the son of CWA
founder Phyllus Schaffly.

> Please do not identify yourself as a homeschooler but
> instead can call as a concerned parent and constituent.

Hmm. I wonder why. If the legislator finds out that you are a
homeschooler they will assume that you are irrationally opposed to
all vaccines. This opposition caused children who were neighbors of
my manager to catch whooping cough because my manager would not
vaccinate his kids. They all got whooping cough and infected the
neighborhood of the kids depending on herd immunity. It delayed
autism research -- a topic I am personally interested in because my
son is autistic -- five years running down the Thimerosal rat hole
rather than following the current Autism Genome project that recently
identified some gene combinations associated with autism.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Sat Mar 3 11:44:05 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Mar 03 2007 - 11:44:05 EST