U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-04-2012, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Is that all you got out of this? I'll tell you this, a lot of people I know in the health care field are waiting before they get this vaccination as well.
Then those are people I would not want to be providing health care to me and my family.

Quote:
I already went through why it's impossible to investigate vaccine deaths after the fact. You are telling me all those reports that plain old people who report to VAERS are investigated now? And after their investigation they said the shot had nothing to do with it, people are just paranoid conspiracy freaks? After you've already compared those complaints as "hear say" in your previous posts? You aren't serious are you?
How do you investigate any death before the fact?

VAERS reports can be made by anyone, and some of them are hearsay. Some of the alleged deaths cannot be investigated because the reporting person did not even give the dead person's name! How do you investigate a death if you do not know who the dead person is? When enough information was given to do an investigation, no link between the vaccine and the deaths was found.


Quote:
The only association between the adverse event and vaccination is temporal, this means that the adverse event occurred sometime after vaccination. The adverse event may be coincidental or it may have been caused by vaccination, however they cannot make any conclusions that the events reported to VAERS were caused by the vaccine or if they were not caused by it. Do you not think if they could conclusively tell vaccine harm from other factors it wouldn't make this decision easier for parents?
When they could identify the dead person and actually do an investigation, it was found that the vaccine did not cause the death. That is what we have repeatedly told you. The investigation is done when there is enough information in the VAERS report to identify the dead person so that the records can be obtained and reviewed.

Quote:
According to you it's worth it to get a shot I'm not confident with that protects around 5000 women a year from dying of cervical cancer in the United States and it's just ridiculous of me to you to think anyone in the medical community would ignore anything that causes harm when over 100,000 people die yearly from in-hospital medical errors?
You are ignoring vaginal cancer, vulvar cancer, penile cancer, anal cancer, throat cancer, warts (they do not all go away without treatment, are uncomfortable, embarrassing, and painful to treat), and abnormal Pap smears (which are anxiety provoking, result in painful biopsies, which sometimes have adverse effects on fertility, and result in the need for more frequent Pap smears and sometimes more biopsies.

That gets it up to about 30,000 cancers per year. That ignores all the precancerous conditions that need to be treated.

I'll ignore the reference to medical errors, since it is irrelevant to the discussion and probably incorrect anyway.

Quote:
I'd say your reasoning is faulty. You obviously are justifying why you got the shot for your kids, I understand, but that's just very human of you, assuming I'm part of the conspiracy crowd for waiting on it is a real stretch though. Nice try but I'm still not getting anything out of you that convinces me not to wait. Green alien name calling isn't persuasive enough for me.

Being pro vaccines is the same as being anti vaccine. Extremist are just cause driven. I'm not an extremist, just a regular old parent. My kids have had some vaccines, the ones I deem worth it.
Those of us who support the vaccine have explained exactly why we do. If anything, I would say that your reasoning is faulty because it appears to be based on irrational fears from reading unsubstantiated internet stories. There really is no medical controversy here. The experts have shown the vaccine is safe and effective.

 
Old 02-04-2012, 07:31 PM
 
Location: BK All Day
4,480 posts, read 8,353,324 times
Reputation: 4288
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
You have already told us you had a significant abnormality at age 19. The women who get dysplasia are in their prime childbearing years. Some of them will have fertility issues related to cervical biopsies, including the biggest cervical biopsy: hysterectomy.

You have blinders on when you you just mention cervical cancer. HPV also causes vaginal, vulvar, anal. and throat cancer. Pap smears are not as good at picking up vaginal abnormalities as they are cervical.

Cervical cancer can be cured. It may involve radical surgery, chemo, and radiation therapy.

Or you can take the vaccine and greatly reduce the risk of needing that treatment.

Prevention is better than cure.

HPV vaccine is no longer experimental.
Thank you for this well written post.

Vaginal Chemo is the same chemo they use for skin cancer. It's a cream which you have to apply internally with an applicator similar to a tampon applicator. It takes layers upon layers of skin off. You have to put benzo-something on you vulva to prevent it from burning the outside of your skin. (it's the stuff you put on your nose thats white to prevent sun burn...can't think of the name.) This was every day for 2 weeks. After you are completely raw in the in side of your body you have to put the benzo-something inside in the same manner that you applied the Fluorouracil for two weeks. I couldn't use tampons for 3 months. Did I mention it was summer and I wasn't able to enjoy my backyard pool with all my friends? It was a huge bummer, thank god I have a great mom who bought me a raft to float so I wasn't totally left out. Depending on how much Fluorouracil you need it can be as expensive as $100 for one prescription.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Really? Their are kids dying around the world of hpv virus? I thought that was just swine flu?
I thought the average age for cervical cancer was over 40yrs old? I also thought around 90% of it was curable if caught early, and around 70% if it isn't.
I must be off my rocker this morning.
Guess what, no kids die of cervical cancer caused by hpv but over 30 of them have died soon after getting the shot for it this year.
Yes, there are kids dying around the world from HPV.

My kids are 32 and 34 years old. They are still my kids!

Can you show me confirmation that any of those thirty deaths were caused by the vaccine? A link to that confirmation, perhaps?

More than a quarter of a million women die from cervical cancer annually worldwide.

Add in the other female genital cancers, anal cancers, and throat cancer, and millions more women --- and men --- die.

They were someone's kids, too.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 07:56 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia View Post
Anyone know why what ... the fainting? Fainting, or syncope, is usually a response to a sharp drop in blood pressure. The body reacts defensively by passing out: getting horizontal ASAP so that blood stays in the brain. What causes the drop in blood pressure? It's an unusual but also normal bodily response to a shocking experience, such a getting a shot or seeing blood or getting upsetting news. Fainting is caused by the act of getting a shot, not by what's in the shot.
Exactly.

The more painful it is, the more likely you are to faint.

I know a teenager who fainted after a normal pelvic exam. It was not even a traumatic exam. She just got up off the table and passed out. Her mom says the nurse checked on her because she had not come out of the exam room, by which time she had waked up and was getting dressed. No harm done.

I also know a man who passed out after getting stitches in his hand at the emergency room. Walked out the ER door to go to his car. Clunk. He's on the sidewalk. The ER doc did not let him drive himself home.

I once fractured my arm. At the time I got to the ER, it was not hurting much, but the nurse suggested that I lie down after she took my blood pressure. It was a wee bit low and she did not want me to pass out.

Fainting does not mean you have a neurological abnormality.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 08:01 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,393 posts, read 29,817,769 times
Reputation: 14503
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
Yes, there are kids dying around the world from HPV.

My kids are 32 and 34 years old. They are still my kids!

Can you show me confirmation that any of those thirty deaths were caused by the vaccine? A link to that confirmation, perhaps?

More than a quarter of a million women die from cervical cancer annually worldwide.

Add in the other female genital cancers, anal cancers, and throat cancer, and millions more women --- and men --- die.

They were someone's kids, too.
\
Please post your supporting data on HPV deaths.

Thank you
 
Old 02-04-2012, 08:10 PM
 
32,538 posts, read 29,471,746 times
Reputation: 32249
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohiogirl22 View Post
Vaginal Chemo is the same chemo they use for skin cancer.


I've seen what that cream does to skin when it's used for skin cancer and I know the treatment is tremendously painful.

Thank you for sharing your story with us ohiogirl. I hope there are people reading this and learning about what happens in real life when people have to suffer through treatment to regain their health. You are a very brave woman.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post

eastwestagain:There is logical reasoning and available scientific data on the HPV vaccine.

Poppysead:Reasoning? That if we get rid of A then we won't have to worry about C? Is that what you mean by reasoning? If not I don't get this part. Sorry.
Well, yes, that is what it means.

If you get rid of HPV (A), you do not get dysplasia (B) and then you do not get cancer (C).


Quote:
eastwestagain: Whether there is enough longitudinally for an individual's comfort is another question.

poppysead: This is it exactly it for me. I am concerned with the development of persons or groups over time, I need to wait to be comfortable. Which I have stated repeatedly.
But the observation of very large groups over a much shorter time tells the same thing as observing a small group over a long time.

The fallacy is that you are assuming that it will take years for adverse reactions to the vaccine to become apparent. That means you do not think any of those adverse reactions will happen near term. But that is not the way adverse reactions to drugs work. Some people will have them right away, others might take longer. Based on vaccines as a group, serious adverse effects are more likely to happen sooner than later. If the adverse effect is rare, you might never see it in a small group, even if you follow that group for many years. You may just not have anyone in the group susceptible to that particular side effect.

Once you get very large groups, and about 35 million doses of HPV vaccines have been given, you are more likely to have susceptible people in your group and see the adverse effects.

And if you still do not believe the science that says HPV vaccines will prevent cancer, then you may as well stop getting Pap smears, because you are saying you do not believe in the science behind Pap smears. It is not necessary to wait 20 years to be absolutely sure the number of cancers will go down.

Quote:
eastwestagain:But using unsubstantiated VAERS reports as if they were conclusive is not logical reasoning. Using anecdotal evidence from alleged adverse reactions to the vaccine while concurrently dismissing anecdotal evidence from those taking the vaccine without incident or who suffered from HPV is not logical reasoning.

poppysead:This is science at it's best actually. Unless you watch over everyone who gets this vaccine like rats in a cage for a period of years you have know way of knowing.
Eastwestagain is referring to the use of internet stories as your source of information. This is absolutely the worst way to make medical decisions. There is no science in it at all. Many internet stories are just people who are desperately seeking answers to fundamentally the question, "Why did this happen to my child?" A rare few are actually scams, and it can be hard to detect those.

As I have already stated, it is not necessary to watch for many years to get the information we need to make a rational decision to use the vaccine now. The reassurance comes from the very large number of people who have taken the vaccine without adverse effects worldwide.

And the people in the original studies are being followed. They will be followed for years yet. And the people in those studies are not getting sick or dying from the vaccine.


Quote:
poppysead: Are you telling me that people who report side effects aren't taken seriously by anyone? So it's not conclusive or logical to even take them into consideration? It really hasn't been long enough to tell in my opinion. If it has in yours then great but this is all still emotional reasoning. The only substantiated evidence to me is that this vaccine may prevent hpv. And don't get me wrong, that is great. That is it so far, so I'm not making my decision on hope, I am not going to assume vaccines are a perfect science because they aren't. Sounds logical to me. If you think your decisions are better than mine then great for you, if doesn't effect me and that is the way I want to keep it. You see, I think you are as wrong as you do me. So, that is how it goes with us people, we all have different logic. It's not like everyone is flocking toward this vaccine, a lot are not. That's why I asked what your motives were. Thank you for answering.
People who report side effects are taken seriously. The problem is that you are assuming that what a reporting person thought was a side effect is truly a side effect. That has to be confirmed by additional investigation after the report is received. If the person making the report does not give enough information for an investigation to be done, then that makes the report essentially worthless. Any bored person with an internet connection can log on and say, "My sister-in-law's third cousin's niece died after getting Gardasil. Sorry, I do not know her name."

That is why you cannot use the VAERS reports to support a decision not to vaccinate. That is not what VAERS is for. So, no, it is not logical to base a decision on reports that cannot be confirmed, either VAERS or the thousands of blog posts.

The VAERS reports that can be investigated have not found a connection between the vaccine and deaths or serious injury.

Quote:
eastwestagain: People are welcome to use whatever kind of reasoning they want, but let's call a spade a spade.
This is a figure of speech. It means call a spade a spade, not a club --- as in the card suits. It means you have no factual evidence to support your fear of the vaccine and you should admit it. If you are afraid of it, that is fine.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 09:12 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
This is the problem for me with getting the shot for boys specifically. Cancers develop rarely in men, even infected men, they may take years or decades to develop. Penis cancer is primarily a disease of elderly, uncircumcised men. Following boys for 50 years to see how many of them develop penis cancer is nearly impossible. So whether HPV vaccination prevents cancer in men will be difficult to prove.
You still have this misconception that it will take an inordinate length of time to see a decrease in cancer rates with the vaccine. What we will see first is a decrease in the precancerous conditions. The decrease in cancers will follow. I am not sure how you define "elderly", but the peak age is 50 to 70. The treatment can mean amputation of the penis. You might want to think about that.

Cancer of the penis

Quote:
Not only that, but we canít even be sure that vaccination prevents men from spreading HPV to their partners, itís very difficult to know what men are even infected, so correlating new infections in their partners would be logistically impossible.
If they do not catch HPV, they cannot give it to a partner, can they?

Studying HPV infections in couples may be difficult, but not impossible.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/arti...7-0616_CME.pdf

Quote:
That doesnít mean that the vaccine doesnít work, just that itís hard to prove that it works to the same degree that we require proof of effectiveness of other vaccines. They hope that it works.
We are given the choice to make ourselves. This is a good thing, some will get it some will not. I may or may not in the future. I will probably get my girls vaccinated later next year. They are not sexually active yet so I'm not in a hurry, and yes, I do know they are not, for sure.
Any vaccine has to prove its effectiveness in order to be licensed. the effectiveness is not in doubt at all.

I am happy that you are thinking about the vaccine for your girls, and I hope that you will be open to considering the information from reputable medical sources over that of internet stories when you make your decision.

Quote:
It's difficult to know, prove, that it will be effective for boys. This doesn't mean you shouldn't get it, if it's worth the try then by all means do get it. But I think this does explain why their is questions on getting it. Now for girls I can see it being easier to come to the decision regarding getting it. Boys, not so easy. Yes, you don't want your boy spreading it around but they still don't know if this will prevent it's spread. I'll stop on this note and let some others get a word in edge wise. It's worth talking about for sure. It's a unique shot to me, a bit different than the rest. IMO
Yes, it has been shown to be effective in boys. They looked for protection against warts.

FDA Approves New Indication for Gardasil to Prevent Genital Warts in Men and Boys

If it will prevent the wart causing strains, it will prevent the cancer causing strains, too.
 
Old 02-04-2012, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zimbochick View Post
Also many clean eating trends are lower in salt/sodium. Adding in a little bit of salt together with better hydration helps with those prone to fainting. It may help with the hypotension too.
OK. You now have the opportunity to do a study.

Insist that the girls eat and drink some Gatorade before their shots. See if you can prove your hypothesis!
 
Old 02-04-2012, 09:21 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,619 posts, read 26,315,697 times
Reputation: 26715
Quote:
Originally Posted by PoppySead View Post
Anecdotal evidence can be the early warning that a scientific theory has a problem. A smart scientist would explore further to discover what must be going on, to find the scientific evidence that proves what the anecdotal evidence hints at. If it is invalid so be it but we don't know yet. I'm waiting to see if it is.

You can find historical examples of serendipity that shows the importance of anecdotal evidence through out medical books, internet, etc. You can look through them for an anecdotal example of the importance of anecdotal evidence. It's been useful in biology, physics, astronomy, chemistry, even pharmacology. I don't take it lightly, or sell it short. It was of great importance in my science classes.

Anecdotal evidence definitely has a part in science. I can and will base my decision on all evidence regarding it, I won't be as selective or close minded as to leave anything out. You obviously don't agree and that's up to you but I wouldn't sell Anecdotal evidence short. It turns into a lot more scientific data than you let on. You can dismiss it all as such but I won't.

A lot of hear says turn into a study, then evidence. We will have to agree to disagree again.
But the scientist uses the anecdotal information to develop a hypothesis, then he tests his hypothesis.

Anecdotal stories by themselves should not be used to make a decision.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Parenting
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top