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 02-06-2012, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,033 posts, read 98,948,726 times
Reputation: 31502

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia View Post
There are two other vaccines with increased likelihood of fainting in adolescents, the meningitis vaccine and the tDap (tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis). I believe the risk of fainting is present in all vaccination warnings, because it's a bodily reaction to a moment of stress and fear. Compound that with a hungry adolescent who is going through a growth spurt, and no wonder that some kids faint. My daughter takes some health occupations classes in high school (she wants to be a nurse), and her class went to observe a surgery. One kid barfed and one fainted. It's nothing to get that alarmed about.
Interestingly, those are the vaccines most frequently given to adolescents. I remember when Hepatitis B vaccine was required for 7th grade entry in CO. I worked for a health dept. at the time, and we had lots of kids fainting. It seems to be that the common denominator is adolescence, not the vaccine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JustJulia View Post
Okay. But usually these debates dwindle to mere back-and-forth. You're close-minded! No, YOU are closed-minded! Etc.

It's hard for me to respond to some topics without sounding sanctimonious--I don't know, maybe I always do despite my efforts not to. It could be that I am reading too much into the words used recently, but some of the conversation here is unkind. There's no rule that posters have to be kind, but there is one that they have to be respectful. A big part of the problem is that some posters have no respect for the other's perspective, but it's possible to be respectful of a person regardless.

I try not to weigh too heavily on hot topics, because I think it's good that we can talk about a variety of things. But after a point, everybody has said his or her piece and reinforced it a few times, so when there's nothing but jabs I feel that we're done.
Well, I agree with the bold. We should always strive to be respectful of people. It is not helpful to call people bullies, unethical and all of the things that people who are pro-vaccine, especially those who give/gave vaccines, are called. I will say these vaccine threads usually do not get as nasty as the vaccine threads on Politics and Other Controversies.

Last edited by Katarina Witt; 02-06-2012 at 08:15 PM..

 
Old 02-06-2012, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Geneva, IL
12,976 posts, read 11,809,119 times
Reputation: 14677
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Yes, it is only one of many. Did you think it isn't.

You also realize that the vaccine only protects against 4 types of HPV. There are others the vaccine does not protect against. So, what the vaccine does is, theoretically, reduce your risk of certian strains of the virus. You can also reduce your risk by not participating in risky behaviors. Wow, imagine that....UGH.

With or without the vaccine we have to teach our children to protect themselves. With or without the vaccine our dd's need to get regular pap smears to protect themselves against cervical cancers. Nothing changes if you get the vaccine except you took the risk of having the vaccine. All the vaccine does is, theortically, reduce the risk and that means it's not worth the risk. We're talking MAYBE a 70% reduction in cervical cancer rates IF the vaccine is 100% effective and, so far, no vaccine has been 100% effective. It doesn't eliminate the risk and it will be 30+ years before we know if the claims are true. That being the case, the prudent course of action is to educate our kids to the fact that certain behaviors are risky because even with the vaccine, they are still risky!!!

Why get a flu shot? Beause people die of the flu. Because the flu spreads through casual contact and contact with surfaces. The flu isn't something you can avoid by avoiding risky behaviors like HPV is....UGH.. Is this really THAT hard for you to understand? HPV does not spread like the the flu. I have no idea why you'd compare it to the flu. There is no comparison. HPV isn't something your going to pick up from a hand shake. It's an STD. You can avoid STD's and given that the vaccine does not eliminate the risk, you still need to. If nothing changes by having the vaccine, why have the vaccine?

IMO, all this vaccine will do is give a false sense of security that will result in deaths from cervical cancer going up not down. The vaccine does not make it safe to participate in sleeping around, sleeping with someoen who sleeps around or other risky behaviors like oral sex. And HPV is NOT casually transmitted like the flu. Since behavior can prevent transmission and the vaccine can't, I vote for changing behaviors. We need to educate our kids as to what can happen to them and make sure they know how to protect themselves.

I do, however, find it funny that you trash condoms because they only reduce transmission yet push the vaccine that....drum roll please....AT BEST only reduces HPV related health issues by 70%....Still trying to figure out the logic of that one....UGH.

UGH.....try harder!
 
Old 02-06-2012, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,033 posts, read 98,948,726 times
Reputation: 31502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Yes, it is only one of many. Did you think it isn't.

You also realize that the vaccine only protects against 4 types of HPV. There are others the vaccine does not protect against. So, what the vaccine does is, theoretically, reduce your risk of certian strains of the virus. You can also reduce your risk by not participating in risky behaviors. Wow, imagine that....UGH.

With or without the vaccine we have to teach our children to protect themselves. With or without the vaccine our dd's need to get regular pap smears to protect themselves against cervical cancers. Nothing changes if you get the vaccine except you took the risk of having the vaccine. All the vaccine does is, theortically, reduce the risk and that means it's not worth the risk. We're talking MAYBE a 70% reduction in cervical cancer rates IF the vaccine is 100% effective and, so far, no vaccine has been 100% effective. It doesn't eliminate the risk and it will be 30+ years before we know if the claims are true. That being the case, the prudent course of action is to educate our kids to the fact that certain behaviors are risky because even with the vaccine, they are still risky!!!

Why get a flu shot? Beause people die of the flu. Because the flu spreads through casual contact and contact with surfaces. The flu isn't something you can avoid by avoiding risky behaviors like HPV is....UGH.. Is this really THAT hard for you to understand? HPV does not spread like the the flu. I have no idea why you'd compare it to the flu. There is no comparison. HPV isn't something your going to pick up from a hand shake. It's an STD. You can avoid STD's and given that the vaccine does not eliminate the risk, you still need to. If nothing changes by having the vaccine, why have the vaccine?

IMO, all this vaccine will do is give a false sense of security that will result in deaths from cervical cancer going up not down. The vaccine does not make it safe to participate in sleeping around, sleeping with someoen who sleeps around or other risky behaviors like oral sex. And HPV is NOT casually transmitted like the flu. Since behavior can prevent transmission and the vaccine can't, I vote for changing behaviors. We need to educate our kids as to what can happen to them and make sure they know how to protect themselves.

I do, however, find it funny that you trash condoms because they only reduce transmission yet push the vaccine that....drum roll please....AT BEST only reduces HPV related health issues by 70%....Still trying to figure out the logic of that one....UGH.
B#1: This is a half-truth. Unless one has all the pro-vaccine people on ignore, one should certainly have seen the posts, with credible links, that show that these four strains of HPV cause ~75% of cervical cancers.

B#2: Well, yeah. "Certain behaviors" include having sex. When you have sex, you are having sex with all of your partner's sex partners.

B#3 Sure, you can avoid HPV by avoiding having sex. That is about the only way. Almost everyone has sex at some point in their life. I'd guess the % is about 99.9%. If 50% of people who have sex contract HPV, that is basically 50% of the population. There are other diseases we immunize against that are not transmissable person to person. Tetanus, one of the 'granddaddies' of the diseases we immunize against these days, jis not communicable person to person. Tetanus spores live in soil. You get tetanus by having a 'dirty' puncture wound and getting tetanus spores into your body. Likewise, you can get Hepatitis A from another person, but you can also get it from eating contaminated food. The food can be contaminated by sewage, as in not being washed properly, or seafood harvested from dirty water, or from eating food prepared by a food handler who has active Hep A. Hepatitis B is spread through sharing blood and other body fluids.

B#4: Au contraire, I think you are the one with the false sense of security with your talk of 'safe sex' and 'certain behaviors' to avoid.

B#5: No one said it did! In fact, again, you are indulging in a false sense of security if you think your daughters won't do that (which is probably untrue as they get older) they won't get HPV. You can get HPV from having sex with a person of the opposite sex in the missionary position. You don't have to engage in any kinky behavior to get HPV. The only behavior that can prevent transmission of HPV is abstinence.

No one is trashing condoms. Condoms may help, but they don't prevent the spread of all cases of HPV. Talk about a false sense of security!
 
Old 02-06-2012, 09:47 PM
 
Location: here
24,477 posts, read 28,789,444 times
Reputation: 31057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Yes, it is only one of many. Did you think it isn't.

You also realize that the vaccine only protects against 4 types of HPV. There are others the vaccine does not protect against. So, what the vaccine does is, theoretically, reduce your risk of certian strains of the virus. You can also reduce your risk by not participating in risky behaviors. Wow, imagine that....UGH.

With or without the vaccine we have to teach our children to protect themselves. With or without the vaccine our dd's need to get regular pap smears to protect themselves against cervical cancers. Nothing changes if you get the vaccine except you took the risk of having the vaccine. All the vaccine does is, theortically, reduce the risk and that means it's not worth the risk. We're talking MAYBE a 70% reduction in cervical cancer rates IF the vaccine is 100% effective and, so far, no vaccine has been 100% effective. It doesn't eliminate the risk and it will be 30+ years before we know if the claims are true. That being the case, the prudent course of action is to educate our kids to the fact that certain behaviors are risky because even with the vaccine, they are still risky!!!

Why get a flu shot? Beause people die of the flu. Because the flu spreads through casual contact and contact with surfaces. The flu isn't something you can avoid by avoiding risky behaviors like HPV is....UGH.. Is this really THAT hard for you to understand? HPV does not spread like the the flu. I have no idea why you'd compare it to the flu. There is no comparison. HPV isn't something your going to pick up from a hand shake. It's an STD. You can avoid STD's and given that the vaccine does not eliminate the risk, you still need to. If nothing changes by having the vaccine, why have the vaccine?

IMO, all this vaccine will do is give a false sense of security that will result in deaths from cervical cancer going up not down. The vaccine does not make it safe to participate in sleeping around, sleeping with someoen who sleeps around or other risky behaviors like oral sex. And HPV is NOT casually transmitted like the flu. Since behavior can prevent transmission and the vaccine can't, I vote for changing behaviors. We need to educate our kids as to what can happen to them and make sure they know how to protect themselves.

I do, however, find it funny that you trash condoms because they only reduce transmission yet push the vaccine that....drum roll please....AT BEST only reduces HPV related health issues by 70%....Still trying to figure out the logic of that one....UGH.
Duh Yes I know. it is one of many. I'm not sure why you would think any differently. I wasn't questioning the existence of other STDs. I was questioning your logic.

And, yes, it was discussed earlier in the thread - the 4 strains that it protects against are the 4 most dangerous kinds.

ya know, I have much more I could say, but I'm not even going to bother. It is like talking to a wall.

ETA I just read your last line. Excuse me? Please show me where I ever mentioned condoms in any context.

People die of cervical cancer too

You can teach your daughters anything you want until you are blue in the face (how's that workin out for you so far?) The fact is, the only way to avoid STD's 100% is to have sex only with her husband and for him to NEVER have had sex with anyone either. Do you REALLY think that is going to happen???
 
Old 02-06-2012, 10:19 PM
 
Location: BK All Day
4,480 posts, read 8,333,153 times
Reputation: 4288
Wow I didn't realize I was such a risk taker! After all "risky" behaviors lead to HPV right? Hmmm. had 1 boyfriend, used condoms, went for paps and STILL ended up with vaginal chemo! All you "my daughter would NEVER do that" people would quickly change your tunes when your daughter is crying because she can't pee comfortable because her whole vaginal area is swollen and raw from chemo. But I'm a risky unpure **** right? No need for vaccines!
 
Old 02-07-2012, 01:37 AM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,564 posts, read 26,178,293 times
Reputation: 26618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
You also realize that the vaccine only protects against 4 types of HPV. There are others the vaccine does not protect against. So, what the vaccine does is, theoretically, reduce your risk of certian strains of the virus. You can also reduce your risk by not participating in risky behaviors. Wow, imagine that....UGH.
The vaccine also provides cross protection against some strains that are not included in the vaccine, including types 45 and 31.The effectiveness is on the order of 20 to 25%. Types 45 and 31 account for another 10% of the cervical cancers.

http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/...C500021143.pdf

So to say that it only protects against the four types in the vaccine is not strictly true.

As has been pointed out to you repeatedly, cancer is not the only thing that the vaccine prevents. It also prevents dysplasia, or CIN. This is the condition that causes abnormal Pap smears.

Also, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the only way to avoid risky sexual behavior with respect to HPV is to not have any sexual activities of any kind. Condoms will help.

How effective are condoms in preventing HPV?

MMS: Error

"The incidence of genital HPV infection was 37.8 per 100 patient-years at risk among women whose partners used condoms for all instances of intercourse during the eight months before testing, as compared with 89.3 per 100 patient-years at risk in women whose partners used condoms less than 5 percent of the time.."

That means 38% of the women still got HPV infections even if their partners used condoms every time. The risk was almost 90% if the partner seldom used a condom.

None of the women developed cervical dysplasia if their partner used a condom every time.

However, the 38% of women who still got HPV infections are at risk for other HPV associated cancers, including vulvar cancer.

Then what happens if the woman wants to get pregnant? How do you do that and still use condoms?


Quote:
With or without the vaccine we have to teach our children to protect themselves. With or without the vaccine our dd's need to get regular pap smears to protect themselves against cervical cancers.
You still have not explained to me how you can feel so fervently about the effectiveness of Pap smears. You do not believe the science behind Pap smears. How can they work if the science is flawed?

Quote:
Nothing changes if you get the vaccine except you took the risk of having the vaccine. All the vaccine does is, theortically, reduce the risk and that means it's not worth the risk. We're talking MAYBE a 70% reduction in cervical cancer rates IF the vaccine is 100% effective and, so far, no vaccine has been 100% effective.
No vaccine will claim to be 100% effective, but the HPV vaccines are pretty darned close. In fact, if you get the vaccine before you are exposed to the covered strains, the early studies are showing 100% effectiveness.

It seems you did not bother to read this link, so I will repeat it.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biologi.../ucm111274.pdf


Look at tables 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. The study participants who did not have preexisting infections with the HPV types in the vaccine got 100% protection against cervical, vaginal, and vuvar warts and CIN due to the types in the vaccine.

In populations already exposed to HPV, the vaccine is less effective.

This is the reason to vaccinate our children before they ever have their first sexual contact.

So do not try to say the vaccine is not effective. It is probably one of the most effective vaccines ever.

You also continue to conveniently ignore the abnormal Pap smears that will be prevented by the vaccine.

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Biologi.../ucm111274.pdf

Two to three million Papsmears in the US each year will have minor abnormalities that lead to follow-up smears.

One million will show low grades of dysplasia.

And 600,000 will show high grade abnormalities.

See here for how Pap smears are done and evaluated:

http://www.mc.uky.edu/obg/divisions/...and%20PAPS.pdf

The vaccine prevents the abnormalities that cause abnormal Pap smears!


Quote:
It doesn't eliminate the risk and it will be 30+ years before we know if the claims are true.
It does not eliminate the risk, but it does reduce it 70% or more.

The vaccine prevents the abnormalities that cause abnormal Pap smears. These abnormalities reliably and predictably precede cervical cancer. If that were not true, then Pap smears would be worthless except to diagnose cancer. That is not the way Pap smears are used. They are used to find precancerous conditions. Some of those are more likely to get worse than others. Some can be followed. The vaccine prevents those precancerous conditions. The evidence for that is definitive. If you prevent those precancerous conditions, you not only will prevent cancers, you will prevent millions of abnormal Pap smears.

It is not necessary to wait 30+ years to know the vaccine will prevent cancer. We already know it will prevent pre-cancer. You do not get cancer without having the pre-cancer first.

You also ignore the fact that not everyone who gets cervical cancer is over the age of 40.

Cancer of the Cervix Uteri - SEER Stat Fact Sheets

"From 2004-2008, the median age at diagnosis for cancer of the cervix uteri was 48 years of age. Approximately 0.2% were diagnosed under age 20; 14.3% between 20 and 34; 25.8% between 35 and 44; 23.9% between 45 and 54; 16.4% between 55 and 64; 10.6% between 65 and 74; 6.4% between 75 and 84; and 2.5% 85+ years of age."

"From 2004-2008, the median age at death for cancer of the cervix uteri was 57 years of age. Approximately 0.0% died under age 20; 4.8% between 20 and 34; 15.8% between 35 and 44; 23.6% between 45 and 54; 21.3% between 55 and 64; 15.4% between 65 and 74; 12.5% between 75 and 84; and 6.6% 85+ years of age."


Quote:
If nothing changes by having the vaccine, why have the vaccine?
Your premise that "nothing changes" is false. The vaccine prevents precancer. Therefore it will prevent cancer --- and millions of women will not have to be treated for those precancers.

Quote:
IMO, all this vaccine will do is give a false sense of security that will result in deaths from cervical cancer going up not down.
That is your opinion, unsupported by any facts. Conscientious women will continue to get Pap smears. Those who are vaccinated but are not conscientious about getting Pap smears will be at lower risk.

Quote:
The vaccine does not make it safe to participate in sleeping around, sleeping with someoen who sleeps around or other risky behaviors like oral sex. And HPV is NOT casually transmitted like the flu. Since behavior can prevent transmission and the vaccine can't, I vote for changing behaviors. We need to educate our kids as to what can happen to them and make sure they know how to protect themselves.
Behavior cannot 100% prevent transmission. The vaccine can potentially prevent close to 100% from the strains in the vaccine, with a little added protection against at least two more. If you are vaccinated, you will not be infected. If you are not infected, you cannot give it to someone else.

Quote:
I do, however, find it funny that you trash condoms because they only reduce transmission yet push the vaccine that....drum roll please....AT BEST only reduces HPV related health issues by 70%....Still trying to figure out the logic of that one....UGH.
Only 70%? Do you not see how silly that sounds? It has to be 100% or it is not any good at all?

Do you only give zeros and hundreds on your students' exams?
 
Old 02-07-2012, 08:06 AM
 
Location: Boerne area
706 posts, read 1,479,070 times
Reputation: 858
Some people are squigged out, apparently, because this is an STD. 'my kid is only 9!' 'giving permission for promiscuity!' 'my child will be raised better'!.....

But unless your virgin bride/groom finds ANOTHER virgin bride/groom, you are risking your child's future health on their future partner's sexual choices. So, to me, this line of argument is weak at best. If you are choosing because of the alleged risks of the vaccine, so be it. But IMO the above argument has no merit.
 
Old 02-20-2012, 01:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
9,226 posts, read 20,253,831 times
Reputation: 6352
2 new oral cancer articles

Both are worth the read. They mention oral cancer but the same can be said for any cancer it's said to prevent. They just don't know enough about the vaccine to know.

For the record; my daughter did not have it. There are posts in the health section about side effects. I also have other links for anyone wanting more info.

Is Oral Sex to Blame for the Surge in Cancer of the Mouth and Throat?
Human papillomavirus was one of the first viruses identified in human cancers. Approximately 40 subtypes spread sexually. Two types, HPV-16 and HPV-18, account for most cases of cervical cancer in the U.S. Most women with HPV are asymptomatic and don't get cervical cancer; when and if malignancy develops, it's usually 20, 30 years or longer after initial infection. Most often, oropharyngeal cancers are caused by the HPV-16 subtype.
Note the last paragraph about the vaccine...
Deeken also supports a primary prevention, by vaccination of young people against HPV. "Hopefully in decades ahead, teenagers who are getting vaccinated now will not be developing oropharyngeal cancer," he says. "But that will be hard to prove, and it will take a long time."

More men than women have oral cancer virus - About 7 percent of adults and teens in the United States are orally infected with the human papillomavirus, or HPV, a new study says. This represents about 14.9 million people.

More men are affected than women: About 10 percent of men ages 14 to 69 have an oral HPV infection, compared with 3.6 percent of women, the study showed.

...they show that while oral infection with the virus is common, cancer cases as a result of these infections are rare. In other words, most infected people don't get cancer.

....More studies are needed to know whether the HPV vaccine effectively prevents oral HPV infections, the researchers said. Currently, the vaccine is recommended to prevent cervical cancer, anal cancer and genital warts.
 
Old 02-20-2012, 09:55 PM
 
Location: American Expat
2,189 posts, read 4,554,294 times
Reputation: 1872
Default I'm a guy in College...

Quote:
Originally Posted by no kudzu View Post

And I got this one. I'm happy with my decision. It helps prevent 90% of genital warts. Genital warts, like HIV, can't be cured yet. So it was a no brainier for me to get vaccinated against a disease that can't be cured. I'm sure they will some time develop a vaccine against HIV. I'll be the first one to get it.
All this BS talk about them not being safe etc. You eat food every day and you don't know what happened to it. Some pesticides could still be on it. The air you breathe is probably lousy and nobody knows what will happen in 30 years, the house you live in could contain something that's not safe and you won't know until later ( like asbestos back then )... etc etc. Well, and an asteroid can hit you while walking down the street. Some people just overdo it. Don't get it if you don't want to, but coming up with phony excuses is pathetic.
 
Old 02-21-2012, 01:04 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,033 posts, read 98,948,726 times
Reputation: 31502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roselvr View Post
[...[b]they show that while oral infection with the virus is common, cancer cases as a result of these infections are rare. In other words, most infected people don't get cancer.
Nor do most people infected with polio develop paralysis. And who wants to have an HPV infection in the mouth anyway, cancer or no?
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.


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