BlogHer - gardasil - Comments

that's what I thought

keyster94 — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:31:26 -0500

I had been very wary of this vaccine from the get-go. Until there was evidence of long term research, there wasn't a chance I was going to support it. I have become very wary of anything with unknown side effects....

~Kelly

http://www.30somethingandsearching.today.com/<

It's a wart!

lifeexperiences — Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:12:00 -0500

ok, we all know what HPV is, Its a wart, like many warts but it can definately complicate things and make your CHANCES of cervical cancer increase. Just like if you smoke, makes your chances of lung cancer increase. If you eat white flour, it will make the chances of cancer grow. Like everything in life, there are certain risks to everything and all things that you do, eat, wear, etc...

When I first seen the commercials on T.V basically saying that if you don't get your daughter vaccinated against this HPV virus YOU WERE A BAD PARENT. (well... that is the way it made me feel, and I am sure a few other mothers made themselves think about vaccinating their children just for this reason) Now what a way to make money!, Scare the bejeezus out of parents.

Don't get me wrong, I believe it might be a good thing to do, but the way it was presented to the public was wrong. Look at the adds for Valtrex, they were tastefully done. (the ones I seen anyways) Herpes is a growing concern, it is not curable, million are effected AND your chances of getting cervical cancer increases when you have herpes. To me there is no difference with the CHANCES they say, but I didn't see a Valtrex commercial that made me feel bad if I didn't take their pills. (understand what I am trying to say? Shame Shame on Gardasil.

Informed people make informed decisions, scared people make rash decisions. That is the part that worries me the most about this.

The posts we did on Gardasil

evilslutopia — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 01:57:01 -0500

The posts we did on Gardasil on our blog (10 Things and 10 More Things) are still some of the most popular even though they were written quite a while ago. We definitely agree that this is a case where you really need to do your own research, learn about the risks and benefits, and decide what's right for you.

We'd also recommend this NYT piece, which goes into more depth about the "push" for Gardasil from Merck: The Evidence Gap

From that article:

"But some experts worry about the consequences of the rapid rollout of the new vaccines without more medical evidence about how best to deploy them. They say that because of the aggressive marketing, even parents of girls who are far from being sexually active may feel pressured into giving them a vaccine that is not yet needed and whose long-term impact is still unclear. Legislative efforts to require girls to have the vaccine only add to the pressure.

In the United States, hundreds of doctors have been recruited and trained to give talks about Gardasil — $4,500 for a lecture — and some have made hundreds of thousands of dollars. Politicians have been lobbied and invited to receptions urging them to legislate against a global killer. And former state officials have been recruited to lobby their former colleagues."

The Evil Slut Clique
Evilslutopia

Great info. Although my

lilmommythatcould — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 08:38:14 -0500

Great info. Although my daughter is only two I have already decided "NO!" to Gardasil. It is upsetting that drug companies are still getting away with these ploy marketing schemes and extreme failures and not being held accountable for thier actions. Is the media to blame for Gardasil, no way- They provide the information that is given to them. Although I would LOVE to know who gave them their info!

~Susan

http://lilmomthatcould.com/

Excellent post, Catherine.

Amy Gates — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 01:12:11 -0500

Excellent post, Catherine. Thank you for raising awareness on the many issues surrounding the Gardasil vaccine. I think you said it best when you said "Don't let fear dictate your decision." The best thing people can do is their own research and trust themselves.

Amy
Crunchy Domestic Goddess
BlogHers Act contributing editor

I agree.

Catherine Morgan — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:51:54 -0500

I agree.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
at Catherine-Morgan.com, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election<

Merck is vaccinating groups the vaccine is not proven to help

Margaret Lozano — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:32:04 -0500

It might be nice if they were vaccinating a group that the vaccine was proven to help, like young girls, but companies are focusing on testing the vaccine on young men. It's a little too reminiscent of the plot of "Constant Gardener" for me. I don't approve of pharmaceutical companies vaccinating populations that are not being informed of the risks of taking part in an experimental program.

http://www.theearthlyparadise.com/

In developing countries...

Catherine Morgan — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 14:04:20 -0500

Hi Meggie.

I actually think the one place where this vaccine could be very useful is in poor and developing counties, where access to healthcare and PAP tests are limited. The death rate (from cervical cancer) in these developing countries are still very high, and that is because they don't have access to testing and treatment. In that case, the benefit of this vaccine would seem to outweigh the risk. The trouble is...Merck would rather sell it to us (whether we need it or not) because they can make more money selling it here. It's all about the money...always is.

Thanks for your comment.

Contributing Editor Catherine Morgan
at Catherine-Morgan.com, The Political Voices of Women, Care2 Election<

In developing countries, boys are being vaccinated as well...

Margaret Lozano — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 13:25:10 -0500

Thank you for collecting all of these articles! I've been a little wary of the Gardasil vaccine since it came out. In my view, it always seems better to take some time to see how well a vaccine actually works before rushing out and getting it.

I was horrified to learn the other day that in Colombia they are attempting to have boys vaccinated, as well as girls (even though the vaccine won't be approved for boys for another year). My stepson, who lives in Colombia, was getting a lot of pressure at school to get the vaccine--even though it hasn't even been approved yet! It's amazing how much pressure pharmaceutical companies put on parents to get these vaccines. Suddenly, you're the worst parent in the world if you aren't willing to give your child an unproven vaccination. If I was skeptical before, I'm ten times as wary of the vaccine now.

http://www.theearthlyparadise.com/

Mothering Magazine called it first

rshannigan — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 12:39:27 -0500

In December of 2006 Mothering Magazine published this "A Shot in the Dark" warning about the dangers of gardasil. This vaccine was never tested on young girls, not approved for adolescents or teens, and guards against only 4% of HPV strains.

I don't understand why people believe the drug companies anymore. THEY PROFIT WHEN YOU ARE SICK--- hello....

I don't think the media is to blame, the drug companies paid to have those stupid "one less" commercials on the air and they paid their lobbyists to have it worked into the vaccine schedule. Which state was it that wouldn't let girls into middle school without it?

Sure- blame the media a little, but parents can no longer believe that the government is looking out for their kids, when it's owned by drug companies.

http://mrshannigan.blogspot.com

I feel better, sort of

Liz Thompson — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:39:32 -0500

My two oldest girls (they are 12 and 14) had their well-visits, this month and I still held off on allowing my Pediatrician to administer the vaccine.

I feel okay about my decision, or lack thereof, sort of.

Thank you for this terrific post, Catherine - the more information I can get my hands on, the better I feel.

--------------------------------------------

This Full House

This Full House Reviews

Imperfect Parent

hmmmm....

ScarlettHester — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:23:30 -0500

I didn't know about the backlash or the issue with the vaccine. I suffer from lack of exposure to mass media.

I'm with you, you can't trust the FDA, but I didn't know I couldnt' trust the CDC. Of course I'll have to look into that one myself, can't trust everything I read ;)

It will be interesting to

mays5 — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 17:53:31 -0500

It will be interesting to see how Hannah's court case affects future autism cases. I'm still not completely convinced autism is caused by vaccines. There does seem to be conflicting research on it and I tend to believe there is a genetic basis to the disease as well. There's a very thorough debate on this issue at www.opposingviews.com/questions/are-autism-and-vaccines-related. Experts from both sides argue their points and provide rebuttals to the other side's argument. Definitely worth taking a look at!

Technically sort of true, but the points still stand.

Atena — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:10:35 -0500

@ Suzanne - I didn't realize that I was mentioned in your post. Thanks for mentioning me!

@ Denise M: While you are technically correct about distinctions of good v. bad, you do not acknowledge the heart of what Suzanne and Catherine are saying. This creates a fallacy of logic in your argument.

It up to all of us in communications not to be swayed by own biases.

Too true! These women have presented quite a breadth of quantitative data about this drug, research surrounding it, and a variety of opinions about it. They seem to be going out of their way to make informed arguments and present a less-biased viewpoint. Kudos, Ladies!

I'm sure lots of good, honest, hard-working Americans work for the FDA, Merck and the ad agency that made those commercials. But that is certainly no guarantee that these organizations and corporations are acting with the interests of the public good at the heart of their operations. If we are not biased, then that is a simple thing to recognize: People in a position to make a lot of money and gain a lot of power have been known to not make decisions for the public good. If we are unbiased in our presentation of information, then we have to admit this readily.

I was suspicious of Gardisil from the start, not because I love to hate wealthy, powerful institutions, but because it was presented as The Best Answer. The PR campaign came hard and fast and didn't seem to be encouraging a lot of reflection. You get a least a bit of a Whoa, Slow Down with some of these hormonal birth control ads. Gardisil was too much, too fast, preying on the fears of parents of daughters. I have little patience for that.

And again, as Catherine has repeated, the numbers don't really add up.

My mind remains open - when I'm convinced, I'll change my mind.

-Atena

Assumptions, Biases & Irrational Fantasies

As a healthcare and business

Denise M — Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:18:34 -0500

As a healthcare and business writer, I understand the skepticism. But this isn't a black and white world. Everyone has a bias, but that doesn't mean there isn't some valid data underneath it. There are greedy bad apples in every group, every company, every industry. That doesn't mean the entire group, company, or industry is a greedy bad apple. And that doesn't necessarily invalidate the data.
There are also good people throughout healthcare who work hard to make better medicine. Regulatory oversight isn't perfect either, but the people at the FDA work hard to make that oversight as good as it can be for the safety of all. It up to all of us in communications not to be swayed by own biases. Our jobs certainly would be easier if the good guys wore white hats. Absent that, it's up to us to present the information, including the sources, so that individuals can judge for themselves whether the source and data are reliable and meaningful.