Finally: "Complaints cause cervical cancer vaccine scrutiny"

In February 2007 I did a story on Gardasil, a vaccine for certain STDs that cause cervical cancer. What upset me most about the story at the time was that Texas had decided to mandate this drug for all school-age girls, even those who did not intend to engage in sexual activity.

Such a decision is outrageous because this vaccine can cause serious side effects. Quite simply: why inoculate girls for an STD they have no chance of contracting (if they practice abstinence) and thereby put them in danger of suffering the vaccine's own harmful side effects?

Texas is not alone in this quest to mandate Gardasil. As recently as June 18th, Alberta was trying to force Catholic schools to give the vaccine to girls in pre-sexual activity age groups.

In January of this year, two instances of Gardasil-related deaths finally made it into the mainstream: "Alert over jab for girls as two die following cervical cancer vaccination" (UK Daily Mail).

By June, the FDA had refused permission for Gardasil to be marketed among women age 27-45. This decision came as a blow to its pharmaceutical producer Merck, because Gardasil "has been one of [its] most successful newer products and has helped the company recover after the 2004 withdrawal of its Vioxx arthritis treatment." Again, to put it simply: Gardasil is big business for Merck.

Today, it caught my eye that even CNN thinks there could be a story here:

A vaccine designed to prevent cervical cancer is coming under fresh scrutiny amid thousands of complaints linking it to a range of health problems.

Gardasil has been the subject of 7,802 "adverse event" reports from the time the Food and Drug Administration approved its use two years ago, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Girls and women have blamed the vaccine for causing ailments from nausea to paralysis -- even death. Fifteen deaths were reported to the FDA, and 10 were confirmed, but the CDC says none of the 10 were linked to the vaccine. The CDC says it continues to study the reports of illness.

It's nice to see the mainstream media finally noticing a story that I (and many, many others) have known about for about 16 months. So why did it take them so long?

I would argue that this is only getting reported now because their fixation on eliminating the harmful side-effects of promiscuous sex often causes them to turn a blind eye to the drawbacks of mandatory universal vaccination. And the sad thing is that even young women trying to live a chaste lifestyle, in these situations of mandatory vaccination, are in danger of the vaccine's own harmful side effects.

Now whose freedom is being violated?

Full coverage: HPV vaccine mandated in Texas

Yesterday I came across this headline: "Texas mandates cervical cancer vaccine."

Here is the LA Times on the story:

HOUSTON — Texas on Friday became the first state to require school-age girls to be vaccinated against a sexually transmitted virus that has been shown to cause cervical cancer.

Gov. Rick Perry signed an executive order mandating that most girls, starting in September 2008, receive the vaccination against the human papillomavirus before entering sixth grade.

More than a dozen states, including California, have been considering such a move. HPV, which also causes genital warts, is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the country. Several strains have been linked to cervical cancer, which kills about 3,700 Americans a year, according to the Food and Drug Administration.

Numerous Catholic blogs have been covering this story. Catholic Matriarch starts us off:

"This vaccine does prevent a sexually transmitted disease that can lead to cervical cancer. What I cannot justify is making the vaccine mandatory. Contrary to the hype, this vaccine does not prevent cancer. It prevents a sexually transmitted disease, human papilloma virus (HPV)."

(... and her post got noticed by someone at Merck, the manufacturer of this vaccine.)

The Crescat takes a look at the disturbing marketing campaign behind this vaccine (named Gardasil):

"Its a vacine against a STD (SEXUALLY transmitted diseases) being marketed as a vacine against cervical cancer. The "vacine" is also being marketed to GIRLS and women ages 9-26. AGES NINE-9... do nine year olds need a vacine against an STD?"

Here is the video for one of the ads:



More resources:

• KCC has an interesting rhetorical approach to the issue.
• Catholic Fire takes a look at the way People magazine is spinning it.
• TCYM brings out some of the hard facts about HPV and cervical cancer.

More quotes from the LA Times article:

"He [Governor Perry] promised that parents who did not want their children vaccinated "for reasons of conscience" would be allowed to seek exemptions. The mandate would affect about 365,000 girls a year."

"But the move drew criticism from conservative groups, which noted that the governor had accepted campaign contributions from the vaccine's manufacturer, Merck & Co."All Merck wanted was a mandate so the insurance companies would have to pay for this. Follow the money," said Cathie Adams, president of the Texas Eagle Forum, an organization that promotes socially conservative government policies."

Update: Happy Catholic has an excellent post on this topic. And she gives us this link as well: 10 Thins You Might Not Know About Gardasil.