Human Papiloma Virus vacine, Need ammunition!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Patriot04
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Patriot04 said:
My wife and I had an argument over the new vacine this last weekend. Seems our pediatrician strongly recommends it. I was told of the office visit after the fact, My daughters have not received the vacine, yet.
I have been educating myself for the last many years about my catholic faith and have heard several reasonings against the vacine on moral grounds. I tried to relay this to my wife, but was told I wasn’t concerned for the health of my children.
I need documentation for my position against the vacine. With the reasoning she gave, I asked her why she wasn’t getting them fitted with contraception? That ended the “discussion” for the moment. Help me with some print resorces, please.:confused:
Click to expand...
I would get my daughters the vaccination in a minute! I see nothing immoral about protecting your children from disease. Since they are scenarios where they could contract HPV and not have intercourse I don’t see a moral dilemma at all.
 
vluvski said:
Commercials do not acknowledge HPV is an STD!
Click to expand...
I’m glad you mentioned that; that’s one of the biggest problems with this whole issue. It’s almost as if they assume that every girl needs to get it, because they presume automatically that every person will have had sex at some point.
 
estesbob said:
I would get my daughters the vaccination in a minute! I see nothing immoral about protecting your children from disease. Since they are scenarios where they could contract HPV and not have intercourse I don’t see a moral dilemma at all.
Click to expand...
Hi,
There are? I thought you could only get this virus from sexual contact? I guess I dont know enough about it.:o
 
Patriot04,

Maybe these links will be helpful:
hli.org/sl_2006-06-16.html
hli.org/sl_2006-06-23.html
hli.org/sl_2006-07-07.html

Dr. Mercola reports that “the National Cancer Institute (NCI) says that “direct” causation {between genial HPV and cervical cancer}has not been demonstrated; however, the NCI and just about everyone else works with the principle that it has been established”. You may find some of the information from mercola.com helpful but I will warn you that Dr. Mercola supports condoms use.
You can raise your children to be chaste but then they get married and maybe their spouse wasn’t chaste, so they should run the risk of getting cervical cancer? I just don’t get that line of thinking. This is not the same as birth control.

I agree. I would not provide my children with contraception or condoms for “safer sex”, but I would consider the HPV vaccine if it is proven safe. The safety of the vaccine is my concern.
Commercials do not acknowledge vaccine prevents only 4/100
Click to expand...
The goal of the HPV vaccine is to prevent genital HPV infections. 30 out of the 100 identified strains of HPV infect the genitals.

Autumn
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,
There are? I thought you could only get this virus from sexual contact? I guess I dont know enough about it.:o
Click to expand...
There is debate on this very subject; however, my DD could remain chaste and marry a man who did not and become infected. There is also rape, molestation, etc.

Autumn
 
sorry, should have clarified. The commercial makes it sound like all cervical cancer is preventable by receiving the vaccine, and that all HPV is preventable via the vaccine. It does mention genital warts, I think, but the primary content of the commercial is about cervical cancer and HPV in general. This distinction is not clear, and IMO dishonest.
 
I agree the commercial fails to mention pertinent information. I do think it is about time that the link between genital HPV and cervical cancer is made known to the public, but the commerical could have been much more effective. IMO, we should make a distinction between genital HPV and other strains of HPV. Trust me, people are confused.

Autumn
 
astegallrnc said:
There is debate on this very subject; however, my DD could remain chaste and marry a man who did not and become infected. There is also rape, molestation, etc.

Autumn
Click to expand...
You can get HPV through heavy “petting”. Do we want to condemn our daughters to death because their boyfriend got his hands down their pants???
 
ALLFORHIM said:
Hi,
There are? I thought you could only get this virus from sexual contact? I guess I dont know enough about it.:o
Click to expand...
Its a wicked virus, Even use of a condom doesnt stop its spread. It can be spread by skin to skin contact or skin to condom.
 
estesbob said:
You can get HPV through heavy “petting”. Do we want to condemn our daughters to death because their boyfriend got his hands down their pants???
Click to expand...
Any genital contact. I diagnosed and treated many cases of genital HPV and it does not discriminate.

There is discussion about non-sexual transmission.

Autumn
 
T1Catholic said:
👍 I’m with you. This is not about supporting premarital sex. I had written before in another post that I had an aunt who remarried and at the age of 40-something got HPV through her new husband, she had to have pre-cancerous cells removed and now has to go for testing many times a year. You can raise your children to be chaste but then they get married and maybe their spouse wasn’t chaste, so they should run the risk of getting cervical cancer? I just don’t get that line of thinking. This is not the same as birth control. And it is something that the Church has not said is immoral (and if I remember correctly, there had been a statement on this some time ago, maybe someone can provide a link if they have it).
Click to expand...
I’ve always thought we have the obligation to take care of our health, as we’re created in God’s image. This issue to me is strictly about health, not morals. Should a rape victim have to worry about cervical cancer when the medical technology is available to protect against it?

If there were a proven, safe AIDS vaccine available, even though I’m single and have no plans on sex outside of marriage, I would TOTALLY be the first person in line.

c
 
If you want to resolve this issue with your wife you need to communicate not gather “ammunition” to prepare for another “battle”. You need to listen to her concerns with an open heart and mind. Maybe you can agree to wait for now until more information about the vaccine available. This is a brand new vaccine, moral issues aside - it may be prudent to wait out of pure safety issues.

If she truly feels strongly about it’s necessity maybe you can compromise by not being specific about what the vaccine is for.

The reality is, in my opinion, whether you child has sex or not is dependant upon if they have the vaccine. Teenagers think bad things happen to other people not to them. So if you think not vaccinating them will be a deterrant, you’re being unrealistic.

Children that choose to wait against the mainstream peer pressure do so because of deeply grounded faith beliefs not fear of STD’s
 
Karen1996 said:
(…)
I just went this September to my OB/Gyn, who is an excellent doctor. He didn’t even mention this vaccine to me. I was very proud of him for not.

(…)
Click to expand...
The vaccine isn’t offered to woman over 26.
 
Does anyone fear/wonder/have concerns that this vaccine may be laced with an hcg vaccine? I read an article once from Human Life International about vaccines (I believe it was tetanus) being given to poor areas and third world countries that were found to be laced with hcg vaccine as well - causing the woman to make antibodies against the pregnancy hormone, rendering her unable to carry to term.

Those vaccines too were only offered to women. And this is only offered to girls to 26…not saying at all that I believe this is the case but I wouldn’t put it past some people. You never really know what’s in those vials, you know?
 
I too am concerned with the vaccine safety. Rotashield was thought to be “safe” until lots of babies began developing bowel problems/obstructions - several fatal. Hib and Prevnar have altered the flora of the normal body causing the person to be susceptible to more dangerous strains/serotypes of these diseases for which there are no vaccines. Oral polio ended up *causing *polio, and infected thousands with the SV-40 cancer strain.

I’d play it safe and wait. You never know what kinds of strange mutations may happen from introducing this virus into the body, especially with its aluminum adjuvant. What if it *causes * a type of stronger cancer later? What if it causes tumors to form? What if it causes sterility or birth defects? They just don’t know the long term outlook because it hasn’t been tested long enough.
 
scary thought, sancta! I would hope that they wouldn’t attempt something like that, but it’s true- we really would have no way of knowing!
In third world countries I can at least comprehend the motives- here? Well, unless they have plans to promote some fertility drug in 5-10 years… Scary indeed.
 
vluvski said:
There are several problems with the vaccine:
  1. Misrepresentation on so many levels
    a. Commercials do not acknowledge HPV is an STD.
    b. Commercials do not acknowledge vaccine prevents only 4/100
    c. Dishonest use of non-benign placebos
    d. General attitude that vaccine is the wonder-drug for cervical cancer.
  2. All vaccines carry risks. The risks of this vaccine (and many others) are downplayed too much, IMO.
  3. Too new to know. Remember when the rotavirus vaccine was pulled from the shelves???
My point is that the issue with the vaccine has nothing to do with the fact that it is for an STD. The risks simply do not outweigh the benefits. Potentially severe side effects to get a vaccine for a disease I will probably never get? Not me!
Click to expand...
I agree with all these things. My other concern is that it hasn’t been thoroughly tested. I cannot imagine parents of 9-year-olds volunteering their DDs to take part in the study. A good study will include the long-term reactions to the shot. Some of the girls will also have to be exposed to the virus under controled situations to determine the effectiveness of it.

No, I will not be giving my daughter this one. Not now, at any rate.
 
As someone mentioned, isn’t the idea that it would protect them in cases of rape the same argument that can and is used at times for putting your children on birth control?

I.e., preemptive protection?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top