Japan Stops Cancer Vaccines (Gardasil, Cervarix) Against HPV

[Rau]

Actually, yes I do have concerns about all vaccines. My oldest got severely ill after his MMR. He ended up in the hospital with encephalitis at 15 months old–Christmas Eve. I was told by the doctors to say good bye because he wouldn’t survive. Praise Jesus he did and is now 20 and doing well after years and years of therapy (speech, occupational and physical). He has a medical exemption to all future MMR vaccines. My youngest is 9 months now, but she had milder (considered moderate by her pediatrician) to her DTaP. We ended up in the ER with her having seizures. I do vaccinate my children. All 8 are up to date on all required vaccines plus flu shot. Only those two reactions out of the hundreds of shots my family has received. I do, however, think that we need to be cautious about what we allow doctors to do to our kids.

Vaccines save millions of lives, but they do have very real risks. I technically don’t need to vaccinate because I homeschool, but I feel for most illnesses the benefits FAR EXCEED any and all risks. Not so sure about this vaccine yet.

Caution is good, and I am glad to see you are rational in how you make assessments. Though I’m not sure how home-schooling comes into it - I assume your kids play sports and circulate with other kids, etc.

Some younger parents object to vaccinations “in principle” I fear - the theory being that we don’t need ‘chemicals’ added to the body and they might even do harm (never mind that that may be the case in only <1 in 100,000 instances…). Unfortunately, younger parents have, in some cases, NIL experience of the risks that used to beset children prior to vaccination. Many of the so-called childhood diseases, such as Hooping cough, are horrendously dangerous, and occurred far more frequently (prior to vaccinations) than does an adverse reaction to a vaccination. And most adverse reactions are mild.

The trend of a minority to “opt out” of vaccinations is a worry. The effectiveness readily falls away even for modest numbers of non-participants.

 

[7armyrugrats]

Many homes homeschoolers don’t vaccinate because the state (at least ours) does not require vaccines unless they attend school. Others choose a “religious” exemption and don’t vaccinate. That is what I meant by technically not needing to.

 

[Cariethra]

I agree with Japan on it. I refused the vaccine and I will not allow my daughter to get it until the side effect issues are resolved.

My husband cannot have the flu shot because they are cultured in latex. I will not get it, because I feel that healthy people getting it will only create a super flu. I do feel that those who are immune compromised and the elderly should get it.

 

[Rau]

Obviously, any further study into adverse effects is worth watching

Note that over 100 million doses of Gardasil have been distributed worldwide in 120 countries. I saw an Australian report that of the 7 mill doses distributed there, <2000 adverse reactions were reported, the vast bulk being of the headache, pain/swelling at the injection site, nausea, dizziness, etc. variety. Some severe allergic reactions were also reported, but at a frequency not worse than other types of vaccines. There are individuals with hypersensitivity to various substances including yeast or other vaccine components (aluminium, sodium chloride, L-histidine, polysorbate and sodium borate) that should not be vaccinated.

I think the scales tilt fairly heavily towards the view it’s safe.

 

[China123]

Well, as a mother, I made a decision for my child. I will make the same decision for my daughter. My husband agrees as we have discussed it since the appt. If it is a wrong decision it was not made out of malice or not caring about their health. My kids have all the required vaccines. I have a gut feeling about this one and I am following my inner voice. I have actually prayed about this as I do care about their health. I have a good feeling about my decision each and every time I have prayed about it. Just my 2 cents

 

[EasterJoy]

Isn’t this the same country that stopped requiring the MMR vaccine and is now the only developed country in the world with rubella and mumps outbreaks.

Cases of rubella in japan 2012: 2,535
Cases of rubella in US 2012: 9

Cases of mumps in japan 2012: 71,549
Cases of mumps in US 2012: 229

Above from the WHO. I wouldn’t say they are that advanced when it comes to vaccines.

As one poster already put it, the diseases for which there are vaccines also have real risks, such as miscarriage in pregnant women, deafness, blindness, and so on.

According to the National Cancer Institute, high-risk HPV infection accounts for approximately 5 percent of all cancers worldwide. The fact remains (and of course ought to be taught to the general public) that the most reliable way to prevent infection with either a high-risk or a low-risk HPV is to avoid any skin-to-skin oral, anal, or genital contact with another person. The guideline says “another person” and not “infected persons” because of the lack of symptoms it is hard to know whether a partner who has been sexually active in the past is currently infected with HPV. (Obviously, it isn’t always easy to know whether a partner has had intimate skin-to-skin contact with a previous partner, either.) It is estimated that an effective vaccination program could reduce cervical cancers by as much as 2/3. Considering that this is a prevalent cancer, that is a lot.

 

[heidi_storage]

I will not get it, because I feel that healthy people getting it will only create a super flu. I do feel that those who are immune compromised and the elderly should get it.

I think you might be confusing vaccines with antibiotics. Antibiotic overuse does pose the danger of selecting for resistant strains; wide vaccine use merely leads to the suppression–and, in some cases, eradication–of the disease. Smallpox, a scourge for hundreds of years? Gone.

 

[on_the_hill]

I think you might be confusing vaccines with antibiotics. Antibiotic overuse does pose the danger of selecting for resistant strains; wide vaccine use merely leads to the suppression–and, in some cases, eradication–of the disease. Smallpox, a scourge for hundreds of years? Gone.

Indeed, polio was nearly gone until some Asian countries stopped vaccinating. I believe Pakistan is the primary culprit.

 

[Cristiano]

I am an infectious disease physician. I don’t need to google my medical information on common viruses.

I did not say the medical basis was wrong, just your leap of logic. Suggesting someone get the vax as an endorsement of anal sex is taking quite a leap.

In regard to the OP and the response by Japan, considering how their government botched their Hep B and C response I would not be overly impressed with their response on this either.

Considering that you are so knowledgeable and assuming that the nurse was informed too, is there any other way for a boy to a a significant risk of anal cancer because of the virus beside the medium of anal sex? If there is another form of significant risk then the nurse might have not hinted to anything but if there is not then the previous poster is absolutely correct because the nurse talked only about the boy health.

 

[Iheartcoffee]

The fact is, since the start of the HPV vaccine we have seen infection rates go down. Over time, a lowered infection rate will translate to a lower rate of the cancers caused by HPV. My husband has worked in Gyn-Onc and he has seen the horrific effects of these cancers.

You can raise your child to be the best person in the world, but that won’t protect them completely from HPV. They may marry a person that unknowingly contracted it. Perhaps that person doesn’t even know they contracted it or how they contracted it. It can be contracted in a variety of ways that do not necessarily reflect a person’s morals or character.

 

[Cristiano]

You are probably correct, Ido not think that there is any intrinsic evil with the vaccine, and it is an obligatory path if we want to minimize the risk of cancer because of that. However, if we look at the more global picture it is not obvious that it is the optimal health solution. Reduction of infection can be obtained through behavioral control and side effects could be reduced by limiting the use of the vaccine. Human health is based on many variables and you cannot minimize the impact of one at cost of others. Here I am not trying to make a moral point I am just looking a the ratio of the likelihoods of events, sometime an optimal solution might appear counterintuitive. Global reduction of effects does not call for the minimization of each one.

 

[Iheartcoffee]

You are probably correct, Ido not think that there is any intrinsic evil with the vaccine, and it is an obligatory path if we want to minimize the risk of cancer because of that. However, if we look at the more global picture it is not obvious that it is the optimal health solution. Reduction of infection can be obtained through behavioral control and side effects could be reduced by limiting the use of the vaccine. Human health is based on many variables and you cannot minimize the impact of one at cost of others. Here I am not trying to make a moral point I am just looking a the ratio of the likelihoods of events, sometime an optimal solution might appear counterintuitive. Global reduction of effects does not call for the minimization of each one.

Behavior can reduce it, but since there are perfectly innocent ways to contract it that do not require sexual contact we must seek to reduce the overall incidence. As the overall incidence goes down we can seek to eliminate it from the global population. All vaccines are based on the idea that contracting the disease is far worse than the risk of developing side effects.

 

[Cristiano]

… All vaccines are based on the idea that contracting the disease is far worse than the risk of developing side effects.

That is correct but it also implies a lot of assumptions that could be fallible. If I were to use your logic I would have to say that we must resume vaccinations for small pox ASAP. Why is that not happening?

 

[Rau]

Considering that you are so knowledgeable and assuming that the nurse was informed too, is there any other way for a boy to a a significant risk of anal cancer because of the virus beside the medium of anal sex? If there is another form of significant risk then the nurse might have not hinted to anything but if there is not then the previous poster is absolutely correct because the nurse talked only about the boy health.

HPV is easily contracted by anyone (however innocently), and boys can be carriers, and can infect females. That’s the primary driver for vaccinating boys.

HPV is also implicated in multiple conditions beyond cervical cancer, that can affect boys. Anal cancer is but one.

 

[Rau]

That is correct but it also implies a lot of assumptions that could be fallible. If I were to use your logic I would have to say that we must resume vaccinations for small pox ASAP. Why is that not happening?

No, that does not follow, because the smallpox virus is actually eradicated. There is nothing to vaccinate against. It is no longer a natural threat.

 

[Cristiano]

No, that does not follow, because the smallpox virus is actually eradicated. There is nothing to vaccinate against. It is no longer a natural threat.

This is somehow a falsely optimistic statement. Hundreds of pepole in the USA are sill vaccinated against it because they are exposed to it. The threat is serious enough that the government has an emergency vaccination plan in place. The vaccine lasts only 3 to 5 years. If we follow the previous logic of impact of infection vs. risk of side effect we should all get the vaccine.

My point is that the policy of HPV vaccines has been sold only based on hand waving feel good arguments, not on solid scientific evidence. I am not arguing the merits of the vaccine but I keep arguing the ignorant and misleading way it has been pushed for adoption. I can just refer to the case where the governor in Texas wanted to mandate it for eveybody an d then he gave up as fast as he started, if he had solid epidemiological evidence he would have probably made it.

People including those in the medical field have not made an honest effort of pushing solid statistical evidence of the utility of the program. The major gain that I see at this point is the ROI of the vaccine makers. The problem is that the policy is not publically supported by a real analysis and that it is why so many people do not buy into it.

 

[Cristiano]

HPV is easily contracted by anyone (however innocently), and boys can be carriers, and can infect females. That’s the primary driver for vaccinating boys.

HPV is also implicated in multiple conditions beyond cervical cancer, that can affect boys. Anal cancer is but one.

Your first sentence is just a red herring when referring to the comment of the nurse. The last sentence is making a statement that I have not negated, I was simply asking about the danger of anal cancer in males that are not involved in anal sex, no answers here.

 

[EasterJoy]

Considering that you are so knowledgeable and assuming that the nurse was informed too, is there any other way for a boy to a a significant risk of anal cancer because of the virus beside the medium of anal sex? If there is another form of significant risk then the nurse might have not hinted to anything but if there is not then the previous poster is absolutely correct because the nurse talked only about the boy health.

Let us say that a man marries a woman who is infected with a sexually-transmitted virus. They are married; of course they have genital contact. If he is vaccinated against the virus, the chances are very much reduced that he will contract the virus. Let us say, though, that he is not vaccinated and he does contract it, quite without his knowledge or hers.

Their attempt at marriage is not valid. They divorce and are declared free to marry. Do we all see that if he had the foresight to be vaccinated, he will have tremendously reduced the likelihood that he will transmit the virus to his new wife when he does remarry?

As a parent of boys, I saw this as an issue of the health of my future daughters-in-law, if nothing else, and that holds even if my sons do not violate moral law with regards to sex. I’m not advocating in favor of every new treatment that comes down the pike, but the statistics are that these vaccines (when properly administered) offer some measure of protection against a very prevalent and potentially life-threatening virus.

As a parent of boys, of course we teach them that there is no way that science is ever going to immunize them against all of the many things that can be transmitted via sexual contact–not just sexual intercourse, but any contact where bodily fluids might be exchanged. Getting them vaccinated against viruses that are as prevalent as HPV only makes sense. It is not an excuse to commit a mortal sin, and with proper catechesis, a young person won’t take it that way.

 

[Rau]

This is somehow a falsely optimistic statement. Hundreds of pepole in the USA are sill vaccinated against it because they are exposed to it. The threat is serious enough that the government has an emergency vaccination plan in place. The vaccine lasts only 3 to 5 years. If we follow the previous logic of impact of infection vs. risk of side effect we should all get the vaccine.

My point is that the policy of HPV vaccines has been sold only based on hand waving feel good arguments, not on solid scientific evidence. I am not arguing the merits of the vaccine but I keep arguing the ignorant and misleading way it has been pushed for adoption. I can just refer to the case where the governor in Texas wanted to mandate it for eveybody an d then he gave up as fast as he started, if he had solid epidemiological evidence he would have probably made it.

People including those in the medical field have not made an honest effort of pushing solid statistical evidence of the utility of the program. The major gain that I see at this point is the ROI of the vaccine makers. The problem is that the policy is not publically supported by a real analysis and that it is why so many people do not buy into it.

The investment in the development of the HPV vaccine was made in the absence of a guaranteed ROI. You’d be aware that most biotech projects fail. It may have been marketed poorly.

The smallpox vaccine needs to remain available. The virus itself exists in laboratories in the US and Russia at least. There is also a background risk that it might be used as a weapon. There is no justification to vaccinate the world’s population against smallpox - the cost of that action would vastly outweigh the potential benefit.

 

[Rau]

Your first sentence is just a red herring when referring to the comment of the nurse. The last sentence is making a statement that I have not negated, I was simply asking about the danger of anal cancer in males that are not involved in anal sex, no answers here.

I sought to focus on the essential elements of the discussion, not a detail about whether a nurse who said something, quoted here by someone else, spoke accurately or not. And I freely admit I’m not up to speed on the means of acquiring anal cancer, but must add that such is a third order issue here.