Would you get a vaccine against HIV/AIDS?

[SpidersfromMars]

To all those who oppose/would oppose HPV and HIV vaccines, I ask the following questions:

1. What if you’re in a horrible accident and require a blood transfusion? Infected blood has been passed onto people in this manner before. A famous Australian author, Bryce Courtney, had a haemophiliac son who got HIV from a blood transfusion.
2. What if you’re raped?

Both situations where you could become infected with HPV and/or HIV and it wouldn’t be your fault.

I don’t understand why someone would want to put their own life, or their child’s life, at risk just to make a point about ‘morals’

 

[Gordon_Sims]

I have twice as many friends who have been bitten by sharks (2) as have been involved in an automobile crash (1). I can’t conclude anything about the risk of shark attack vs automobile crash from that. I think that you just know some characters.

Don’t get me wrong, I would discuss with a doctor the risk from the vaccine (very low I’m sure) against the risk of contracting HIV (probably exceedingly low). If there is a vaccine it would probably first go to people in high risk groups who would have first priority.

My point isn’t that it’s likely my kids will catch it from a dishonest future spouse, but that there’s enough unexpected ways to get it that one’s lack of an exceptionally depraved lifestyle shouldn’t deter them from getting the theoretical vaccine.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

To all those who oppose/would oppose HPV and HIV vaccines, I ask the following questions:

1. What if you’re in a horrible accident and require a blood transfusion? Infected blood has been passed onto people in this manner before. A famous Australian author, Bryce Courtney, had a haemophiliac son who got HIV from a blood transfusion.
2. What if you’re raped?

Both situations where you could become infected with HPV and/or HIV and it wouldn’t be your fault.

I don’t understand why someone would want to put their own life, or their child’s life, at risk just to make a point about ‘morals’

The odds of either of those things happening and transmitting HIV are not good. I don’t mean not good like one out of a hundred. No, I’d say it’s more like one out of a million. I don’t typically worry about something with such an exceedingly small risk weighed against the risk of a (non-existent) vaccine. For example the risk of an allergic reaction to a vaccine is typically 1 out of a million and the odds of getting HIV from a blood transfusion are typically 1 out of 2 million.

Risks from HPV are different and I will follow the recommended schedule.

 

[Burt_Macklin]

The odds of either of those things happening and transmitting HIV are not good. I don’t mean not good like one out of a hundred. No, I’d say it’s more like one out of a million. I don’t typically worry about something with such an exceedingly small risk vs the risk of a (non-existent) vaccine.

HPV is a different story and I plan on following the recommended vaccinations.

 

[SpidersfromMars]

The odds of either of those things happening and transmitting HIV are not good. I don’t mean not good like one out of a hundred. No, I’d say it’s more like one out of a million. I don’t typically worry about something with such an exceedingly small risk weighed against the risk of a (non-existent) vaccine. For example the risk of an allergic reaction to a vaccine is typically 1 out of a million and the odds of getting HIV from a blood transfusion are typically 1 out of 2 million.

Risks from HPV are different and I will follow the recommended schedule.

I agree to some extent; in many places you’d be extremely unlucky to contract HIV in either a rape or transfusion. However, if you were in Africa, where the HIV rates are much higher, it could be a different scenario.

 

[Murmurs]

Absolutely - assuming, of course, it’s thoroughly tested and safe etc etc etc. The same goes for the HPV vaccine, or anything else, either for myself (I’ve had it), or my children should I and the-man-whom-I’ve-not-met-but-hopefully-will-some-day-who-is-my-husband be so blessed with them.

I totally understand concerns about the side effects of vaccines, and yes there is some evidence which maybe questions the safety of the HPV vaccine. (Routinely questioning vaccinations is basically the fault of the guy who perpetrated the MMR-autism link fraud in the 1990s. That guy should be in prison, but anyway…)

Reading between the lines of some posters here - and more particularly having had even more explicit conversations with people offline, some appear to oppose this welcome medical breakthrough (the cervical cancer vaccine especially) on the grounds that it might encourage kids to think casual sex is suddenly a bit safer and more-ok.

Some of these kinds of battles (abortion!) are most definitely worth fighting, others are just a bit silly. Children might be denied a potentially life-saving vaccine just because it might sabotage the abstinence-only message (which now in this case seems to be relying on a fear of dying from cervical cancer to promote abstinence, which isn’t exactly grand in my view).

Vaccines work best when everyone gets them - the principle of ‘herd immunity’. HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection. So, by vaccinating children before they are sexually active (promote abstinence all we like…it doesn’t mean every hormonal 16 year old will follow through on it 100% of the time), there is a hope of dramatically reducing the prevalence of it for the next generation.

Opposing an effective vaccine that could thousands of lives a year with the vacuous assertion that it might lead to promiscuity is inexcusable. About 60-70% of girls have (apparently) had sex by the time they’re 18. The need for a vaccine is clearly self evident. My (“socialist”, British ) view is there’s even a case for it to be mandatory: many parents might not know to ask for it, even if they’d want it, and besides, even if it’s available in theory but costs $200, it’s not available to everyone. (By making it mandatory, it’s therefore accessible, because as far as I know most states/countries make religious exemptions for this kind of thing anyway). It’s also a teaching opportunity - a time for doctors to talk to adolescents about sexual health, and to explain the full range of risks by having non-monogamous relationships (by premaritial sex, by extension).

Of course there are parents who are reluctant to give their 9-year-old girl a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease (it would make me uncomfortable too). But you do have to wonder…not just because I’d be astonished to find very many 9 year olds who know what a cervix is, but also because doctors are not going to say “Congratulations! Now in a few years you can go and have unprotected sex with strangers!” (When I got a tetanus inoculation, I don’t remember the doctor telling me it was now safe to dance on rusty nails). Even if as one gets older one does understand what the vaccine is for, surely the messages sent by parents every day for years (for respect, responsibility, the boundaries of behaviour - and abstinence) - count for more than the implicit suggestions of a vaccine.

If it’s medically safe, everyone should get it, and the same goes for HIV, HepB, and anything else.

 

[pensmama87]

OK guys, this may be the first time in the history of the Internet, but I’m persuaded.

I didn’t get Gardasil because it had JUST come out, and I am now past the age of approval for it. However, since the vaccine seems to be doing OK (or is there a new one now for HPV? I’d appreciate some info on this) I would consider it safe enough for my boys.

As regards HIV, if a vaccine were to be developed and available, I probably would not get it right away because I’m not in a high-risk population (I’m not passing judgment on those who are), but if over time the vaccine was proven safe and I and my kids were eligible to get it, we’d get it. If I was in a higher-risk population for some reason (if I worked in health care or lived in an area with higher rates, or came into regular contact with people who had HIV), then I probably wouldn’t wait, as long as it had passed all the regular clinical trials without incident.

 

[DOJ96]

First, BlueEyedLady wins the Interwebs award for best posts

In all seriousness, very good discussion here.

I would absolutely vaccinate my children, to protect them from circumstances outside of their control and any mistakes they might make. Teaching them morals at home doesn’t meant they’ll never make an adult choice before they are ready, and I don’t believe that means I’m a bad parent or that they are bad. Life just isn’t that black-and-white for me. I will protect them in every way that I can.

I would ask Hubs to get the vaccine because he is a Police Officer. 'Nuff said.

I would get the vaccine because you just never know what will happen.

 

[QuestLove]

Nope. You have to live an exceptionally depraved lifestyle to be at risk for AIDS, and I don’t.

I wouldn’t give my kids any STD vaccine – that’s like giving them permission to go out and have sex.

Then I’m sorry to say, that may be a problem.
If an STD vaccine is the only thing holding them back from having a promiscuous lifestyle, what happens if they reach an age when they get it themselves? Is it no holds barred then?

 

[Xantippe]

Reading between the lines of some posters here - and more particularly having had even more explicit conversations with people offline, some appear to oppose this welcome medical breakthrough (the cervical cancer vaccine especially) on the grounds that it might encourage kids to think casual sex is suddenly a bit safer and more-ok.

**Yes. The idea is, if we can’t get them to be good for good’s sake, we can get them to be good in order to be careful, which is a stretch. Almost nobody in the primary risk group has ever known anybody to die of cervical cancer. People (especially people under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol) simply aren’t motivated enough by that fear.
**

Some of these kinds of battles (abortion!) are most definitely worth fighting, others are just a bit silly. Children might be denied a potentially life-saving vaccine just because it might sabotage the abstinence-only message (which now in this case seems to be relying on a fear of dying from cervical cancer to promote abstinence, which isn’t exactly grand in my view).

**Yes. **

Of course there are parents who are reluctant to give their 9-year-old girl a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease (it would make me uncomfortable too). But you do have to wonder…

My daughter had the HPV vaccine at 11. I didn’t feel the need to explain what it was. There’s really no need to.

 

[QuestLove]

I agree to some extent; in many places you’d be extremely unlucky to contract HIV in either a rape or transfusion. However, if you were in Africa, where the HIV rates are much higher, it could be a different scenario.

Yup, if you are raped in certain places in this world, you are automatically put on drugs for three months and tested regularly until they are sure you don’t have it.

But definitely if you live in America, it would probably be low risk unless you work with STD patients. If such a vaccine came to fruition, I doubt at first it would be available to those who are not at a high risk. You may only require it if you will be travelling abroad for work etc. as a missionary, doctors without borders etc.

 

[QuestLove]

Xantippe:
My friend’s mother died from Cervical cancer. Cancer is one of the worst thing you can die of. She was only ever married to one man in her life and when he died later in life, she never remarried.
Ironically, it was because she was in a stable relationship with a faithful spouse why she didn’t do her annual pap smears. Ironically, she died form one of the slower growing cancers. By the time she found out she was at stage 4 - and it was an incidental discovery.

 

[Royalist]

You seem to discount parent-to-child transmission, heterosexual transmission, blood transfusions, etc.

In Africa mother-to-child and heterosexual transmission is unfortunately very common. Though any AIDS vaccine would probably come too late to prevent mother to child, so I don’t see how it’s relevant here…

But here in the first world, those risk factors are on around the same level as shark attacks, falling pianos, and spontaneous human combustion (it’s real. it could happen to you).

Not even to mention that you spoke of homosexuals and drug abusers with such utter disregard and disrespect that it was extremely un-Christian.

Calling the gay lifestyle “exceptionally depraved” is not un-Christian.

Is there any activity or lifestyle you consider depraved? (Other than, of course, writing harsh things on the internet.)

 

[Royalist]

Then I’m sorry to say, that may be a problem.
If an STD vaccine is the only thing holding them back from having a promiscuous lifestyle, what happens if they reach an age when they get it themselves? Is it no holds barred then?

You’ve moved the bar here. Now you’re talking about “a promiscuous lifestyle”. As a parent, your goal should be that your child not have **any **sex at all until he/she is married, which is going to come after they’ve been an adult for some time. Of course you can’t control what an adult child does, but you should at least have instilled Catholic teachings on sex in them. How well they follow those teachings is ultimately up to them.

An adult should have the maturity to realize that a single STD vaccine is not going to protect you against all the other STDs, and pregnancy, and the spiritual problems that come with sex outside of marriage. A child – does not. Telling your kid, “don’t have sex, but I think you might anyway, so here’s a vaccine against one STD” sends absolutely the wrong message.

Would you tell your child, “Hey, you shouldn’t cook methamphetamine in the garage, but just in case you do, I’ve installed venting fans so you won’t poison yourself. Oh, and I paid off the local crime boss so he won’t have you killed for selling drugs on his turf.” ?

 

[pensmama87]

You’ve moved the bar here. Now you’re talking about “a promiscuous lifestyle”. As a parent, your goal should be that your child not have **any **sex at all until he/she is married, which is going to come after they’ve been an adult for some time. Of course you can’t control what an adult child does, but you should at least have instilled Catholic teachings on sex in them. How well they follow those teachings is ultimately up to them.

An adult should have the maturity to realize that a single STD vaccine is not going to protect you against all the other STDs, and pregnancy, and the spiritual problems that come with sex outside of marriage. A child – does not. Telling your kid, “don’t have sex, but I think you might anyway, so here’s a vaccine against one STD” sends absolutely the wrong message.

Would you tell your child, “Hey, you shouldn’t cook methamphetamine in the garage, but just in case you do, I’ve installed venting fans so you won’t poison yourself. Oh, and I paid off the local crime boss so he won’t have you killed for selling drugs on his turf.” ?

Here’s the thing - most of us don’t explain vaccinations to our children, beyond, “You have to get this shot to help keep you healthy.”

Murmurs mentioned that getting the tetanus shot doesn’t give our children permission to dance on rusty nails. That’s a good comparison.

Vaccinating against HPV is not the same thing as handing your child a pack of condoms or pills and saying, “Better ‘safe’ than sorry.” THAT is telling a child you don’t trust them to remain abstinent.

 

[Xantippe]

In Africa mother-to-child and heterosexual transmission is unfortunately very common. Though any AIDS vaccine would probably come too late to prevent mother to child, so I don’t see how it’s relevant here…

If you vaccinate the mother before and keep her from getting HIV, then you protect her child from getting HIV and any older children from being orphaned. That’s kind of a big deal.

 

[Xantippe]

Here’s the thing - most of us don’t explain vaccinations to our children, beyond, “You have to get this shot to help keep you healthy.”

Murmurs mentioned that getting the tetanus shot doesn’t give our children permission to dance on rusty nails. That’s a good comparison.

Vaccinating against HPV is not the same thing as handing your child a pack of condoms or pills and saying, “Better ‘safe’ than sorry.” THAT is telling a child you don’t trust them to remain abstinent.

Yes. Most shots (when kids are big enough to understand the concept) are just explained as, “This is to keep you from getting sick.” There’s no need for further explanation.

 

[Royalist]

Here’s the thing - most of us don’t explain vaccinations to our children, beyond, “You have to get this shot to help keep you healthy.”

OK, that’s reasonable.

Murmurs mentioned that getting the tetanus shot doesn’t give our children permission to dance on rusty nails. That’s a good comparison.

Comparing sex to dancing on rusty nails is a little flawed…

 

[Royalist]

Xantippe, in that case the vaccine would not be preventing mother-to-child transmission, but preventing the mother from getting AIDS in the first place. We were talking about risk factors for AIDS here, in the context of “would you get this vaccine or not if it existed”.

 

[pensmama87]

OK, that’s reasonable.

Comparing sex to dancing on rusty nails is a little flawed…

But that’s not the comparison.

The comparison is, “We still get our kids tetanus vaccines even though we still expect them to not play with rusty nails.”

So, “We still get our kids HPV vaccines even though we still expect them to remain chaste.”

It’s not, “We don’t trust them to behave,” it’s “Sometimes $%^& happens and it’s not always because we do something wrong.”