[Closed] 13 yo daughter and deciding on the hpv vaccine.

definately

as someone whos worked in a cancer hospital, vaccination is a very good thing

Yes.

Yes.

Yep

Ta.

Yep. Cancer isn't very pleasant.

The only questionable thing about it is why it's not being given to boys too.

Thought it only covered a couple of the strains that can cause cancer and infection is often a multistrain fest.
So not quite as clear cut as measles etc

Why wouldn't you?

They're evaluating giving it to boys too now

Why wouldn't you?

They're evaluating giving it to boys too now

Because it's my daughter...and it's an injection of something...
Just being cautious/

Daughter had it at 13. all her school had it you would have seemed the local lunatic to make a fuss about it.
Regarding the boys, as with all vaccinations there is a tiny risk attached, and they wouldn't directly benefit from having the jab. Makes sense if your looking to eradicate the virus though.

I'd have it like a shot (no pun intended) if someone offered it to me.

and they wouldn't directly benefit from having the jab. Makes sense if your looking to eradicate the virus though.

Perhaps not, but given the method of infection it would no doubt be of benefit to women too were men also immunised.

Men would benefit, as HPV can cause warts and cancer in gentlemanly areas too, as well as not having their female loved ones get cancer.

Ok..a view on the nhs direct site includes only two comments, both of which don't help. One questions how prevalent the particular strains it protects against are, the other reports a girl slipping into a 13 week coma immediately after the injection.
Consent form duly signed tho.

Yep. The anti brigade in the US are anti because they think it'll encourage kids to go and have sex at 11 🙄

Yes it is a no brainer, as in takes no mental effort to realise it is the right thing to do . The anti vaccine arguments also tend to be no brainers too, as in no brains used in their creation.

[url= https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/147957/Green-Book-Chapter-18a-v2_0.pdf ]vaccine info (or "government party line", for conspiracy fans[/url]

Its a bit more complicated than you boys realise: there is not much evidence to support the notion that immunising against a couple of strains works. Some experts think its all destined to fail. People often envisage interventions as risk free, but they are not. So you have to look at the pros and cons. I'm generally in favour of immunisation but this one might be different - I don't think we know yet.

My (much younger) sister recently received her first one aged 15. My mum didn't want her getting it for odd reasons when she was 13. She was the only one in her YEAR not to receive it. Fair to say she got questioned by her classmates for a while. Maybe even bullied? Didn't sound particularly pleasant. Apart from being important for her health, it's also important from a social perspective.

I am not sure if I would have had it or not, if I could turn the clock back a few years!
Have you asked your daughter what she wants?

I have had treatment for an abnormal smear test/pre-cancerous cells and it wasn't a pleasant experience, and I now have to have annual checks.

But then again, I am not in favour of jabs for this and that without knowing all the risks, and this one for me is still too new for me personally to feel at ease with it.

Would possibly have saved my friend's wife (and mother of their small daughter), if it had been around earlier. She died of cervical cancer.

Suggest (strongly) she has the jab.

Someone close to me had a close call. Please do it

As I said....consent granted.
Daughter has decided to have it too after talking it through.

Yes... Just do it.

rockhopper70- show your daughter this thread. Then tell her she's made a good choice. Because she has made a good choice.

I'm a schoolteacher and I'm going to show this thread to my yr9 registration class later.

Vaccines are TERRIBLE. Just awful.
And since when has everyone else doing something make anything right? If everyone was jumping off a cliff etc.

Vaccines are terrible. Just awful.

In the UK, the MMR vaccine was the subject of controversy after publication of a 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield et al. reporting a study of twelve children who had bowel symptoms along with autism or other disorders, including cases where onset was believed by the parents to be soon after administration of MMR vaccine.[33] In 2010, Wakefield's research was found by the General Medical Council to have been "dishonest","The GMC decided they shared responsibility for the ethical conduct of the trial, although neither one was said to have acted dishonestly."[34] and The Lancet fully retracted the original paper.[35] The research was declared fraudulent in 2011 by the British Medical Journal.[36] Several subsequent peer-reviewed studies have failed to show any association between the vaccine and autism.[37]

Personally the jury is out on this vaccine, particularly when you see what's happened in Japan and Spain. I will not be rushing into having my daughter vaccinated.

Sits back and waits to be called a ****ing idiot.

Yes...

Please stop the awful conspiracy to save our children's lives... 🙄

OP. good call go for it.

I should really look this up but it's early and I'm working...so could you share what has happened in Japan and Spain?

Spain

MADRID (AFP) – Spanish health authorities have withdrawn tens of thousands of doses of a vaccine against cervical cancer after two teenagers who received the shots were hospitalised, regional authorities said on Tuesday.

A batch of nearly 76,000 doses of the human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) was withdrawn from market, a government statement said, after two girls in the eastern Valencia region fell seriously ill hours after receiving them.

"One of the girls got out of intensive care this weekend and the other is still there. Both are in stable condition," a Valencia health department spokeswoman told AFP. The two girls were vaccinated last week as part of a vast government vaccination programme targeting adolescents.

Japan

the Japanese health ministry has withdrawn its recommendation for vaccination after receiving hundreds of side effects reports of long-term pain and numbness, among other things, The Asahi Shimbun writes. Although vaccines will remain available, local health officials are being told not to promote vaccination while studies are conducted.

“The decision does not mean that the vaccine, itself, is problematic from the view of safety, “ Mariko Momoi, vp of the International University of Health and Welfare, who headed a task force probing the issue, tells the paper. “By implementing investigations, we want to offer information that can make the people feel more at ease.”

To date, an estimated 3.28 million people have been vaccinated, and 1,968 cases of possible side effects, including body pain, have been reported and the task force examined 43 cases, the paper writes. However, a causal relationship between vaccination and pain and numbness could not be established, which prompted the decision to run further studies by the ministry.

Actually " the truther girls " using screenshots of headlines from the internet have convinced me that medical science and peer reviewed studies are all wrong and vaccines are bad.

and to put some of the stats into perspective (2000 in 3.28 million)

Every year there are potentially more than 500 sudden unexplained deaths in England, reveals a nationwide study published ahead of print in the journal Heart.

This figure is around eight times higher than previously thought, the data suggest.

The research team drew on cause of death judgments relating to sudden unexplained deaths in people from 117 coroners (out of 122) across England between October 1997 and May 1999.

The judgments were all based on post mortem examination reports. None of those who died had a history of heart disease, and they had all last been seen alive within 12 hours of death. All were aged between 4 and 64. Each case was assessed by an expert to eliminate other identifiable causes of death.

Booked the kids in for first jab for chicken pox vaccination next week.
Seems to be that it's only the cost which has kept it from being added to the NHS program.

With all vaccines there is are tiny risks they will tell you these on the information leaflet, it's then up to the individual, the parents or maybe both depending on age of the child to way up these risks against protection of whatever they are immunising against.

I have 2 Daughters and when it comes around to them I'll be recommending they have it. It's a choice and if people choose not to have one then that's their choice, no need to insult other people either way.

Obviously it will be 30-40 years before we know whether this vaccination programme is actually effective in reducing the rates of cervical cancer. It will also be interesting to see if there are other unintended consequences, such as a rise in other STDs because of reduced condom use among vaccinated girls and their partners.

It's a shame that the ethical assessment couldn't justify offering the jab to boys as well. Not only because it reduces the chance of herd immunity, but to help demonstrate to them that STD prevention is as much their responsibility as girls.

I suspect that the statistical risk of a 13 year old getting run over on the way to have the jab is greater than the risk of side effects...

It's a choice and if people choose not to have one then that's their choice

Sure. For instance, just now when I woke up, I had a choice between making coffee and stabbing myself in the eye with a fork.

which did you go for Cougar ?

It will also be interesting to see if there are other unintended consequences, such as a rise in other STDs because of reduced condom use among vaccinated girls and their partners.

Sorry, but this is the second time this has been hinted at here, and it's... weird.

a) "we'd better use a condom, it slightly reduces the risk of cervical cancer," said no teenage boy in the history of the world, ever. There's a slightly more forefront side effect of unprotected sex, which takes about nine months to appear.

b) what's the argument here, that actually we should be exposing teenagers to as much risk as possible in order to discourage them from having sex?

Not read much of this but spotted the opportunity to post this.

6079smithw - Member

Vaccines are TERRIBLE. Just awful.
And since when has everyone else doing something make anything right? If everyone was jumping off a cliff etc.

[img] [/img]

I think the argument is that, if no-one tells kids about sex, they'll never work it out for themselves.

[i] we should be exposing teenagers to as much risk as possible in order to discourage them from having sex? [/i]

this appears to be the approach being adopted by a number of US states.

All they seem to be achieving is an explosion in teen pregnancy and a huge rise in STD's.

Why look at the evidence when the conservative right can feel smug as they go to bed at night?

Sorry, but this is the second time this has been hinted at here, and it's... weird.
a) "we'd better use a condom, it slightly reduces the risk of cervical cancer," said no teenage boy in the history of the world, ever. There's a slightly more forefront side effect of unprotected sex, which takes about nine months to appear.

Not at all weird, sometimes the thought processes of teenagers are slightly odd though. Assuming they all make rational, informed decisions is an odder perspective though.

A fair few teenage girls use oral contraception. Many of these will also insist on condom use because they are aware of STDs. Some won't, because they are unaware of STD risk generally, choose to dismiss it, or give in to pressure from a partner who doesn't want to use one.

What we don't quite know is whether a vaccine against one particular type of STD will make it more likely that a small subset of teenagers more likely to dismiss STD risk or give into pressure.

There have been studies which show that knowledge about HPV/STDs generally/condom use is pretty flawed among a large group of teenagers:

example: http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/78437130/teenagers-knowledge-about-hpv-infection-hpv-vaccination-first-year-public-vaccination-programme

I recall another which at least hinted that some girls mistakenly believed that HPV vaccination would protect them against all STDs and would be less likely to insist on condom use as a result. Can't find the link to that one.

It's not about choosing to expose your child to more risk to encourage abstinence - that's just loony. It's about making sure over time that a vaccination programme which aims to reduce long term risk of cervical cancer does not end up with the unintended consequence of increasing the risk of genital herpes.

I'd most likely opt to give my daughter the jab, FWIW. But I'd expect researchers to be vigilant for not only immediate side-effects, but also indirect consequences.

martinhutch - your argument seems to support a drive for more education about the purpose of HPV vaccine, not its removal?

It's not about choosing to expose your child to more risk to encourage abstinence - that's just loony. It's about making sure over time that a vaccination programme which aims to reduce long term risk of cervical cancer does not end up with the unintended consequence of increasing the risk of genital herpes.

martinhutch - your argument seems to support a drive for more education about the purpose of HPV vaccine, not its removal?

My argument certainly isn't for its removal, unless you've misread it entirely. Education would certainly be a good thing, although history shows the delivery and efficacy of teenage sexual health education programmes is also a wee bit patchy.

Vaccination science just isn't black and white. I broadly support HPV vaccination in girls, from what I've seen of the science. I'd support it more if it could be introduced for boys, for herd immunity reasons.

Doesn't mean that researchers should not be interested in some of these issues though.

I've only just got that youtube video of the truther girls posted on page 1 to work. That deals with MMR. It kind of suggests some sort of conspiracy and sweeping under the carpet that MMR IS linked to autism.
Bt surely, some medical professionals (Andrew Wakefield) would be shouting this from the rooftops either for the good of the population or to make a name for themselves in medical circles (Andrew Wakefield) or to say "I told you so".
How much credibilty can you give to a blog site?

rockhopper70 - Member

I've only just got that youtube video of the truther girls posted on page 1 to work. That deals with MMR. It kind of suggests some sort of conspiracy and sweeping under the carpet that MMR IS linked to autism.
Bt surely, some medical professionals (Andrew Wakefield) would be shouting this from the rooftops either for the good of the population or to make a name for themselves in medical circles (Andrew Wakefield) or to say "I told you so".
How much credibilty can you give to a blog site?

From http://www.examiner.com/article/polish-study-vaccines-carry-the-potential-to-do-tremendous-harm

A new scientific review from Poland addresses vaccines in terms of adverse events, immune system effects and neurological symptoms following vaccination. The following information was gathered form a Gaia Health article dated May 12.

The authors of the said review state that:

"...postvaccinal complications among children can be observed in sporadic cases and that they are disproportionate to the benefits of vaccination in the elimination of dangerous diseases in childhood."

They point out several adverse effects that occur shortly after vaccination including local reactions and postvaccinal adverse events of the central nervous system which include:

encephalopathy
febrile convulsions
non-febrile convulsions
paralytic poliomyelitis caused by vaccine virus
encephalitis
meningitis
Guillain-Barré syndrome

Other adverse events following immunization were also listed. The authors go on to state: "...it is not reasonable to assume that manipulation of the immune system through an increasing number of vaccinations during critical periods of brain development will not result in adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes."

How much credibility can you give to authorities who said thalidimide and asbestos were ok?

-a lot more than I give some nutter who writes a blog on the interwebz

fortunately a quick search of pubmed will give you a reasoned, scientific exploration of facts. im not sure 'Gaia Health' counts as a legitimate soruce

thalidomide is perfectly safe*, its used as a cancer therapy

* as long as youre not an unborn foetus- not enough animal testing was done on that one

still It must be hard eschewing all medicines because you dont trust the authorities, I take it you would refuse any and all treatments for illnesses, from headaches to heart attacks and cancer?

People do try and warn others, however when you have a controlled media it's difficult to get this message across.

Vaccine preventable diseases currently include:
Diseases for which vaccinations form part of the NHMRC Standard Vaccination Schedule
diphtheria
tetanus
pertussis (whooping cough)
poliomyelitis (polio)
measles
mumps
rubella
haemophilus influenzae type b infections
hepatitis B
influenza
pneumococcal infections

How much credibility can you give to authorities who said thalidimide and asbestos were ok?

Abestos isn't a medicine though is it? Also with occupational diseases they take a long time to manifest, for example 20-40 years for asbestosis or mesothelioma. Now if we also take into account that many gp paractices historically didn't initially look at occupational exposure to substances hazardous to health and the fact that historically life expectancy was shorter, the epidemiology for long them occupational illness is much harder to identify. So it's not that the "man" kept it quiet as a conspiracy, more a case that to identify occupational diseases, cancers etc needs a multidisciplinary approach from doctors, health and safety specialists, and bodies like the hsl and cdc.

When my Daughter was old enough to get the HPV we read about it online, about the side-effects etc, she was due to go in on the Wednesday and one of the girls who had been in before her had fainted, she still went and had the first jab but she was quite ill after for a while (and was sent home that day.

On reading further we found that there were a lot of young girls had been adversely affected after the first jab and went for the 2nd and ended up worse. We decided (incl Daughter) not to get the 2nd jab, we may live to regret it but I doubt it.

P.S.
Don't read the NHS info about it read independent reports.

The [url= http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20928-we-need-to-talk-about-hpv-vaccination--seriously.html ]New Scientist[/url] will give you a more unbiased view than health companies who benefit from mass drug use.

On reading further we found that there were a lot of young girls had been adversely affected

Living to regret it would seem an unlikely outcome.

The New Scientist will give you a more unbiased view than health companies who benefit from mass drug use.

I love the big scary drug companies are all out to make money and turn us all into zombies approach

Good article - wouldn't stop me immunizing though (we have give MMR to both our kids although we have an autistic nephew whose mother is convinced got it from the mmr )

The NHS doesn't benefit from doing this btw, it costs it money. As does dealing with autistic kids, incidentally.

Not strictly true Molgrips one of the reasons for vaccines is prevention is cheaper than cure.

"Where was this data found ? what were the numbers involved ? Blogs ? Mumsnet ? This is no diff from the mmr scare, you are taking anecdotal evidence and extrapolating it to the an illogical conclusion "

You are quite right it was not evidence but enough to scare us nonetheless, I did quick search and found some REAL scary stuff, it could all be false - or not! Actually heard a lot 1st hand from other schools in the area, probably heard more as I work in schools.

Cougar - I meant my wife and I as parents making the decision may live to regret it 🙂

Still very happy with the decision to pull her out, I'll let you know I the next 20 - 30 years if it was correct decision - if I live that long.

one of the reasons for vaccines is prevention is cheaper than cure.

The other being people don't die ......

The other being people don't die ..

Do you think.

You are quite right it was not evidence but enough to scare us nonetheless, I did quick search and found some REAL scary stuff, it could all be false - or not!

Is cervical cancer not scary then?

"The NHS doesn't benefit from doing this btw, it costs it money. As does dealing with autistic kids, incidentally. "

Sorry should have worded that better, the peoples who advocate the use of vaccines/drugs etc to the NHS make a LOT of money. Conspiracies abound:- Doctors prescribing wrong medicines to people just because they have to shift (targets) so much a month, Doctors over-prescribing meds for same reason.

Doctors prescribing wrong medicines to people just because they have to shift (targets) so much a month, Doctors over-prescribing meds for same reason.

Although GP's have immunisation targets ... I wonder why ?

"You are quite right it was not evidence but enough to scare us nonetheless, I did quick search and found some REAL scary stuff, it could all be false - or not!

Is cervical cancer not scary then? "

And that's emotional blackmail exactly why people get the vaccine, we were worried about the reports of paralysis although thought to be temporary it wasn't for some. All you need to do is type Paralysis caused by HPV vaccine into Google.

Also as I stated it was our choice, I didn't want to scaremonger that's why original post was lacking in detail,

Sorry should have worded that better, the peoples who advocate the use of vaccines/drugs etc to the NHS make a LOT of money.

What do you think makes the drug company more money - a dose of a vaccine, or a course of anti-cancer drugs?

The conspiracy theorists can't have it both ways - either the NHS wants to save money, or the drug companies want to make more money. Those two aims are mutually exclusive.

"and I speak to lots of very dull doctors at parties)."
Andy your credibility has gone out the window, there can't be any dull Doctors 🙂

I did say conspiracies abound............

People should make an 'informed decision' rather than letting the NHS convince you.

For example, I am supposed to have regular mammograms but I don't want them so don't have them.

kimbers - Member
still It must be hard eschewing all medicines because you dont trust the authorities

It would require a HAZMAT team to clean up the mess if the contents of a vaccine fell on a floor. Yet if you were ever asked if you wanted mercury injected into your bloodstream the answer should be a resounding no. When it's in a vaccine though somehow that's ok. Cognitive dissonance much?

kimbers - Member
I take it you would refuse any and all treatments for illnesses, from headaches to heart attacks and cancer?

Ooooooh, interesting stuff from 6079smithw. 🙂

People should make an 'informed decision' rather than letting the NHS convince you.

For example, I am supposed to have regular mammograms but I don't want them so don't have them.

I think you misunderstand what "informed" means 😉

if you wanted mercury injected into your bloodstream the answer should be a resounding no. When it's in a vaccine though somehow that's ok

Yeah, and don't put salt on your food - it's got chlorine in it. Chlorine is poisonous - chlorine gas was used in the trenches, you know. Plus there's also sodium in salt - every tried adding sodium to water? It explodes! What kind of idiot would eat that?

mikewsmith - Member

Anyway which of these would you like?

To the OP this would be a useful read http://www.jabs.org.uk/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4488&whichpage=1

No, any perfectly rational man or woman would not deliberately ingest or insert toxins into their body.

Definition of a toxin is anything that doesn't occur naturally in the body. Caffeine for example.

I've finally got round to reading [i]Bad Science[/i], and just finished it yesterday. This thread is perfectly timed, well played everyone - I'm enjoying some of the responses much more than I would have a couple of weeks ago. 🙂

When it's in a vaccine though somehow that's ok.

Yup vaccines are pure mercury - makes your blood boil doesnt it ......
link [url= http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/thi-table.htm ]here[/url] to show how much there is in each one

Vaccines never eradicated any illness!

Too right, that's why I got smallpox last week. And polio.

I got better.