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

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?

I shall shortly be having all my amalgam (mercury) fillings removed. Interestingly most other countries banned mercury years ago but the UK is supposed to be withdrawing it (for fillings) in a couple of years.

Goes without saying that I don't trust the NHS with my health. 😐

I trust the NHS a lot more than a private company who makes a profit out of my health.

Vaccines never eradicated any illness!

I read some of that. It goes on about illnesses not being eradicated, but it does admit that they have been significantly reduced. Surley significant reduction is a good thing?

When was the last time you knew a kid with polio or smallpox?

When was the last time you knew a kid with polio or smallpox?

IIRC Smallpox is effectively eradicated; last 'wild' outbreak was in the early Seventies, and there have been no cases [b]at all[/b] in >30 years.

The article disputes that...

The article disputes that...

I think I'd rather take the WHO's word for it, on the whole 😛

[i]I shall shortly be having all my amalgam (mercury) fillings removed. Interestingly most other countries banned mercury years ago but the UK is supposed to be withdrawing it (for fillings) in a couple of years.[/i]

really?

[b]Some[/b] European countries have banned it's use, and that's mostly because of environmental concerns after it's been used. In the meantime, there must be literally millions of people worldwide not dropping dead on a daily basis because of their fillings.

If you must, please please do some "informing of yourself" of the contributory agents of composite filling materials, their sensitivity issues, and their longevity, and check which ones your dentist uses.

we've taken the decision to withdraw the consent for now.
Inactivity is more comfortable that agreeing to it at the moment for all of us.
If need be, we shall do a lot more research and maybe speak to the GP.
Then let the GP administer it.

[i]we've taken the decision to withdraw the consent for now.[/i]

It would be a real shame if anything negative posted on this thread had made you change your minds.

Go with the science, not the conspiracy theories.

chipsngravy - Member
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.

IIRC the Spain was suspected to be a 'bad' batch, have you banned her from eating chicken in case it's got Campylobacter, Salmonella, Shigella, E. coli O157:H7, Listeria, or botulism in it, because the vaccine will have been a lot more thoroughly prepared than anything served in a restaurant (or at home). Japan didn't withdraw it, just suspended mass vaccination (you can still ask for it) but the symptoms weren't any more severe than the TB jab (numbness, soreness etc arround the injection).

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?

*Bangs head on wall* 'mercury' was removed from vaccines for one reason, and one reason only. People didn't like the word mercury. The form it was used in was completely, unequivocally and utterly inert. Unfortunately anti vaccine campaigners have siezed on it as a victory over the government/pharmaceutical companies trying to poision them.

I really can't believe that a few postings from some very poorly informed/ignorant people on here have stopped you giving your daughter a potentially lifesaving vaccination

As someone who's worked in cancer research for the last 15 plus years its really very depressing

we've taken the decision to withdraw the consent for now.
Inactivity is more comfortable that agreeing to it at the moment for all of us.
If need be, we shall do a lot more research and maybe speak to the GP.
Then let the GP administer it.

Please do proper research, not Google. Read scientific papers, and work out for yourself the risk you're taking.

Maybe the guy wants to take his time making a decision that one way or another will impact on his daughter's life.

Fair play to the OP for bringing the issue to STW in the first place and even more so for the recent update. I know I wouldn't have done that. My private life has **** all to do with anyone on STW.

Reading scientific papers and knowing you've looked at a balanced sample of papers and understood them appropriately is not necessarily a good idea without a reasonably good understanding of medicine, science and statistics.
There's an advert doing the rounds on Facebook that says "FACT- cancer is a fungus", and from reading the comments attached to it, I am horrified at the number of people who believe that to be true and when challenged they tell you they've "done a lot of research and are well informed".

As for "natural treatments" some of them are toxic, for example butterbur was banned because it causes liver toxicity. "Natural" does not necessarily mean 'safe and effective'. Also, many pharmaceuticals are based on natural substances, so distinguishing the 2 isn't so simple.

It's not put off...perhaps on hold until we satisfy ourselves more.
It was a bit last minute with not a great deal of notice from the school about their intentions.

I've finally got round to reading Bad Science, and just finished it yesterday.

You don't seriously think Ben Goldacre would bite the hand that feeds him?

Some European countries have banned it's use, and that's mostly because of environmental concerns after it's been used. In the meantime, there must be literally millions of people worldwide not dropping dead on a daily basis because of their fillings.

If you must, please please do some "informing of yourself" of the contributory agents of composite filling materials, their sensitivity issues, and their longevity, and check which ones your dentist uses.

Nick - this was obviously a tough decision to make but I've had 4 years of rubbish health. Many people with my (permanent) condition get better. Also, as I'm sure you know, it's a specialist job to remove them so have done my research. 🙂

A number of people on here are keasea and I claim multiple £5s!

Ben Goldacre actively hates the pharmaceutical industry, describing using terms such as "evil", to the point that I think he is clouding his own judgement. However, he does write very well on the merits of evidence from properly designed and conducted clinical trials.
I am not saying whether anyone should or should not have their child vaccinated, it's none of my business, but beware of people who claim to be informed when they may not actually be either appropriately informed or qualified.

Ben Goldacre is pretty wideranging in the hands he bites and is really happy to explain and justify his reasoning. I would trust him over the "truther girls" and the opinion piece in the new scientist linked above which was pretty comprehensively rebutted in the comments section .

OP you do need to be confident in your decision talk to your GP and read the NHS information .

*googles Ben Goldacre hating pharmaceutical industry*

Nope, can't find it. Can you post a link please? I see that he wants to fix the industry: [url= http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/bad-pharma-a-manifesto-to-fix-the-pharmaceutical-industry/ ]http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/bad-pharma-a-manifesto-to-fix-the-pharmaceutical-industry/[/url] and is positively anal about having data to back claims (that's why he is behind alltrials.org). But he hates people pulling things out of thin air such as anti-vaxxers and woo-merchants, though he would change his view if given hard evidence.

I have avoided flu jab but one of colleague is addicted to it so demands getting one every year. Coz it's free according to him ... 🙄

AdamW- I can certainly find you some quotes from Ben Goldacre relating to the pharma industry, when I get home later tonight.
I'm pretty sure they are in his book Bad Science. He has also make such comments on Facebook.

I can assure you, having just read Bad Pharma and Bad Science, that at no point in either does he profess to hate the pharma industry.

For a start Ben Golacre has written a book called "Bad Pharma: how drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients". I haven't read this one, but I do know that in Bad Science he has made sweeping statements that are not true across the board in the industry.

Ben Golacre has written a book called "Bad Pharma: how drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients". I haven't read this one

It's good; perhaps you should.

And, such as?

I have avoided flu jab but one of colleague is addicted to it so demands getting one every year. Coz it's free according to him

That's not a good reason. Avoiding ending up on ECMO, now [b]that's[/b] a good reason.

theflatboy - I have read large excerpts from that book and I have also read Bad Science twice. I am not defending the pharmaceutical industry, and I am sure that not all big pharma companies are totally inncocent of bad practice. However, what I cannot tolerate is people like Ben Goldacre making sweeping statements, giving the impression that everything he claims is fact and applies to all medicines developed in all pharmaceutical companies. Take Chapter 11 of Bad Science where he suggests that pharmaceutical companies are all out there manipulating their statistical analyses inappropriately to rig the results. I can't claim that has never happened any more than he can claim that it happens frequently, or most of the time.
I am unusual in experiencing particularly bad side effects from almost all medicines that I have ever been prescribed, but that doesn't mean I can't see that many medications make a big differece to people's lives and they haven't all been developed by evil people.

Vicky - all the more to be behind the 'alltrials.org' system where *all* trials, good and bad, all those dropped and left dangling are all registered and their data, good and bad is open for all to see. Full transparency is the key. The natural competitiveness of the industry will then keep everyone on their toes.

And hopefully if that happens the shyster Burzynski can be forced to give his 'results' for anti-neoplastons. 😀

Goldacre can point to evidence where falsifying clinical data has occurred, and you can never claim something didn't happen as it would be trying to prove a negative. Best get all data out.

I have a copy of Bad Science - which focuses on unscientific reportage in all areas of life - and I'll re-read Chapter 11. I find it hard to believe that he would state *all* companies would do that, as it is not very scientific and he's particularly anal about that stuff. More likely he would say 'many' or a similar phrase. You'll never get a true scientist to give a 100% guarantee of anything. But I'll re-read it as you may be correct (see? I'm a scientist by training too...)

Don't decide not to let your daughter have the HPV vaccine on the strength of what you found on Google. Or if you are swayed by Google then include this blog by a cancer surgeon who gets very angry the antivaccine conspiracy theorists (amongst others): http://scienceblogs.com/?s=Hpv

Because of the vaccine future cases of cervical cancer could be much reduced but not if people don't have it. Don't forget that it's vaccination that eradicated polio, diphtheria and has almost eradicated tetanus in the UK, amongst others, and it's a tragedy that a combination of anti-Western propaganda and Western anti-vaccination groups have prevented the WHO from achieving the aim of eradicating polio worldwide (it's endemic in Afghanistan, Nigeria and ****stan). We've forgotten how awful these communicable diseases are but if you need a reminder about polio you could do worse than listen to the samples here http://www.allmusic.com/album/the-body-blow-mw0000243699.

I would happily [s]take natural treatments.[/s] die

FTFY.

Don't decide not to let your daughter have the HPV vaccine on the strength of what you found on Google.

This.

I would happily take natural treatments.

Ah yes the natural treatments. Over the years I've picked up several people taking natural treatments and giving their kids natural treatment, "We don't believe in medicines" is the common phrase they use.

"Well I can make that severe pain you're in go away in seconds are you can suffer in pain, the choice is yours but I do have a duty of care to look after you which will it be?"

Funny they all decide to take the pain relief.

"I've tried homeopathic medicines but he's not got any better"

"Has he got worse or has his breathing been this bad for the last few days and have managed to control his temp?"

"No, he's got worse the last few hours and his temp has been getting higher"

"Well it's your child and your choice but I do have a duty of care for this child, I can make him well by given him a few simple meds or I can document you choice to refuse you sign it and we continue to leave him untreat"

"Oooh he is much better what did you say you gave him again"

"Calpol"

Drac. I hate it when people do this but I'll have to do it...genuine lol 🙂

vickypea - Member

that doesn't mean I can't see that many medications make a big differece to people's lives and they haven't all been developed by evil people.

That sentiment is basically continually flagged up through the entirety of Bad Pharma (and the relevant parts of Bad Science). You really should read it.

Just because some drug companies behave like rapacious capitalists, and that they limit access to information about the problems with their products doesn't mean all their products are bad or harmful.

It never ceases to amaze me:

1) How many people think "natural" is automatically good. Arsenic and shit are "natural". Everything non-natural is not part of a conspiracy.

2) How people would rather their child had a 1:10,000 chance of something really bad happening to them by taking [i]no [/i]action/having no vaccine than a 1:1,000,000 chance of something bad happening by taking a [i]decision [/i]to have a treatment/vaccine.

3) How people who believe in a "holistic" approach, rarely consider that their problems might be due to emotional or psychological issues. That their holism applies to treatments... not causes...

[b]OP [/b]- please think again. I have seen enough cervical cancer to know it isn't nice.

This is worth a watch
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01f51s5 - Pain Puss & Poison and the evolution of modern healthcare.

I do know that in Bad Science he has made sweeping statements that are not true across the board in the industry.

Interestingly, I've found a Ben Goldacre blog about the Express's reporting on cervical cancer vaccines -

http://www.badscience.net/2009/10/jabs-as-bad-as-the-cancer/#more-1374

And it seems to me that, while he is critical of the coverage (and explains why), he makes no sweeping statements about the medical industry as a whole. I must say (and not to labour the point) that I have read Bad Science, and I remember it as being very evidence-led and singularly lacking in sweeping statements. I'll give it another go, though - it's a good book.

He did making a sweeping statement about me and my wife in [i]Bad Science[/i] - he accurately lumped us in as "trendy MMR-dodging north London middle class humanities graduate couple with children", which luckily we didn't end up actually becoming (6 out of 7 isn't bad though... ok, 5 out of 7).

If I'd read [i]Bad Science[/i] while my wife was pregnant it would have been quite instructive in helping us pick out the wood from the trees a little earlier.

I am a cancer researcher and remember seeing the original HPV story unfold - you should see what it does to monkeys 8O.
A friend, and mother to three children the same age as ours, has just had major surgery to remove a cervical cancer that wasn't detected by regular screening. It's not something to take lightly.
No surprise then that my daughter will have it, and if possible, my son will as well.

Thalidamide is a strange example, the drug itself in one form works perfectly, it's Chiral opposite causes the problems.

Recently read Bad Science, and am in the middle of Bad Pharma. It seems to me that Ben Goldacre was fairly complimentary about the drugs companies that signed up to the trials register (GlaxoWellcome was one I think), and was disparaging when they pulled out after a merger with Smithkline. He's hugely in favour of open information on trials (positive and negative), and unimpressed with hidden trials and statistical manipulation.

Bad Science is a great book - should be a standard text for kids. Encourage them to look behind sensationalist headlines.

To the OP, as I mentioned earlier in the thread, my friend's wife was diagnosed with cervical cancer basically during the birth of their daughter, and died soon after. The HPV vaccine (had it been available then) may have prevented the cancer and my friend's daughter may have a mother now.

This is factually incorrect despite turning up in organic chemistry textbooks. The enantiomers of thalidomide interconvert rapidly at the pH of blood so you could never test anything other than a racemate.
Thanks for letting me get that off my chest...

"I've tried homeopathic medicines but he's not got any better"

Homeopathy works for some. Not for me. Acupuncture works for some. Not for me. Natural herbs work for some. Not for me.
Without my medication I would be unable to live a normal life, be unable to leave the house, end up in hospital (again) and possibly try to commit suicide (again).
Good luck to you guys with your natural medications. I'm sure they work but not for me.
My point is if something is clinically proven to help just bloody take it.

Homeopathy works for some. Not for me.

And don't use it to clean your loo either 😀

Homeopathy works for some.

Well, no. It's no better than placebo, as that's exactly what it is.

To be fair I think the rest of his post suggests that iolo actually meant:

Homeopathy [b]"[/b]works[b]"[/b] for some.

I think it works quite well for homeopaths.

To be fair I think the rest of his post suggests that iolo actually meant

Point taken, however acupuncture may work (though not for everyone, and not for me either), and herbal remedies (ie. St Johns' Wort) do have some effect.

Homeopathy, OTOH, is utter quackery, and doesn't work for anyone.

If a placebo makes someone feel better is it a bad thing? When mummy kisses her sons elbow and he stops crying is this a medical thing?
St. John's wort was the worst possible thing I ever took which sent me batshit crazy. Don't give it to a Bipolar sufferer.

No, of course placebo is no bad thing. My objection to homeopathy is that there is lots of robust evidence it doesn't work, little that it does work, and it's hugely expensive for what is distilled water. There is a disaster relief charity called Homepaths Without Borders, and this is beneath contempt.

St John's Wort has well-documented effects.

Anyway, me ranting about the evils of the distilled water peddlars is getting a bit off topic.

If a placebo makes someone feel better is it a bad thing?

That rather depends if it is [b]just[/b] making them [i]feel[/i] better whilst the underlying cause is still killing them.

Skint elbow is one thing. [url= http://www.badscience.net/2010/02/the-bbc-have-found-someone-whose-cancer-was-cured-by-homeopathy/ ]Cancer is another[/url].

I have had treatment twice for abnormal cells (CIN2) on my cervix and I have HPV.

Once you have it, it can stay dormant and never actually clear up. the body may get rid of it on its own, but it doesn't always.

I had very unpleasant treatment to remove the changed cervical cells, including a biopsy with no anaesthetic and then a LLETZ treatment which basically burns them off. My first abnormal smear was at 23, which is only 10 years older than the OPs daughter, and I was treated a year later. My second treatment at age 27 - I got infected afterwards and my cervix is scarred, and is now hypersensitive.

I now have to have smear tests every year, I bleed every time and it's very painful after the two treatments, not to mention that having a very sensitive cervix affects, ahem, other things. I dread having another abnormal one and having to go through it all again, but of course if it happens then that's what will have to be done in order to stop it turning cancerous.

Sorry for any squeamishness on the part of the men, but that's what women have to deal with when they have abnormal cells due to HPV infection and I would like that the OP is informed about this before he makes any final decision regarding whether his daughter is vaccinated or not. I sure as hell wish there had been one when I was that age.

I sometimes wonder if men don't want their daughters to have this vaccine because they can't handle the idea of them having sex, ever, so they WANT an excuse to say no to it and not have to deal with it. And of course, there is an association of HPV with promiscuity, even though you need only have one partner who has been infected to get it yourself, so some people think that the women who have to go through this probably deserve it because they are sluts anyway, if they've ended up with a sexually transmitted infection.

@graham, I never said anything about healing cancer with sugar pills.
My post was to take whatever medicine or vaccination to ensure the illness, whatever it might be, is either controlled or treated.

I am a small animal veterinarian. I give literally dozens of vaccines every day. In 13 years I have seen fewer than 10 serious adverse reactions.

Being a vet and a keen traveller I have also received far more vaccines than the average person - my wife, also a vet, has too. We are both quite fit and well despite these dreadfully toxic things.

My daughter who is now 11 months has had all her vaccines to date and I'm sure in time will have her HPV vaccine too.

I think in the Western World it is very easy to forget just how serious the diseases are which have now largely disappeared. I have dealt with rabies and distemper cases (both of these fairly well eradicated in the UK) and still see parvovirus - which is preventable IF animals are vaccinated.

Vaccines are not without risks. No medical intervention is. By and large though these risks through are tiny compared to the diseases they prevent.

I sometimes wonder if men don't want their daughters to have this vaccine because they can't handle the idea of them having sex

That's part of the public opposition in the US, within a religious framework. As in, our kids should not be having sex, and they should only sleep with one person, so why should we support them doing anything else?

That's part of the public opposition in the US, within a religious framework. As in, our kids should not be having sex, and they should only sleep with one person, so why should we support them doing anything else?

The thing is, that one person they sleep with could have slept with one other person who had HPV....even if the girlie is a wee angel, the boy might not be, or vice versa!

Of course - you don't have to tell me how stupid the idea is!

And don't use it to clean your loo either

Beginner's mistake. He's supposed to put the solution into a special flask, and strike it 10 times against a special leather and horsehair mat. Only then will the water remember the bleach molecules.....

Good thing he didn't, or the homeopathic bleach could have killed him 🙂

Of course - you don't have to tell me how stupid the idea is!

Lol - I saw "US" and "religious" in the sentence and I figured! 😉

Good thing he didn't, or the homeopathic bleach could have killed him

Makes you wonder why there have never been any homeopathic terrorist attacks eh? Pretty easy to sneak 1 picolitre of something nasty into a public water reservoir! 😆

Spotted this this morning and thought it would help those still on the fence.

http://theconversation.com/six-myths-about-vaccination-and-why-theyre-wrong-13556

The second part of this cover vaccines well too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03ccs7k/Pain_Pus_and_Poison_The_Search_for_Modern_Medicines_Pus/

What was the outcome of the original decision here, out of interest? Still holding off or got the jab?

Held off for now.
We'll be looking into this in due course but I appreciate the debate this thread started.

those of you who Facebook might like to look at the [url=

Vax Wall of Shame[/url] - but I warn you, there is some frightening stuff on there.

Of course, you could always ask your daughters what they want.

At 13 yrs old, I know myself and most other girls were quite self aware and if my mum signed for me to have an injection that I did not want, there is no way I would have had it!

I cant imagine the wishes of the girls are not asked about!

Held off for now.
We'll be looking into this in due course but I appreciate the debate this thread started.

vaccinate now. I'd be really surprised if some further evidence emerged to either put you off or encourage you.

HPV is also linked to head & neck cancers. [url= http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdFact-HPVandoralcancer.htm ]http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdFact-HPVandoralcancer.htm[/url]. albeit ones with a [url= http://www.oralcancerfoundation.org/facts/pdf/hpv_Infection.pdf ]more favourable prognosis[/url] than non-HPV related ones.

[img] [/img]
[IMG] [/IMG]
http://www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/09/17/the-murdering-of-our-daughters-12255/

[img] ?1364131602[/img]

6079smith your links are absolute bobbins -the study they refer too seems to be a complete fiction-and dumping stuff like that a a thread about vaccinating a someone against a cancer causing virus would be laughable if it wasn't so damaging

Snopes debunk 6079smithw's scaremongering here:

http://www.snopes.com/medical/drugs/gardasil.asp

Which in part reads:

The CDC, in conjunction with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), operates a program known as the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). The VAERS program collects and analyzes reports on adverse events following immunizations in order to help track the safety and efficacy of various vaccines. It is important to note that reports collected by VAERS are raw data; they do not in themselves establish causal connections between vaccines and adverse medical issues — such determinations cannot be made until the reports have been investigated, evaluated, and analyzed.

(To illustrate this concept, we offer the following [admittedly far-fetched] scenario: A man who received a flu vaccination and then accidentally hit his hand with a hammer a few hours later might legitimately report that soon after he received the flu vaccine, his hand began to throb painfully. Although such a report would be literally true, it would not establish any causal connection between the flu vaccine and the adverse medical symptom of a throbbing, painful hand.)
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/medical/drugs/gardasil.asp#MvrJyOIeToiBOoox.99

Sorry I can't sort the line spacing in the quote!

I expect it would be tasteless and too big a task to post pictures of the thousands of girls and women who have lost their lives to cancer . So I will just point out that 6079smithw's link is to an American right wing website and intact only documents one death in relation to which it says there was no autopsy so despite the claimed link to the vaccine no evidence just a perverse form of wishful thinking.

If you have any doubts about vaccination then Penn & Teller explain it very simply.

Of course, you could always ask your daughters what they want.

At 13 yrs old, I know myself and most other girls were quite self aware and if my mum signed for me to have an injection that I did not want, there is no way I would have had it!

I cant imagine the wishes of the girls are not asked about!

Hell no, when it comes to their teenage daughters, a lot of fathers believe they are the guardians of their daughters' sexuality, and therefore they just stick their fingers in their ears and go "la la la" when faced with anything that points to their daughters having future sexual activity.

All this scaremongering about vaccines comes from the American right, who have exactly the views above. They love a bit of Bible bashing, and you only have to read a few choice verses from there about how basically women are morally f***ed and have to repent their sins through the pain of childbirth and subservience to men. Punishment for sexual activity outside the prescribed Bible belt LifeScript(TM) is part of the deal, and since they believe that this vaccine promotes promiscuity, they prefer to believe that cervical cancer is a punishment for "promiscuous women" hence they will bash and discredit it all they can to try and prevent women having more agency, and choice, about their own bodies.

What women want rarely comes into it.

they believe that this vaccine promotes promiscuity, they prefer to believe that cervical cancer is a punishment for "promiscuous women"

Really is an odd attitude eh?

I mean, even if you buy into that [i]interesting[/i] moral framework - their pure virginal daughters still risk contracting HPV when they get married and have good honest intercourse (procreative purposes only obviously) with their loving devoted husband?

I mean, even if you buy into that interesting moral framework - their pure virginal daughters still risk contracting HPV when they get married and have good honest intercourse (procreative purposes only obviously) with their loving devoted husband?

Sadly, I think they believe that God will spare them and diseases only affect people of lose morals / atheists..

Sadly, I think they believe that God will spare them and diseases only affect people of lose morals / atheists..

Sadly, these people ARE this delusional.

Anything that gives women greater choice, protection, and agency over what happens to their bodies is opposed.