HPV mandates coming in January 2020

banana123

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 12:52 am

amother [ OP ] wrote:

Same as with BC. Apply whatever you logic you do to explain why teens don't need to be on mandatory BC in order to enter HS.

Pregnancy isn't a disease?

And I never said it should be mandatory. I just said it is worth thinking about this in real terms, instead of being against it just because it's a vaccine. I don't think this should be mandatory. I do think that it should not be rejected outright.

amother

Blonde

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 9:11 am

I think BC is really a very good comparison. You don't know which religious teens will go otd and which husbands will be horrible humans so default should be mandatory universal BC and maybe you need to order babies and get Dr. Permission to go off BC when you want a child. Because there is population overgrowth which makes global climate change worse and we need to save people from being teen moms even if they are religious and married because teen mom is horrible atrocity and let's save everyone against their will. Throw in a hint of China laws and a big of Hollywoods handmaiden tales. Please help stop government overeach. Please vote NAY. We need to be free to choose to use science not FORCED.

shabbatiscoming

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 9:26 am

amother [ Pewter ] wrote:

This vaccine does not prevent cancer. This vaccine is for a disease that may or may not cause cancer at age 50 plus and this disease comes from not keeping our halachos properly.
There is not one study proving that it prevents cancer. Because it was only tested on Indian girls and they are still in their teens. And the control group even proved that if you were previously exposed to that virus you are 46% more inclined to get cancer from that virus after you the shot.
So ladies - just because you are pro vaccine and just because you are a liberal and want to allow your children to have irresponsible intimate lives, doesn’t mean that this vaccine is for you.
Finally, this vaccine was originally intented for girls and later added for boys. Can you find the reason for that?
So use your heads and don’t allow yourseld to be a victim of the flavored e-cigarettes industry.

I went to a shiur by simeone also in the medical field (I forgot the name, im going to get it though) who spoke about this, how even complety frum jews, can get hpv. One never knows what path one may choose or they may be rebelious in their teens, or get raped. There are so many different reasons why an outwardly sheltered girl msy need this vaccine.
You wrote that this vaccine is for something caused in over 50 year olds. Are you serious? Have you done research? This is not factual. And makes no sense. CANCER CAN, AND DOES, HAPPEN AT ANY AGE!!!
As for why males are also being given this vaccine...ill just put it this way, there are many ways to have 2ex and for men and eomen to give pleasure to each other.
I saw a terrifying program a few years ago, that oral cancer is becoming one of the top types in douth africa. And oral 2ex has a LOT to do with that.
Now lets get all the tomatoes and stsrt throwing them. I think ill get ready to make a salad.

southernbubby

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 10:13 am

shabbatiscoming wrote:

There are likely to be numerous students infected with HPV if they have not received the vaccine but it is usually not spread at school so school attendance should not depend on vaccination status. STDs are on the rise now and some, such as passing syphilis to a newborn, could have lifelong consequences. Students need to understand the consequences of promiscuous behavior and unprotected relations.

amother

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 10:43 am

shabbatiscoming wrote:

Still not enough of a reason to mandate the vaccine for school attendance.

princessleah

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 1:27 pm

I don't think it should be mandated for school attendance but don't bury your head in the sand about the frum community. At the very least, there are lots of BT's who join the community and people who go OTD and come back. Having HPV doesn't make you bad, and getting the shot doesn't imply anything about your morality.

The reason they start so young with the vaccine is that by the age of 26 most women who are going to contract HPV ALREADY HAVE IT. It is rampant.

If you're against the mandate, then at least there should be safe s-x education mandated in every school to help prevent STI's. Yet plenty of people are against that too.

amother

Fri, Oct 11 2019, 4:23 pm

perquacky wrote:

I just wanted to point out that the link to the Gardasil package insert in the OP's post is out of date. Gardasil 9 is what is being administered these days. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf......html
My kids are all vaccinated. I don't take chances. But as long as the choice is still ours, you make whatever choice you choose.

You are right. Here is the insert for the current Gardasil 9

[url=file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/125508-374%20PI%20Approved%20Final%20Draft%20(004).pdf]file:///C:/Users/user/Downloads/125508-374%20PI%20Approved%20Final%20Draft%20(004).pdf[/url]
(I don't know why it's not linking. Google Package insert gardasil 9. Or copy, paste the above into your browser.)

But. The information is NOT outdated because, wait for this, the safety studies were done with a control group that received Gardasil! So the new Gardasil is as "safe" as the old one... with its data manipulation in combining control groups. You're only getting the comparison to the saline group when dealing with on-site injection pain. LOL.

southernbubby

Sat, Oct 12 2019, 8:14 pm

amother [ Tan ] wrote:

So it seems from here that even pro vax ladies feel this should not be required for school attendance, so why does it not bother anyone that govt wants to go ahead and push this law through.

It does bother those who know about it and feel that their child has very little risk of acquiring or transmitting an HPV infection and therefore would be less likely to benefit from the vaccine.

Probably, the majority of parents trust their doctors so they don't question whether or not the vaccine is beneficial for their child and many do want their kids to get Gardasil so it doesn't bother them if it becomes mandated. They don't lose sleep over free choice, religious freedom or government overreach because it doesn't affect them personally.

amother

Tan

Sat, Oct 12 2019, 8:22 pm

southernbubby wrote:

I guess my opinion is affected by political views Smile

and I have a hard time understanding how any orthodox Jew can not be staunchly opposed to govt overreach.

southernbubby

Sat, Oct 12 2019, 8:47 pm

amother [ Tan ] wrote:

I guess my opinion is affected by political views Smile

and I have a hard time understanding how any orthodox Jew can not be staunchly opposed to govt overreach.

From the little bit that I see in publications such as the Monsey Mevaser, frum people who are in favor of most vaccines are opposed to giving their kids Gardasil and also to government overreach for education.

The majority of non-Jews and non-frum Jews have no skin in the game so they probably don't even realize that there is an issue.

amother

Pewter

Sat, Oct 12 2019, 11:22 pm

This thread was so derailed.
Nobody is suggesting that frum people don’t have the need to be protected from this virus/disease. Indeed we unfortunately do have the need.
Rather, the HPV vaccine is not the answer. It actually has massive problems according to many studies done and according to real life results.
This vaccine is not like all others. This vaccine is being pushed more than any other on the basis that teens are s-xually active. However this is a flase sense of security if you read the studies.
It doesn’t necessarily work. It creates horrible long term effects in 1/3 of those receiving the vaccine.
Finally, it is supposed to protect against a virus that has almost no obvious effects and resolved on its own in 95% of people.

If you did the risk /benefit table it is a no brainer.

There most definitely is a need for a vaccine to prevent STD. I wish there was one. But this vaccine is making it much worse by giving a flase sense of security as it supposedly protects only for a handful of diseases (we won’t have proof for 50 yeas that it actually works) and having horrible long term effects such as premature ovarian failure, gullian barra syndrome, and death. Victims were reimbursed by the national vaccine court which is why I know they had the medical proof that their side effect came from this vaccine. (That court receives billions of claims but throws out 99% of them)

southernbubby

Sat, Oct 12 2019, 11:39 pm

amother [ Pewter ] wrote:

The word "frum" is very broad but some frum people are sheltered to the point where they have a significantly lower risk than the general society.
Some frum people choose to take the vaccine because either they see that their kids are not going in such a frum path or they want to protect them in case of rape, molestation, or an adulterous spouse. I would guess that the rate of cancer from VPDs is low among Orthodox Jews; not zero, but less than in general society which makes the risk verses benefit ratio not attractive to many frum people.

amother

Pewter

Sun, Oct 13 2019, 12:47 am

southernbubby wrote:

But again, your referencing if the frum community needs a cure for STD or not.
The point is not if yes or no. (IMO we do need)
The point is this vaccine does not necessarily work and has a higher percentage of harming then of working. Only 5% of those 50% of ppl who will get this STD will develop this cancer that this vaccine is protecting for.
So we are trying to mandate a vaccine to EVERYONE so that a 1% may or may not be protected in 50 years from now. The real life side effects happen to 1/3 of those receiving the vaccine.
Finally, note that in the manufacturerers own trial studies, girls already infected with this STD are 46% more likely to develop cancer than anyone else. We went from the average of 5% to 46%. This should make you think.

southernbubby

Sun, Oct 13 2019, 1:07 am

amother [ Pewter ] wrote:

But one of the posters was wondering why the frum community wasn't making a bigger effort to oppose mandating this vaccine. I would think that if it would not really make a dent in the 4000 American deaths from VPD related cancers each year, it would be self evident that nobody should support the mandate. Where is everyone who should be concerned about this?