M.Dancer Posted September 26, 2007 Report Posted September 26, 2007 (edited) My friend, that was exactly my point. Re-read my post. I found your allusion to be over the top. Perhaps the constant chidings I get from Charles The Mod tgo clean up my foul posts has made me more prudish. Shit I hope not. Edited September 26, 2007 by M.Dancer Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
buffycat Posted September 27, 2007 Report Posted September 27, 2007 I know I am coming in late to this thread, but I figured I'd post this article as betsy might have an interest in it. (I admit that this is one of the few times where she and I are in agreement wrt this particular vaccine) Deaths Associated with HPV Vaccine Start Rolling In, Over 3500 Adverse Affects Reported excerpt: TORONTO, September 20, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - As Canada, in large part due to aggressive behind the scenes lobbying, rolls out the not-comprehensively-tested Merck HPV vaccine for girls as young as nine, a look at developments on the vaccine south of the border should cause Canadians serious concern. In the United States a similar lobby campaign by the same company launched the mass HPV vaccination of girls beginning in June last year. *snip* However the Canadian lobby effort by Merck's Canadian affiliate Merck Frosst Canada has been underway using powerful lobbyists with close connections to the politicians who have signed off on massive government funded vaccination programs. The Toronto Star recently reported that Merck Frosst Canada Ltd hired public relations giant Hill & Knowlton to push the immunization strategies using some well-connected lobbyists: Ken Boessenkool, a former senior policy adviser to Prime Minister Stephen Harper; Bob Lopinski, formerly with Premier Dalton McGuinty's office; and Jason Grier, former chief of staff to Health Minister George Smitherman. Harper's Conservative Government approved Merck's HPV vaccine Gardasil in July and later announced a $300 million program to give the vaccine to girls from ages 9-13. That of course is only the beginning of what Merck likely hopes will be a much larger vaccination of all potentially sexually active women in Canada who are not already HPV infected. In August, McGuinty's Ontario Liberals, on the advice of his Health Minister George Smitherman, announced that all Grade 8 girls will have free access to Gardasil. One of the major complaints by physicians is that the HPV vaccination program has been implemented before adequate testing has been completed. Long-term effects of the vaccine remain unknown. Many are asking why the seemingly reckless rush? At least one answer to that question comes from the fact that Merck currently is the sole provider of an HPV vaccine with its Gardasil product. A competing HPV vaccine, Glaxo Smith Kline's Cervarix, is set to hit the market in January 2008. As more children are vaccinated with Gardasil, fewer will be able to later receive the necessary repeat boosters of a competing, incompatible vaccine. Merck is in a race to capture as much of the market as it can, consuming many millions of taxpayer dollars. **** As usual with these pharmaceutical corporations - it's the $$$$ that is the motivating factor - NOT the health of it's consumers. If I had a daughter there is NO way I would allow her to get this untested, and seemingly ineffective and dangerous vaccine. No way. Quote "An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind" ~ Ghandi
betsy Posted September 27, 2007 Author Report Posted September 27, 2007 I know I am coming in late to this thread, but I figured I'd post this article as betsy might have an interest in it. (I admit that this is one of the few times where she and I are in agreement wrt this particular vaccine)Deaths Associated with HPV Vaccine Start Rolling In, Over 3500 Adverse Affects Reported As usual with these pharmaceutical corporations - it's the $$$$ that is the motivating factor - NOT the health of it's consumers. If I had a daughter there is NO way I would allow her to get this untested, and seemingly ineffective and dangerous vaccine. No way. Well at last, we agreed on something. Thanks for the post. Quote
geoffrey Posted September 28, 2007 Report Posted September 28, 2007 Each year the flu vaccine protects against 3 strains out of about 200. These three are the most likely to infect you in that geographical area. Sometimes, some strains are not tested for even a year before administering them to the population (they make these up last minute once data about infections comes out). And your concerned about a vaccine that protects against more strains that is tested longer? Like I said, people are just offended that someone dare say their girls are sleeping around. The truth is they are. Best to protect them. Unless of course, your demanding the flu vaccine be eliminated on the same grounds? People have never been so critical of other, less or equally tested vaccines. Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.