Cap Journal Story on HPV Vaccine vote today

The Pierre Capitol Journal has a story today on the HPV vaccine proposal, which I believe happens to be up for a vote today in front of the legislature:
The three-dose series cost the state $288 per person, according to Hollingsworth. Families can expect to pay an administration charge, which usually is about $10 she said.

"The health department, like we do all other childhood vaccines, is sending this to physician's offices across the state so families can go and have a discussion with their doctor," she said.


"Given the nature of the drug and the lack of knowledge about it, I would sure think that it would be incumbent for the executive (branch) to consult with the legislative branch before going down this road," said state Sen. Brock Greenfield, R-Clark.

Hollingsworth said the Department of Health has no plans to try to make the vaccine part of school requirements.

Greenfield said his primary concern about the vaccine is the new side effects being discovered, such as possible seizures and dizziness.

"I think Secretary Hollingsworth referred to it as a miracle drug," he said. "I think the same was probably said about Vioxx because it had such a profound healing impact on people for their various aches and pains and all of a sudden it started killing people."
Read it all here as proof that, yes, I will disagree on some issues with my good friend Brock.

If we can practically eradicate a cancer with a simple injection, it's a good idea. I'd have my daughters vaccinated for it even if the state didn't contribute to the program.


Anonymous said…
My 12 year old daughter came home with a sheet from school, saying the shots are available free, and they are giving them at my local hospital (which has also run ads in the paper). If this hasn't passed the legislature yet, why are there free shots available already?
Anonymous said…
The only hesitation I have about this is that it is so new and I too wonder about potential side-effects. I honestly think I'd wait a year or two to vaccinate my daughter (she's already too old actually) to be more sure that nothing adverse pops up from the shots. I can remember the swine flu shots of 30+ years ago and the problems they caused because they were rushed to market. I have no moral reasons against the shot though; if it is shown to have no side-effects, I would highly recommend it.
Anonymous said…
This sudden concern for side effects that no reputable health group is worrying about is just a distraction. They have no reason to block this other than they want to allow the cancer as punishment thing to continue.
How Christian.
Anonymous said…
61-9, only the wierdest of the wierd voted against it.
Anonymous said…
The New York Times is reporting today that Merck, maker of the HPV vaccine, is suspending lobbying efforts in over 20 state legislatures to make the vaccine either provided by the state or mandated. Apparently, over-aggressive lobbying is creating a backlash.

Health or personal views on sex aside, it appears that another story may be brewing on this issue, PP, you may want to look into it.
Anonymous said…
Anyone female age 11 to 25 can get protcetion with the HPV vaccine shot in Watertown. Brown Clinic is giving these shots on Feb. 22 3:30 pm to 6:30 pm Girls under 18 must be with a parent. There will be a vaccine administration charge, generally covered by insurance. So all those wanting your free shots, head to Brown Clinic Northridge. What is all the noise in Pierre about this when we can have shots now?
lexrex said…
pp: "I'd have my daughters vaccinated for it even if the state didn't contribute to the program."

but even more so if the taxpayers are footing the bill?

would you vote for this nanny-state bill, pp?

while i'd say this is hardly a miracle drug, as it only prevents a few of the dozens of strains of HPV, i, too, would probably have my daughter vaccinated, if it's proven safe. but to force others to pay for it? not me.
lexrex said…
12:39, that's a great point. hospitals and clinics -- in south dakota -- are already offering the shot for free. just shows how insanely dumb governments can be.

i believe pp once said that the role of the government is to do for its citizens what they cannot do for themselves, or something to that effect.

not sure how that principle applies, here.
lora said…
Remember LYMErix vaccine? AS in ALL vaccines, the body's exact immunological response is UNKNOWN. A vaccine is an immunological assault to get the body to respond. So is getting the disease naturally - but the route is different (intra-muscular as opposed to air-borne or topically via skin break) and hence the body's immune response is different to the vaccine than it is to the natural way of acquiring the disease. AND no one knows if this difference is harmful or not. It was in the LIMErix case. Considering our children now have more auto-immune diseases than ever before (asthma, allergies, lupus, Crones, arthritis) maybe it is the immunizations that are screwing up their immune systems. Pharmaceutical companies are money driven and a bias party - but everyone thinks they are gods. Some day they will be exposed for all the ill they poured out on unsuspecting patients. The WORST marriage in the world would be the government and its bedfellow the drug companies forcing our children to take unproven chemicals.

Popular posts from this blog

KSFY: Advance copy of abortion measure in hand

Breaking News: Frederick not in SDGOP Chair Race