Considering it is a very new drug, has it been tested enough?
Seeing as they still need to have protected sex and regular check-ups, wont these alone be enough?
Gardasil has had a lot of bad press, and it is similar to the Cervarix used here.
Posters here are usually very good at rooting out reliably sourced information, so go for it.
I've given my consent, but told her about the possible implications and left the decision up to her.
It's the first 'adult' thing she's had the choice about.
Would you consent to your daughter having a syphilis vaccination?
Mass vaccination programmed like this are not usually carried out on a whim with poorly tested drugs. People often try to attribute unpleasant happenings to whatever is "new" or recent. MMR jabs are still thought to be autism-causing by a large percentage of the population when I'm fairly sure that's been unravelled as a mystery.
Not a parent so don't know. But if it were me I'd consent to it on myself.
Yeah, I would, no problem, if I were a parent.
Remember that the main mover behind the campaign against the jab is the Mail, and their Irish subsiduary is running a campaign for a govt mass vaccination program in Ireland where they aren't running one.
My youngest daughter is having hers tomorrow. Her sister is too old. I wasn't consulted but their mother is a pharmacist so feel quite calm about it.
From memory clinical trails of the vaccine were hugely successful - so much so that it was considered ethically necessary to go straight ahead with the vaccination programme. Basically the vaccine could eradicate HPV
As a father of two teenage girls I have had no problem consenting for the youngest to have the injection, as my oldest daughter she is able to consent for herself and while we encouraged her to do this she was able to make the decision for herself
As a nurse and evidence based practitioner I tend not to make judgements based on reports in the popular press, but tend to use academic journals and research reports - and basically the pro out way the cons
Absolutely no problems (other than the fact it will be 12 years before she is old enough)
No one starts a mass immunisation programme without being pretty darned sure it is safe. I'm not aware that any alleged side effects have actually been pinned on the jab. The benefit outweighs any minimal potential risk.
Same with MMR in our book
my 12 yr old had it on thursday last week....good as gold... 
Sure, no qualms at all.
I find the anti-vaccination lobby in general to consist of the worst sort of parasite. Vaccination against HPV, though, is a little different to the other preventable diseases. It's obviously not contagious in the same way as something like measles, so I can see some parents at least having pause over it. This pause will of course be siezed upon by anti-vaccinators and amplified with the usual fear, scaremongering and incomprehension of risk.
Absolutely, my daughter is nearly 4 and having lost both my mum and gran to cervical cancer, I would have no reservations whatsoever!
Dunno about Englandshire, but up in Scotland she can have it whether I consent or not.
Definitely. My wife had quite a scare in her early 20s and we have a friend who had a hysterectomy in her early 20s. One expert likened not having the vaccine to crossing a 10 lane highway with your eyes shut. Taking the vaccine still has a risk but it's more like crossing a 10 lane highway with your eyes open.
Nice to see so many sensible posts, makes a change from all the idiots the media usually find to interview.
Out of curiosity, why would you think that it hasn't been tested?
so much so that it was considered ethically necessary to go straight ahead with the vaccination programme. Basically the vaccine could eradicate HPV
Are they giving it to boys?
my daughter has had it and apart from her needle issue (scared stiff) its all fine and if my new child is a girl i won't have a problem then.
Yes -I would let my daughter have it,
yes, it's been tested enough.
no, the regular examinations aren't frequent enough.
I agree with breakneckspeed, go with academic reports and medical analysis to determine any decisions to be made. Don't listen to some irresponsible journalist who is just trying bag a story. How many people look at the contraindications to easily available over the counter drugs? No drug is perfect!
I have read that it has been rushed out and the first lot of people having it are basically guinea pigs.
I dont pretend to know much about it apart from what I've read on the internet, and a lot of that has shown some bad side effects. Obviously these things always look skewed though.
I'm still unconvinced that regular smear tests wouldn't save as many people. From what I've read it's normal for women to get the HPV virus and fight it off themselves, only rarely do things go beyond this, and regular tests would pick this up. 
Edit: Unless these aren't regular enough as wrote above. I'm happy to be persuaded either way.
Rich - The regular smear tests are no where near regular enough!
If a vaccine had been available for me when I was younger there is a high chance I wouldn't have had to go through years of hospital appointments and treatment. Cervical cancer is not to be taken lightly and anything you can do to lessen the risk has got to be a positive thing.
The answer is yes for me. Am sure Jade Goodys mum would give the same answer.
Smear tests don't stop you needing medical intervention - they just start the process. If you are lucky, you might not die, just loose large bits of yourself and spend a few months scared as hell and possibly sterile. 2 friends had positive smears, treatments, follow ups and the ongoing fear.
I would look into any health scares, its a good thing to do.
But the ultimate social/religious question is "will I risk my child dying a horrible death and the misery it causes her loved ones, because I want to keep control of her sex life".
I have read that it has been rushed out and the first lot of people having it are basically guinea pigs.I dont pretend to know much about it apart from what I've read on the internet,
I think you summed that up nicely, the guinea pigs died many years ago, shortly after the mice, who died after years of painstaking research into the vaccine. All of which would have been folowed by round after round of clinical trials.
But obviously the guy in the white coat knows less than the guy in the tinfoil hat on an internet forum.
statistically speaking, as mass immunisation programmes go, it's pretty bloody good.
In a word, yes. Although I have a son myself.
My daughters?
Having sex?
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!
without a doubt, ca cervix is nasty!
Haven't even considered the "control of their sex life" angle, just well-being.
The side effects listed above are obviously minor, but what do you make of the people who say their child suddenly changed after having the vaccine, as in couldn't walk, lost all their energy?
I do wonder about what is put in these vaccines and their effects on the body.
Think it's a resounding yes from you guys anyway.
Possibly worth looking up the number of deaths and interventions for HPV versus the number of immunisations with ill effects. I've not done that myself, of course, but I'm guessing the stats would point overwhelmingly in favour of immunisation at this point in time.
For a good idea of the Daily Mail's consistency and logic on matters such as these, please take a look at the The Daily Mail Oncological Ontology Project.
I do wonder about what is put in these vaccines and their effects on the body.
Then why not look for yourself on the NHS/Department of Health website to see exactly what's in it? These sites will likely list the side effects also.
My youngest daughter has had hers - 2 separate ones IIRC
I trust the medical profession's judgement more than I trust the roulette of life in this case
Yes I would. And in fact I just did (cost me 300 Euros 
)
If I had a daughter, I'd let her have the injection in a heartbeat. If I was a teenager again, I'd have it myself.
A lot of the hysteria is coming from the Daily Mail, who have a slightly creepy anti-women agenda in addition to thinking that everything causes/cures cancer (similar to bent_udder's link, there's also Daily Mail Kill or Cure.
They'll have a huge front page headline of "OMG GIRL DIES AFTER HAVING CANCER JAB!", but no front page, "OH NEVER MIND, SHE ALREADY HAD A LIFE-THREATENING TUMOUR SHE DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT".
Same way as they'll run frequent articles against the contraceptive pill, or how career women who choose not to have kids will end up bitter and regretting their choice, or how working mothers are damaging their kids - all based on tiny studies, shoddy science and anecdotal evidence, and ignoring anything that contradicts their viewpoint.
For example: dodgy Mail article on the Pill.
"With Dianette, the risk [of DVT] increases by a staggering seven times." Sounds scary, but you're still more likely to have a blood clot during pregnancy than on any of the pills, and when you look at the numbers...it's still pretty low.
"My mother had heard about the dangers of Dianette early on and began to complain about my using it.
I smoked and was to take several long distance flights during my gap year, both of which contribute to the risk of a DVT, and she was worried." I would have thought her mother would have been more concerned about her smoking, what with it being more likely to cause blood clots, heart disease AND cancer.
So yeah, I take hysteria whipped up by the Mail with a grain of salt. I think that they're stupid and irresponsible, and have agendas when it comes to women, immigrants and whatever scaremongering is flavour of the month.
I'm sure that there's people who have adverse reactions to vaccinations - my mate had her arm swell up and go manky after her TB jab. I'm sure that she'd agree that a few weeks of discomfort is preferable to a life threatening disease where you have to spend months in isolation, getting jabbed in the arse with streptomycin, then having a few years on a course of antibiotic drugs*. People should be aware of the risks of any medication, and choose whether they think its worth it - hopefully most people will realise that a tabloid is not the best source of this information.
* Admittedly my knowledge of TB treatment is based on stories from my dad, who had TB in the 70s - let's just say, when the time came for my brother and I to have our TB jabs, we weren't given the option!
And that's my rant for the day! 
The side effects listed above are obviously minor, but what do you make of the people who say their child suddenly changed after having the vaccine, as in couldn't walk, lost all their energy?
You mean un-reported side-effects? That somehow you know about and the medics don't? Do tell us more.
Why aren't they giving it to boys?
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
