[Closed] Would you consent to your daughter having the HPV vaccine?

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 [b]for[/b] 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... 8)

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.

[img] [/img]

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 [url= http://thedailymailoncologicalontologyproject.wordpress.com/ ]The Daily Mail Oncological Ontology Project[/url].

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 [url= http://kill-or-cure.heroku.com/ ]Daily Mail Kill or Cure[/url].

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: [url= http://www.****/femail/article-1208519/Is-time-stop-taking-Pill-A-new-book-asks-tide-risks-gone-far.html ]dodgy Mail article on the Pill[/url].

[i]"With Dianette, the risk [of DVT] increases by a staggering seven times." [/i] 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.

[i]"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]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! 😛

[i]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]

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?

Why aren't they giving it to boys?

🙄

I have read that it has been rushed out and the first lot of people having it are basically guinea pigs

[i]'rushed out'[/i] - as I understand it, the results of the early trials showed [b]so conclusively[/b] that the benefits outweighed the risks that it was deemed unethical not to make it available as soon as possible. Is that 'rushed out'? Possibly. Does that make it a bad thing? Not in my opinion.

[i]'the first lot of people having it are basically guinea pigs'[/i] - well, [u]like every new drug/vaccine[/u], there's only so much that can be determined through clinical trials and knowledge continues to grow significantly as the population takes it. That's not the same as saying the first people to take it are 'guinea pigs' though.

p.s.
kids have had MMR (and all the rest)
daughters will have this one (or equivalent when they're old enough)
family will have swine-flu if it goes on general release and the Chief Medical Officer (who as far as I know is not a lizard in human form) deems it necessary.

donald.........go to the toilet, have a look between your legs, if you find a cervix, go see the daily sport, you'll make a mint......

[i]Why aren't they giving it to boys? [/i]
PMSL

No seriously, why aren't they giving it to boys.

Mosquitoes don't cause malaria but we still try to kill them.

Why aren't they giving it to boys?

Out and out sexism. Can't beleive no-one has called them on it!

Couldn't be bothered with swine flu, somehow the risk seems incredibly minimal.

donald......are you advocating the mass culling of the male population, are you Harriot Harman?

No, I'm advocating vaccinating mosquitoes against plasmodium falciparum 🙂

Or the equivalent.

that will be a mass vacination programme

she had it 2 weeks ago no problems

best bit is winding her up about the 6 inch needle and where they have to stick it

A study done in 1952 of 13,000 nuns found [i]no [/i]cases of cervical cancer.

The vast majority of people who die from cervical cancer were given that disease by their partners. It would seem odd that if we are trying to eradicate the disease from the planet we only target half the population.

its not given to men because...................

Men cant get cervical cancer (well, not very easily), and as its caused by an STD vacinating men would be poinless, you only need to vacinate one sex of the other and voila, its no longer passed arround (bum lovers excepted).

And in general giving teenage boys any remote reason not to use a condom ('I cant give you cancer') is proabably a very bad idea.

Some info for anyone interested: [url= http://emc.medicines.org.uk/medicine/20204/SPC/Cervarix/ ]Cervarix Information[/url]

Its a shame that in the aftermouth of vaccination scares / hoaxes such as the MMR bollox that the press show no willingness to correct the situation or clear the air, perhaps because of their own sheeplike complicity in the whole thing. Perhaps because they daren't look over their should at the misery in their wake

The MMR hoax is facinating: An 'expert' being bribed by lawyers to conjour up supportive evidence for use in a trial. The 'expert' takes a half million pound bung. The press are either fed or seize up on the 'evidence' and cover the story as if its an issue that is dividing the medical profession 50/50 when in fact its one insubstantial excise being weighed against a conclusive mass of evidence and opinion.

Harrowingly, the alternative therapy scene chuck their oar in too, uninvited, seeing that there are sides to be taken, they instinctively take the side opposing the conventional line.

The genius of it all in the the lawyers only had to bribe the one quack, the press, self appointed 'therapists', gossips at the school gates and sound-biting politicians did all the rest for free.

Meanwhile we re-introduce measles, a disease that has the potential to leave peoples children in a permanent near-vegatative state that will need minute by minute care for the rest of their lives (or if they are lucky, dead). Roughly one in a thousand Measles cases will result serious, permanent mental imparement. And there have been more than a thousand cases of measles since it was reintroduced, so there is like be be a tragedy out there somewhere. Measles is a third world disease, it has no place in one of the richest countries on the planet. If I was a parent of a child who I'd refused to inoculate I'd be shitting myself, if I was the parent of children too young to inoculate I'd be seething.

To my mind that all adds up to an act of biological terrorism - the spread of fear, and unreason, disease, harm, death.

I think thats a great story, why haven't I read it anywhere.

When I was a kid [in the 60s]we all got measles - along with a whole bunch of other diseases - if fact, we were taken around to peoples houses that did have them in order to catch them 😯

Anyway - I don't know anyone that died from measles but I do know someone who suffered deafness because of it - I'm not sure I'd be shitting myself if one of my kids hadn't been inoculated but I wouldn't be volunteering them to go without either.

In you remember the old Giles cartoons, set in a hospital, there would always be a child with measles and a thermometer in them. Measles was frequently serious enough for kids to be hospitalised.

Looking it up, the fatality rate from measles for otherwise healthy people in developed countries is in fact 3 deaths per thousand cases.

It can also lead to corneal scarring and ulceration and acute inflammation of the brain and subsiquent brain damage - perhaps the cause of your friends deafness.

skidartist: Nail on head - well done!

My two daughters - youngest had it, elder just started the course of 3 jabs. Yep their arm was sore afterwards, but it's just been stabbed with a needle!!
My eldest came back from school trip as news broke about that poor girl from Coventry. She was a bit aprehensive but now ok after revelations about the girl's medical history ( brave move by parents still in shock ).

Basic info:-
1m + jabs = no fatalities.
No jabs = 1 chance in 136 of getting disease.
No brainer.
Q

What about the breast cancer, bowel cancer statistics?
Much greater I do believe?

What about the breast cancer, bowel cancer statistics?
Much greater I do believe?

Yes, and if they identify a single viral source of those that can be effectively targeted by a vaccination then I'm sure that will be offered too.

...and having seen what my mother went through with bowel cancer, I'll be fighting my way to the front of the queue.

Run it past me someone. Given the facts what possible reason would there be for not consenting to your daughter having the jabs?

Run it past me someone. Given the facts what possible reason would there be for not consenting to your daughter having the jabs?

Oh I dunno - it's either this thread or a similar one where someone has spent all year reading about how the drug companies are in league with the Martians (& maybe the Brownies too, I can't remember) & all the inoculations are deliberately under-developed in order to use human babies as guinea pigs (I'm not sure if they're kept in a cage with a wheel & one of those drinks bottles with a ball bearing in them though)
The upshot is that the Martians (& Brownies) get much better drugs so he's decided to use voodoo for all his family's medical needs

NB - I may has mis-read the odd point but I'm fairly sure it was the Martians.

Yes I would. I can't see any medical, ethical, or moral objections that stand up.
FWIW The Daily Mail medical correspondent hates big-pharma and regularly publishes misleading articles. My colleagues won't talk to her.
HPV for boys is an interesting idea - there has been an increase in mouth cancer recently, which could be linked. One to watch...

The problem with the Mail (and now the telegraph, where some former Mail seniors now reside) is their journalists write what they are told to, if during their investigation they unearth the facts that would render their story bullshit (which is usually often), then their choice is to ignore the facts and write the story they were given, or have their story passed over to someone who is willing to ignore the facts and write the story they were given. How many times do you think they are going to pass over stories before they find themselves with a lot of time on their hands.

The problem with the Daily Mail journo was that she did the interview, then ignored it and printed a load of rubbish but "quoted" my colleague. She is grinding her axe and ignoring the truth...

My daughter had her jab this morning. Apart from a sore arm she says she's fine.

Having watched my mum die from breast & throat cancer I'm all for it.

What is this daily mail you speak of – as a qualified nurse for 15 years & academic for the last 5 years - I thought as was pretty familiar with most of research journal, but clearly this daily mail as escaped me.