Spring Break
Mandating HPV vaccine a bad idea
Perry's decision leaves Texans scratching their heads
The Daily Campus Ed Board
Issue date: 3/2/07 Section: Opinion
- Page 1 of 1
Ed Board would like to take a few moments to congratulate Texas Gov. Rick Perry.
After all, it's not everyone who can draw the ire of both conservatives and liberals with one fell swoop.
Even if you temporarily forget his ridiculous plan to privatize the Texas Lottery (a hare-brained idea, to be sure), there's still his mandate to vaccinate all girls in Texas against the Human Papilloma Virus, or HPV.
We could say that his intentions were good - if his former campaign manager didn't now work for Merck, the sole manufacturer of the vaccine, as a lobbyist. Even if that were a coincidence, there are still a multitude of reasons that this is, for now, just a bad idea.
Let's take into consideration some of the conservative arguments first. As with all forms of sex education that don't promote abstinence, many Texans fear that this vaccine will give kids the green light to have as much sex as they want. It's patently untrue, of course, but it's still a fear.
In addition, some think that Perry is commandeering parents' authority by taking what used to be a choice about their kids' health and turning it into a legal requirement. Finally - and perhaps the most important line of thinking on the conservative side - HPV isn't something that you can catch simply by being at school, like the chicken pox or the measles. There's no reason that all girls should be inoculated for an STD; it's like giving everyone birth control even if they're not having sex.
It's not just conservatives who are against the mandate, though. Many liberals (and come to think of it, conservatives too) think that the vaccine is too expensive - it's $360 per round of shots, according to slate.com. That's $360 per child that could be spent on desperately needed school supplies, teacher raises or better programs. Plus, the vaccine is still in its early stages; it hasn't been studied enough to be declared safe for what will constitute (in time) more than half of the Texas population.
While there's no denying that cervical cancer is a serious matter, it only affects a small portion of the girls who contract HPV. Perry's goal of finding a cure for cancer is admirable, but this is a very, very small dent he's making. He'd be better served focusing on the obesity epidemic that's plaguing our kids or the dismal state of education, health care and poverty in Texas.
After all, it's not everyone who can draw the ire of both conservatives and liberals with one fell swoop.
Even if you temporarily forget his ridiculous plan to privatize the Texas Lottery (a hare-brained idea, to be sure), there's still his mandate to vaccinate all girls in Texas against the Human Papilloma Virus, or HPV.
We could say that his intentions were good - if his former campaign manager didn't now work for Merck, the sole manufacturer of the vaccine, as a lobbyist. Even if that were a coincidence, there are still a multitude of reasons that this is, for now, just a bad idea.
Let's take into consideration some of the conservative arguments first. As with all forms of sex education that don't promote abstinence, many Texans fear that this vaccine will give kids the green light to have as much sex as they want. It's patently untrue, of course, but it's still a fear.
In addition, some think that Perry is commandeering parents' authority by taking what used to be a choice about their kids' health and turning it into a legal requirement. Finally - and perhaps the most important line of thinking on the conservative side - HPV isn't something that you can catch simply by being at school, like the chicken pox or the measles. There's no reason that all girls should be inoculated for an STD; it's like giving everyone birth control even if they're not having sex.
It's not just conservatives who are against the mandate, though. Many liberals (and come to think of it, conservatives too) think that the vaccine is too expensive - it's $360 per round of shots, according to slate.com. That's $360 per child that could be spent on desperately needed school supplies, teacher raises or better programs. Plus, the vaccine is still in its early stages; it hasn't been studied enough to be declared safe for what will constitute (in time) more than half of the Texas population.
While there's no denying that cervical cancer is a serious matter, it only affects a small portion of the girls who contract HPV. Perry's goal of finding a cure for cancer is admirable, but this is a very, very small dent he's making. He'd be better served focusing on the obesity epidemic that's plaguing our kids or the dismal state of education, health care and poverty in Texas.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Don Granberry
posted 3/04/07 @ 8:42 AM CST
According to Medical News Today, some 44.8% of women ages 20 to 24. Among younger women, ages 14 to 19, the infection rate is about 19.5%. What this says is that we are about to see a title wave of HPV infection among women just now coming into their childbearing years and, doubtlessly, a wave of cervical cancer cases. (Continued…)
Post a Comment